Federal Register Vol. 82, No.176,

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 176 (September 13, 2017)

Page Range42927-43153
FR Document

82_FR_176
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
82 FR 43153 - Continuation of the National Emergency With Respect to Certain Terrorist AttacksPDF
82 FR 43002 - Sunshine Act Meeting NoticePDF
82 FR 43023 - Board of Scientific Counselors, National Center for Environmental Health/Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (BSC, NCEH/ATSDR); Cancellation of MeetingPDF
82 FR 42927 - Continuation of the Exercise of Certain Authorities Under the Trading With the Enemy ActPDF
82 FR 43006 - Registration Review; Draft Human Health and/or Ecological Risk Assessments for Several Pesticides; Notice of AvailabilityPDF
82 FR 43008 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Renewal of an Existing Collection; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 43005 - Product Cancellation Order for Certain Pesticide Registrations; CorrectionPDF
82 FR 42940 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, Harvey, LAPDF
82 FR 42947 - EPTC; Pesticide TolerancesPDF
82 FR 43066 - Presidential Declaration of a Major Disaster for the U.S. Virgin IslandsPDF
82 FR 43063 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 43024 - National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), ICD-10 Coordination and Maintenance (C&M) Committee MeetingPDF
82 FR 43023 - Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health (ABRWH or the Advisory Board), National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)PDF
82 FR 43052 - Agency Forms Submitted for OMB Review, Request for CommentsPDF
82 FR 43037 - 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Application for Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control Grant Programs and Quality Assurance PlansPDF
82 FR 42985 - Fisheries of the South Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico, and Caribbean; Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review (SEDAR); AmendmentPDF
82 FR 42986 - Western Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public MeetingPDF
82 FR 43037 - 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Performing Loan Servicing for the Home Equity Conversion Mortgage (HECM)PDF
82 FR 42945 - Safety Zone; Allegheny River miles 0.0-0.25, Ohio River mile 0.0-0.1, Monongahela River mile 0.0-0.1; Pittsburgh, PAPDF
82 FR 43025 - Microdose Radiopharmaceutical Diagnostic Drugs: Nonclinical Study Recommendations; Draft Guidance for Industry; AvailabilityPDF
82 FR 42963 - Standards for the Growing, Harvesting, Packing, and Holding of Produce for Human Consumption; Extension of Compliance Dates for Subpart EPDF
82 FR 43041 - Proposed Designation of Databases for Treasury's Working System Under the Do Not Pay InitiativePDF
82 FR 43050 - Information Collection: Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Wastes in a Geologic Repository at Yucca Mountain, NevadaPDF
82 FR 42972 - Notice of Public Meeting of the Texas Advisory CommitteePDF
82 FR 42984 - Fisheries of the South Atlantic; South Atlantic Fishery Management Council; Public MeetingsPDF
82 FR 43032 - Iowa; Major Disaster and Related DeterminationsPDF
82 FR 43033 - Vermont; Major Disaster and Related DeterminationsPDF
82 FR 43034 - West Virginia; Major Disaster and Related DeterminationsPDF
82 FR 43017 - Granting of Requests for Early Termination of the Waiting Period Under the Premerger Notification RulesPDF
82 FR 43003 - Application To Export Electric Energy; Plant-E Corp.PDF
82 FR 43038 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Evaluation of the American Apprenticeship InitiativePDF
82 FR 42972 - Notice of Request for Extension of a Currently Approved Information CollectionPDF
82 FR 43013 - Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding CompaniesPDF
82 FR 43010 - Incentive Auction Task Force and Media Bureau Extend the Filing Deadline for the First Priority Filing Window for Eligible Full Power and Class A Television Stations-Revised Filing Deadline: September 15, 2017PDF
82 FR 42973 - Certain Stilbenic Optical Brightening Agents From Taiwan: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015-2016PDF
82 FR 42974 - Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative ReviewsPDF
82 FR 43010 - Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications CommissionPDF
82 FR 43031 - Proposed Flood Hazard DeterminationsPDF
82 FR 43029 - Proposed Flood Hazard DeterminationsPDF
82 FR 43032 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Federal Emergency Management Agency Programs Customer Satisfaction SurveysPDF
82 FR 43068 - Bureau of Consular Affairs; Registration for the Diversity Immigrant (DV-2019) Visa ProgramPDF
82 FR 43029 - Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
82 FR 42969 - Assessment of Fees for Dairy Import Licenses for the 2018 Tariff-Rate Import Quota YearPDF
82 FR 43005 - PSEG Keys Energy Center LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 AuthorizationPDF
82 FR 43004 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
82 FR 43003 - Application To Export Electric Energy; J. Aron & Company LLCPDF
82 FR 43048 - Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel; Charter RenewalPDF
82 FR 43048 - International Space Station Advisory Committee; Charter RenewalPDF
82 FR 42943 - Safety Zone; L4D Optic Ground Wire Crossing, St. Clair River, St. Clair, MIPDF
82 FR 43040 - MET Laboratories, Inc.: Grant of Expansion of Recognition and Update to the NRTL Program's List of Appropriate Test StandardsPDF
82 FR 43083 - Agency Information Collection Activity Under OMB ReviewPDF
82 FR 42938 - Special Local Regulation; Tennessee River, Huntsville, ALPDF
82 FR 42941 - Safety Zone; Tennessee River, Knoxville, TNPDF
82 FR 43084 - Meeting Notice-U.S. Maritime Transportation System National Advisory CommitteePDF
82 FR 42938 - Income TaxesPDF
82 FR 42984 - Endangered Species; File No. 21169PDF
82 FR 43001 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Annual Northern Seal Subsistence Harvest Reporting and St. George Harvest Management PlanPDF
82 FR 43002 - Marine Mammals; File No. 21422PDF
82 FR 42969 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 43077 - Nominations for Coordinating Lead Authors, Lead Authors, or Review Editors With Expertise Relevant to the Working Group I, II, and III Contributions to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Sixth Assessment Report (AR6)PDF
82 FR 43020 - CSGOLotto, Inc.; Analysis To Aid Public CommentPDF
82 FR 43066 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Request and Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 43009 - Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission Under Delegated AuthorityPDF
82 FR 43012 - Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission Under Delegated AuthorityPDF
82 FR 43013 - Lenovo (United States) Inc.; Analysis To Aid Public CommentPDF
82 FR 43049 - Information Collection: Grant and Cooperative Agreement ProvisionsPDF
82 FR 43034 - Texas; Amendment No. 5 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
82 FR 43034 - Wyoming; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
82 FR 43061 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Securities Clearing Corporation; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change To Expand the Application of the Family-Issued Securities ChargePDF
82 FR 43064 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE American LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Modify the NYSE American Options Fee SchedulePDF
82 FR 43057 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Change To Amend Its Rules To Make Technical and Conforming Updates, in Connection With the Merger of NYSE Arca Equities, Inc. With and Into the Exchange's Affiliate NYSE Arca, Inc. and the Name Change of NYSE National, Inc.PDF
82 FR 43059 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE American LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Change To Amend Its Price ListPDF
82 FR 43054 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Securities Clearing Corporation; Notice of No Objection to an Advance Notice To Expand the Application of the Family-Issued Securities ChargePDF
82 FR 42940 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Quantuck Canal, Westhampton Beach, NYPDF
82 FR 43036 - Louisiana; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of an Emergency DeclarationPDF
82 FR 43033 - Texas; Amendment No. 3 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
82 FR 43036 - Texas; Amendment No. 4 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
82 FR 43035 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Generic Clearance for the Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service DeliveryPDF
82 FR 43051 - Information Collection: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Acquisition Regulation (NRCAR)PDF
82 FR 43025 - Proposed Information Collection Activity; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 43028 - National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Notice of MeetingPDF
82 FR 43029 - National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
82 FR 43027 - Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
82 FR 43056 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 43068 - U.S. Department of State Advisory Committee on Private International Law (ACPIL): Public Meeting on Arbitration and ConciliationPDF
82 FR 43079 - Proposed Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 43078 - Proposed Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 42986 - Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to a Pile Driving Activities for Waterfront Repairs at the U.S. Coast Guard Station Monterey, Monterey, CaliforniaPDF
82 FR 42970 - Adjustment of Appendices Under the Dairy Tariff-Rate Quota Import Licensing Regulation for the 2017 Tariff-Rate Quota YearPDF
82 FR 43021 - Information Collection; General Services Administration Acquisition Regulation; Implementation of Information Technology Security ProvisionPDF
82 FR 43085 - Hazardous Materials: Notice of Applications for Special PermitsPDF
82 FR 42960 - Amendment to Standard for All-Terrain Vehicles; Notice of Proposed RulemakingPDF
82 FR 43022 - Information Collection; Certified Cost or Pricing Data and Data Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing DataPDF
82 FR 42945 - Approval of Missouri Air Quality Implementation Plans; Final Rule; Determination of Attainment for the 2010 1-Hour Primary Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard; Jefferson County Nonattainment AreaPDF
82 FR 43026 - Government-Owned Inventions; Availability for LicensingPDF
82 FR 42957 - Airworthiness Directives; Honeywell International Inc. Turboprop and Turboshaft EnginesPDF
82 FR 43077 - Notice of Final Federal Agency Actions on Proposed Transportation Project in FloridaPDF
82 FR 42955 - Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc., AirplanesPDF
82 FR 42953 - Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc., AirplanesPDF
82 FR 42929 - Airworthiness Directives; Airbus AirplanesPDF
82 FR 42934 - Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous AmendmentsPDF
82 FR 42932 - Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous AmendmentsPDF
82 FR 43088 - Home Mortgage Disclosure (Regulation C)PDF

Issue

82 176 Wednesday, September 13, 2017 Contents Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Foreign Agricultural Service

See

Rural Housing Service

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 42969 2017-19392
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection RULES Home Mortgage Disclosure (Regulation C), 43088-43149 2017-18284 Centers Disease Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Meetings: Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, 43023-43024 2017-19443 Board of Scientific Counselors, National Center for Environmental Health/Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry; Cancellation, 43023 2017-19530 National Center for Health Statistics, ICD-10 Coordination and Maintenance Committee, 43024-43025 2017-19444 Children Children and Families Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 43025 2017-19367 Civil Rights Civil Rights Commission NOTICES Meetings: Texas Advisory Committee, 42972-42973 2017-19431 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Drawbridge Operations: Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, Harvey, LA, 42940 2017-19456 Quantuck Canal, Westhampton Beach, NY, 42940-42941 2017-19374 Safety Zones: Allegheny River miles 0.0-0.25, Ohio River mile 0.0-0.1, Monongahela River mile 0.0-0.1, Pittsburgh, PA, 42945 2017-19436 L4D Optic Ground Wire Crossing, St. Clair River, St. Clair, MI, 42943-42945 2017-19404 Tennessee River, Knoxville, TN, 42941-42943 2017-19399 Special Local Regulations; Tennessee River, Huntsville, AL, 42938-42940 2017-19400 Commerce Commerce Department See

International Trade Administration

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Consumer Product Consumer Product Safety Commission PROPOSED RULES Standard for All-Terrain Vehicles, 42960-42963 2017-19341 NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 43002-43003 2017-19548 Defense Department Defense Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Certified Cost or Pricing Data and Data Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data, 43022-43023 2017-19340 Energy Department Energy Department See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

NOTICES Applications to Export Electric Energy: J. Aron and Co., LLC, 43003 2017-19407 Plant-E Corp., 43003-43004 2017-19424
Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Missouri; Determination of Attainment for 2010 1-hour Primary Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard; Jefferson County Nonattainment Area, 42945-42947 2017-19339 Pesticide Tolerances: EPTC, 42947-42952 2017-19452 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 43008-43009 2017-19461 Product Cancellation Order for Certain Pesticide Registrations; Correction, 43005-43006 2017-19459 Registration Reviews: Draft Human Health and/or Ecological Risk Assessments for Several Pesticides, 43006-43008 2017-19463 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration RULES Airworthiness Directives: Airbus Airplanes, 42929-42932 2017-19301 Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures, 42932-42938 2017-19075 2017-19076 PROPOSED RULES Airworthiness Directives: Bombardier, Inc., Airplanes, 42953-42957 2017-19304 2017-19306 Honeywell International Inc. Turboprop and Turboshaft Engines, 42957-42960 2017-19314 Federal Communications Federal Communications Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 43009-43013 2017-19387 2017-19388 2017-19416 Opening of First Priority Filing Window for Eligible Full Power and Class A Television Stations; Deadline Extension, 43010 2017-19419 Federal Emergency Federal Emergency Management Agency NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Customer Satisfaction Surveys, 43032-43033 2017-19413 Generic Clearance for Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery, 43035-43036 2017-19370 Emergency Declarations: Louisiana; Amendment No. 1, 43036 2017-19373 Flood Hazard Determinations; Proposals, 43029-43032 2017-19414 2017-19415 Major Disaster Declarations: Texas; Amendment No. 3, 43033 2017-19372 Texas; Amendment No. 4, 43036-43037 2017-19371 Texas; Amendment No. 5, 43034 2017-19383 Wyoming; Amendment No. 1, 43034 2017-19382 Major Disasters and Related Determinations: Iowa, 43032 2017-19429 Vermont, 43033-43034 2017-19428 West Virginia, 43034-43035 2017-19427 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Combined Filings, 43004-43005 2017-19408 Initial Market-Based Rate Filings Including Requests for Blanket Section 204 Authorizations: PSEG Keys Energy Center, LLC, 43005 2017-19409 Federal Highway Federal Highway Administration NOTICES Final Federal Agency Actions on Proposed Transportation Project in Florida, 43077-43078 2017-19309 Federal Railroad Federal Railroad Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 43078-43083 2017-19353 2017-19354 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System NOTICES Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies, 43013 2017-19358 2017-19420 Federal Trade Federal Trade Commission NOTICES Early Termination of the Waiting Period under Premerger Notification Rules; Approvals, 43017-43020 2017-19426 Proposed Consent Agreements: CSGOLotto, Inc., 43020-43021 2017-19390 Lenovo, Inc., 43013-43017 2017-19385 Federal Transit Federal Transit Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 43083-43084 2017-19402 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration PROPOSED RULES Standards for the Growing, Harvesting, Packing, and Holding of Produce for Human Consumption; Extension of Compliance Dates, 42963-42968 2017-19434 NOTICES Guidance: Microdose Radiopharmaceutical Diagnostic Drugs: Nonclinical Study Recommendations, 43025-43026 2017-19435 Foreign Agricultural Foreign Agricultural Service NOTICES Assessment of Fees: Dairy Import Licenses for 2018 Tariff-Rate Import Quota Year, 42969-42970 2017-19410 Imports: Dairy Tariff-Rate Quota Import Licensing; 2017 Tariff-Rate Quota Year Appendices, 42970-42972 2017-19351 General Services General Services Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Acquisition Regulation; Implementation of Information Technology Security Provision, 43021-43022 2017-19349 Certified Cost or Pricing Data and Data Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data, 43022-43023 2017-19340 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

See

Children and Families Administration

See

Food and Drug Administration

See

National Institutes of Health

Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

See

Federal Emergency Management Agency

Housing Housing and Urban Development Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Application for Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control Grant Programs and Quality Assurance Plans, 43037-43038 2017-19440 Performing Loan Servicing for Home Equity Conversion Mortgage, 43037 2017-19437 Internal Revenue Internal Revenue Service RULES Income Taxes; CFR Correction, 42938 2017-19396 2017-19397 International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Certain Stilbenic Optical Brightening Agents from Taiwan, 42973-42974 2017-19418 Initiation of Administrative Reviews, 42974-42984 2017-19417 Labor Department Labor Department See

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Evaluation of American Apprenticeship Initiative, 43038-43040 2017-19423
Management Management and Budget Office NOTICES Proposed Designation of Databases for Treasury's Working System under Do Not Pay Initiative, 43041-43048 2017-19433 Maritime Maritime Administration NOTICES Meetings: Maritime Transportation System National Advisory Committee, 43084-43085 2017-19398 NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Certified Cost or Pricing Data and Data Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data, 43022-43023 2017-19340 Charter Renewals: Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel, 43048 2017-19406 International Space Station Advisory Committee, 43048-43049 2017-19405 National Institute National Institutes of Health NOTICES Government-Owned Inventions; Availability for Licensing, 43026-43027 2017-19315 Meetings: Center for Scientific Review, 43027-43029 2017-19361 2017-19411 National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, 43029 2017-19362 National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 43028-43029 2017-19363 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Annual Northern Seal Subsistence Harvest Reporting and St. George Harvest Management Plan, 43001-43002 2017-19394 Meetings: Fisheries of South Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico, and Caribbean; Correction, 42985 2017-19439 South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 42984 2017-19430 Western Pacific Fishery Management Council, 42986 2017-19438 Permit Applications: Endangered Species; File No. 21169, 42984-42985 2017-19395 Marine Mammals; File No. 21422, 43002 2017-19393 Taking and Importing Marine Mammals Incidental to Specific Activities: Pile Driving for Waterfront Repairs at U.S. Coast Guard Station Monterey, Monterey, CA, 42986-43001 2017-19352 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Wastes in a Geologic Repository at Yucca Mountain, NV, 43050 2017-19432 Grant and Cooperative Agreement Provisions, 43049-43050 2017-19384 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Acquisition Regulation, 43051-43052 2017-19368 Occupational Safety Health Adm Occupational Safety and Health Administration NOTICES Expansion of Recognition; Applications: MET Laboratories, Inc., 43040-43041 2017-19403 Pipeline Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration NOTICES Hazardous Materials: Applications for Special Permits, 43085-43086 2017-19343 Presidential Documents Presidential Documents ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS Terrorist Attacks; Continuation of National Emergency (Notice of September 11, 2017), 43151-43153 2017-19601 Trading With the Enemy Act; Continuation of Certain Authorities (Presidential Determination No. 2017-11 of September 8, 2017), 42927 2017-19522 Railroad Retirement Railroad Retirement Board NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 43052-43054 2017-19442 Rural Housing Service Rural Housing Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 42972 2017-19422 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 43056-43057, 43063-43064 2017-19360 2017-19446 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: National Securities Clearing Corp., 43054-43056, 43061-43063 2017-19375 2017-19379 New York Stock Exchange, LLC, 43057-43058 2017-19377 NYSE American, LLC, 43059-43061, 43064-43066 2017-19376 2017-19378 Small Business Small Business Administration NOTICES Major Disaster Declarations: U.S. Virgin Islands, 43066 2017-19447 Social Social Security Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 43066-43068 2017-19389 State Department State Department NOTICES Meetings: Advisory Committee on Private International Law, 43068 2017-19357 Requests for Nominations: Working Group I, II, III; Contributions to Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Sixth Assessment Report, 43077 2017-19391 Visas: Bureau of Consular Affairs; Registration for Diversity Immigrant Visa Program, 43068-43077 2017-19412 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

Federal Highway Administration

See

Federal Railroad Administration

See

Federal Transit Administration

See

Maritime Administration

See

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Treasury Treasury Department See

Internal Revenue Service

Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, 43088-43149 2017-18284 Part III Presidential Documents, 43151-43153 2017-19601 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.

82 176 Wednesday, September 13, 2017 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2017-0809; Product Identifier 2017-NM-094-AD; Amendment 39-19030; AD 2017-18-21] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes AGENCY:

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

ACTION:

Final rule; request for comments.

SUMMARY:

We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2017-13-12, which applied to all Airbus Model A318 and A319 series airplanes; Model A320-211, -212, -214, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes; and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes. AD 2017-13-12 required modification or replacement of certain side stay assemblies of the main landing gear (MLG). This new AD clarifies the formatting of a figure in the published version of AD 2017-13-12. This new AD was prompted by reports indicating that affected parties misinterpreted the applicability of the affected part numbers due to the formatting of a figure in the published version of AD 2017-13-12, which could result in a negative effect on compliance. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES:

This AD is effective September 28, 2017.

The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of August 9, 2017 (82 FR 30949, July 5, 2017).

We must receive comments on this AD by October 30, 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: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

For Airbus service information identified in this final rule, contact Airbus, Airworthiness Office-EIAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone: +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax: +33 5 61 93 44 51; email: [email protected]; Internet: http://www.airbus.com.

For Messier-Dowty service information identified in this final rule, contact Messier-Dowty: Messier Services Americas, Customer Support Center, 45360 Severn Way, Sterling, VA 20166-8910; telephone: 703-450-8233; fax: 703-404-1621; Internet: https://techpubs.services/messier-dowty.com.

You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 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-2017-0809.

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-2017-0809; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone 800-647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-1405; fax 425-227-1149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

On June 19, 2017, we issued AD 2017-13-12, Amendment 39-18942 (82 FR 30949, July 5, 2017) (“AD 2017-13-12”), which applied to all Airbus Model A318 series airplanes and A319 series airplanes; Model A320-211, -212, -214, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes; and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes. AD 2017-13-12 was prompted by an evaluation by the design approval holder (DAH), which indicates that the main landing gear (MLG) does not comply with certification specifications, which could result in a locking failure of the MLG side stay. AD 2017-13-12 required modification or replacement of certain MLG side stay assemblies. We issued AD 2017-13-12 prevent possible collapse of the MLG during takeoff and landing.

Since we issued AD 2017-13-12, we have received reports indicating that affected parties misinterpreted the applicability of the affected part numbers due to the formatting of figure 1 to paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) in the published version of AD 2017-13-12, which could result in a negative effect on compliance. Therefore, we have determined that clarification of the formatting of the published figure is necessary.

The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 2016-0018R1, dated September 14, 2016 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus Model A318 and A319 series airplanes; Model A320-211, -212, -214, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes; and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes. The EASA AD is referenced in AD 2017-13-12. EASA has not revised its AD since the issuance of AD 2017-13-12.

You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-0809.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

We have reviewed the following service information.

• Airbus Service Bulletin A320-32-1429, Revision 01, dated February 29, 2016.

• Messier-Bugatti-Dowty Service Bulletin 200-32-315, dated April 24, 2015.

• Messier-Bugatti-Dowty Service Bulletin 201-32-63, dated April 24, 2015.

The service information describes procedures for modifying the MLG side stay assembly. The Messier-Bugatti-Dowty documents are distinct since they apply to different airplane models. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD

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

FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date

We are superseding AD 2017-13-12 to clarify the formatting of a figure in the regulatory text of the published AD. No other changes have been made to AD 2017-13-12. Therefore, we determined that notice and opportunity for prior public comment are unnecessary.

Comments Invited

This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2017-0809; Product Identifier 2017-NM-094-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this AD because of those comments.

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

Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this AD affects 959 airplanes of U.S. registry. This AD adds no new economic burden to AD 2017-13-12. We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

Estimated Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Cost on U.S.
  • operators
  • Replacement or modification (retained actions from AD 2017-13-12) 9 work-hours × $85 per hour = $765 $14,104 $14,869 $14,259,371
    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.

    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes to the Director of the System Oversight Division.

    Regulatory Findings

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

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

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

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

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by removing airworthiness directive (AD) 2017-13-12, Amendment 39-18942 (82 FR 30949, July 5, 2017), and adding the following new AD: 2017-18-21 Airbus: Amendment 39-19030; Docket No. FAA-2017-0809; Product Identifier 2017-NM-094-AD. (a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective September 28, 2017.

    (b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2017-13-12, Amendment 39-18942 (82 FR 30949, July 5, 2017) (“AD 2017-13-12”).

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the airplanes identified in paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), (c)(3), and (c)(4) of this AD, certificated in any category, all manufacturer serial numbers.

    (1) Airbus Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 airplanes.

    (2) Airbus Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133 airplanes.

    (3) Airbus Model A320-211, -212, -214, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes.

    (4) Airbus Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes.

    (d) Subject

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

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by an evaluation by the design approval holder that indicates that the main landing gear (MLG) does not comply with certification specifications, which could result in a locking failure of the MLG side stay. We are issuing this AD to prevent possible collapse of the MLG during takeoff and landing.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Retained Modification or Replacement, With Revised Figure Formatting

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (g) of AD 2017-13-12, with revised figure formatting. Within 120 months after August 9, 2017 (the effective date of AD 2017-13-12), accomplish the action specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD.

    (1) Modify each MLG side stay assembly having a part number listed in figure 1 to paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of this AD, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-32-1429, Revision 01, dated February 29, 2016, and the service information specified in paragraph (g)(1)(i) or (g)(1)(ii) of this AD, as applicable. The modification may be done “off wing,” provided the modified MLG is reinstalled on the airplane.

    (i) For Model A318 Ssries airplanes; Model A319 series airplanes; and Model A320-211, -212, -214, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes: Messier-Bugatti-Dowty Service Bulletin 200-32-315, dated April 24, 2015.

    (ii) For Model A321 series airplanes: Messier-Bugatti-Dowty Service Bulletin 201-32-63, dated April 24, 2015.

    (2) Replace the MLG side stay assembly with a side stay assembly that has been modified in accordance with paragraph (g)(1) of this AD. Do the replacement using a method approved by the Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA).

    Note 1 to paragraph (g)(2) of this AD: Additional guidance for the replacement can be found in Chapter 32 of the Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 Aircraft Maintenance Manual.

    Figure 1 to Paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of This AD—Affected MLG Side Stay Assemblies Models Affected part Nos.
  • (P/N)
  • Strike
  • number not
  • cancelled
  • A318-111, A318-112, A318-121, A318-122, A319-111, A319-112, A319-113, A319-114, A319-115, A319-131, A319-132, A319-133, A320-211, A320-212, A320-214, A320-231, A320-232, and A320-233 airplanes 201166001-xxx 1
  • 201166002-xxx.1
  • 201166003-xxx.1
  • 201166004-xxx.1
  • 201166005-xxx.1
  • 12
    201166006-xxx.1 201166007-xxx.1 201166008-xxx.1 201166009-xxx.1 201166010-xxx.1 201166011-xxx.1 201166012-xxx.2 201166013-000 through 201166013-030 inclusive.2 201166014-000 through 201166014-030 inclusive.2 A321-111, A321-112, and A321-131 airplanes 201390001-000 through 201390001-040 inclusive.2
  • 201390002-000 through 201390002-040 inclusive.2
  • 15
    201527001-000 through 201527001-025 inclusive.2 201527002-000 through 201527002-025 inclusive.2 A321-211, A321-212, A321-213, A321-231, and A321-232 airplanes 201524001-000 through 201524001-035 inclusive.2
  • 201524002-000 through 201524002-035 inclusive.2
  • 201660001-000 through 201660001-030 inclusive.2
  • 201660002-000 through 201660002-030 inclusive.2
  • 15
    1 The `xxx' used in this figure can be any 3-digit combination. 2 Units having a P/N with no dash number after the first 9 digits are also affected. Units having a P/N with the first 9 digits and a dash number higher than those listed, are not affected by the requirements of this AD.
    (h) Retained Provisions for Unaffected Airplanes, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the provisions of paragraph (h) of AD 2017-13-12, with no changes. An airplane on which Airbus Modification (Mod) 156646, Airbus Mod 161202, or Airbus Mod 161346 has been embodied in production is not affected by the requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD, provided it is determined that no part having a part number identified in figure 1 to paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of this AD has been installed on that airplane since the date of issuance of the original certificate of airworthiness or the original export certificate of airworthiness. A review of the airplane maintenance records is acceptable to make this determination, provided that these records are accurate and can be relied upon to conclusively make that determination.

    (i) Retained Parts Installation Prohibition, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (i) of AD 2017-13-12, with no changes. As of August 9, 2017 (the effective date of AD 2017-13-12), do not install on any airplane, an MLG side stay assembly having a part number, with the strike number not cancelled, as identified in figure 1 to paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of this AD, unless it has been modified in accordance with the requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD.

    (j) Retained Credit for Previous Actions, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the provisions of paragraph (j) of AD 2017-13-12, with no changes. This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before August 9, 2017 (the effective date of AD 2017-13-12), using Airbus Service Bulletin A320-32-1429, dated September 10, 2015.

    (k) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:

    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, 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 International Section, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (l)(2) of this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected] Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.

    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA. If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): If any service information contains procedures or tests that are identified as RC, those procedures and tests must be done to comply with this AD; any procedures or tests that are not identified as RC are recommended. Those procedures and tests that are not identified 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 procedures and tests identified as RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition. Any substitutions or changes to procedures or tests identified as RC require approval of an AMOC.

    (l) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA AD 2016-0018R1, dated September 14, 2016, for related information. You may examine the MCAI on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-0809.

    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-1405; fax 425-227-1149.

    (3) Service information identified in this AD that is not incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in paragraphs (m)(3), (m)(4), and (m)(5) of this AD.

    (m) Material Incorporated by Reference

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

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

    (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on August 9, 2017 (82 FR 30949, July 5, 2017).

    (i) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-32-1429, Revision 01, dated February 29, 2016.

    (ii) Messier-Bugatti-Dowty Service Bulletin 200-32-315, dated April 24, 2015.

    (iii) Messier-Bugatti-Dowty Service Bulletin 201-32-63, dated April 24, 2015.

    (4) For Airbus service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus, Airworthiness Office—EIAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone: +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax: +33 5 61 93 44 51; email: [email protected]; Internet: http://www.airbus.com.

    (5) For Messier-Dowty service information identified in this AD, contact Messier-Dowty: Messier Services Americas, Customer Support Center, 45360 Severn Way, Sterling, VA 20166-8910; telephone: 703-450-8233; fax: 703-404-1621; Internet: https://techpubs.services/messier-dowty.com.

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

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

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 31, 2017. Dionne Palermo, Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19301 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 97 [Docket No. 31152; Amdt. No. 3763] Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This rule establishes, amends, suspends, or removes Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures (ODPs) for operations at certain airports. These regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or revised criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational facilities, adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements. These changes are designed to provide safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective September 13, 2017. The compliance date for each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the amendatory provisions.

    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of September 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Availability of matters incorporated by reference in the amendment is as follows:

    For Examination

    1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Ops-M30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Bldg., Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.

    2. The FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the affected airport is located;

    3. The office of Aeronautical Navigation Products, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or,

    4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to:http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    Availability

    All SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are available online free of charge. Visit the National Flight Data Center at nfdc.faa.gov to register. Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP copies may be obtained from the FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the affected airport is located.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Thomas J. Nichols, Flight Procedure Standards Branch (AFS-420), Flight Technologies and Programs Divisions, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125) Telephone: (405) 954-4164.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This rule amends Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97), by establishing, amending, suspending, or removes SIAPS, Takeoff Minimums and/or ODPS. The complete regulatory description of each SIAP and its associated Takeoff Minimums or ODP for an identified airport is listed on FAA form documents which are incorporated by reference in this amendment under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR part 97.20. The applicable FAA forms are FAA Forms 8260-3, 8260-4, 8260-5, 8260-15A, and 8260-15B when required by an entry on 8260-15A.

    The large number of SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, their complex nature, and the need for a special format make publication in the Federal Register expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use the regulatory text of the SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums or ODPs, but instead refer to their graphic depiction on charts printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the complete description of each SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP listed on FAA form documents is unnecessary. This amendment provides the affected CFR sections and specifies the types of SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs with their applicable effective dates. This amendment also identifies the airport and its location, the procedure, and the amendment number.

    Availability and Summary of Material Incorporated by Reference

    The material incorporated by reference is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section.

    The material incorporated by reference describes SIAPS, Takeoff Minimums and/or ODPS as identified in the amendatory language for part 97 of this final rule.

    The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of each separate SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP as Amended in the transmittal. Some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and textual ODP amendments may have been issued previously by the FAA in a Flight Data Center (FDC) Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) as an emergency action of immediate flight safety relating directly to published aeronautical charts.

    The circumstances that created the need for some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP amendments may require making them effective in less than 30 days. For the remaining SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, an effective date at least 30 days after publication is provided.

    Further, the SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs contained in this amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). In developing these SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, the TERPS criteria were applied to the conditions existing or anticipated at the affected airports. Because of the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are impracticable and contrary to the public interest and, where applicable, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d), good cause exists for making some SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore—(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); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

    Air traffic control, Airports, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 25, 2017. John S. Duncan, Director, Flight Standards Service. Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) is amended by establishing, amending, suspending, or removing Standard Instrument Approach Procedures and/or Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures effective at 0901 UTC on the dates specified, as follows:

    PART 97—STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES 1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114, 40120, 44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

    2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows: Effective 12 October 2017 Grayling, AK, Grayling, RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Orig Grayling, AK, Grayling, RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Orig Grayling, AK, Grayling, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig Del Norte, CO, Astronaut Kent Rominger, HOMME ONE, Graphic DP Del Norte, CO, Astronaut Kent Rominger, RNAV (GPS) RWY 24, Orig Del Norte, CO, Astronaut Kent Rominger, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig Danbury, CT, Danbury Muni, LOC RWY 8, Amdt 6 Washington, DC, Ronald Reagan Washington National, LDA Y RWY 19, Amdt 1 Orlando, FL, Orlando Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 17L, ILS RWY 17L (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 17L (CAT II), Amdt 2A Orlando, FL, Orlando Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 17R, ILS RWY 17R (CAT II), Amdt 5D Orlando, FL, Orlando Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 18R, Amdt 10A Orlando, FL, Orlando Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 35L, ILS RWY 35L (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 35L (CAT II), ILS RWY 35L (CAT III), Amdt 8 Orlando, FL, Orlando Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 35R, ILS RWY 35R (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 35R (CAT II), Amdt 3 Orlando, FL, Orlando Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 36R, ILS RWY 36R (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 36R (CAT II), ILS RWY 36R (CAT III), Amdt 11 Orlando, FL, Orlando Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 36L, Amdt 2 Orlando, FL, Orlando Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 36R, Amdt 2 Ashburn, GA, Turner County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Orig Ashburn, GA, Turner County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Orig Ashburn, GA, Turner County, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig Atlanta, GA, Hartsfield—Jackson Atlanta Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 8L, Amdt 1 Atlanta, GA, Hartsfield—Jackson Atlanta Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 10, Amdt 1 Atlanta, GA, Hartsfield—Jackson Atlanta Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 26R, Amdt 1 Atlanta, GA, Hartsfield—Jackson Atlanta Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 28, Amdt 1 Muscatine, IA, Muscatine Muni, ILS OR LOC RWY 24, Amdt 2 Muscatine, IA, Muscatine Muni, VOR RWY 6, Orig-D, CANCELED Mc Call, ID, Mc Call Muni, PEPUC TWO, Graphic DP Gonzales, LA, Louisiana Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Orig-A Boston, MA, General Edward Lawrence Logan Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 4R, ILS RWY 4R (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 4R, (CAT II), ILS RWY 4R (CAT III), Amdt 10C Boston, MA, General Edward Lawrence Logan Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 15R, Amdt 1F Boston, MA, General Edward Lawrence Logan Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 22L, Amdt 8C Boston, MA, General Edward Lawrence Logan Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 27, Amdt 2D Boston, MA, General Edward Lawrence Logan Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 33L, ILS RWY 33L (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 33L (CAT II), ILS RWY 33L (CAT III), Amdt 5D Boston, MA, General Edward Lawrence Logan Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 4L, Orig-A Boston, MA, General Edward Lawrence Logan Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 4R, Amdt 2A Boston, MA, General Edward Lawrence Logan Intl, RNAV (GPS) 15R, Amdt 1D Boston, MA, General Edward Lawrence Logan Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 22L, Amdt 1C Boston, MA, General Edward Lawrence Logan Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Orig-E Boston, MA, General Edward Lawrence Logan Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Orig-G Boston, MA, General Edward Lawrence Logan Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 33L, Amdt 2C Mc Gregor, MN, Isedor Iverson, RNAV (GPS) RWY 14, Amdt 1 Laurel, MS, Hesler-Noble Field, NDB RWY 13, Amdt 8A, CANCELED Cross Keys, NJ, Cross Keys, VOR OR GPS RWY 9, Amdt 6A Wildwood, NJ, Cape May County, LOC RWY 19, Amdt 7 Wildwood, NJ, Cape May County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 1, Orig Wildwood, NJ, Cape May County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 10, Amdt 1 Wildwood, NJ, Cape May County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 19, Amdt 1 Wildwood, NJ, Cape May County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 28, Orig Wildwood, NJ, Cape May County, VOR-A, Amdt 4 Bucyrus, OH, Port Bucyrus-Crawford County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 22, Orig-A Willard, OH, Willard, VOR-A, Orig-A Amarillo, TX, Rick Husband Amarillo Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 4, Amdt 1 Amarillo, TX, Rick Husband Amarillo Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 13, Amdt 1 Amarillo, TX, Rick Husband Amarillo Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 22, Amdt 1 Amarillo, TX, Rick Husband Amarillo Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 31, Amdt 1 Georgetown, TX, Georgetown Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 11, Amdt 1 Georgetown, TX, Georgetown Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 29, Amdt 1 Fillmore, UT, Fillmore Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 4, Amdt 1 Fillmore, UT, Fillmore Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 22, Amdt 1 Salt Lake City, UT, Salt Lake City Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 16R, ILS RWY 16R (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 16R (CAT II), ILS RWY 16R (CAT III), Amdt 3D Salt Lake City, UT, Salt Lake City Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 34L, ILS RWY 34L (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 34L (CAT II), ILS RWY 34L (CAT III), Amdt 3C Seattle, WA, Seattle-Tacoma Intl, ILS OR LOC 16C, ILS RWY 16C (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 16C (CAT II), ILS RWY 16C (CAT III), Amdt 16A Seattle, WA, Seattle-Tacoma Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 16L, ILS RWY 16L (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 16L (CAT II), ILS RWY 16L (CAT III), Amdt 7A Seattle, WA, Seattle-Tacoma Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 16R, ILS RWY 16R (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 16R (CAT II), ILS RWY 16R (CAT III), Amdt 4A Seattle, WA, Seattle-Tacoma Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 34C, ILS RWY 34C (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 34C (SA CAT II), Amdt 3D Seattle, WA, Seattle-Tacoma Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 34L, ILS RWY 34L (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 34L (SA CAT II), Amdt 1E Seattle, WA, Seattle-Tacoma Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 34R, ILS RWY 34R (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 34R (SA CAT II), Amdt 2D Seattle, WA, Seattle-Tacoma Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 16C, Amdt 3A Seattle, WA, Seattle-Tacoma Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 16L, Amdt 5A Seattle, WA, Seattle-Tacoma Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 16R, Amdt 2A Seattle, WA, Seattle-Tacoma Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 34C, Amdt 2C Seattle, WA, Seattle-Tacoma Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 34L, Amdt 1C Seattle, WA, Seattle-Tacoma Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 34R, Amdt 2D Seattle, WA, Seattle-Tacoma Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 16C, Amdt 1A Seattle, WA, Seattle-Tacoma Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 16L, Amdt 2A Seattle, WA, Seattle-Tacoma Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 16R, Amdt 1A Seattle, WA, Seattle-Tacoma Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 34C, Amdt 2A Seattle, WA, Seattle-Tacoma Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 34L, Amdt 2A Seattle, WA, Seattle-Tacoma Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 34R, Amdt 1A Casper, WY, Casper/Natrona County Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 8, Amdt 25B, CANCELED Casper, WY, Casper/Natrona County Intl, LOC RWY 8, Orig Riverton, WY, Riverton Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 10, Amdt 2B Riverton, WY, Riverton Rgnl, VOR RWY 10, Amdt 10B

    Rescinded: On August 17, 2017 (82 FR 39011), the FAA published an Amendment in Docket No. 31148, Amdt No. 3759 to Part 97 of the Federal Aviation Regulations under section 97.23, 97.33 and 97.37. The following entries for Newberry, MI, and Seattle, WA, effective October 12, 2017, are hereby rescinded in their entirety:

    Newberry, MI, Luce County, VOR RWY 11, Amdt 12, CANCELED Newberry, MI, Luce County, VOR RWY 29, Amdt 12, CANCELED Seattle, WA, Boeing Field/King County Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 14R, Amdt 1 Seattle, WA, Boeing Field/King County Intl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP,Amdt 8
    [FR Doc. 2017-19075 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 97 [Docket No. 31153; Amdt. No. 3764] Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This rule amends, suspends, or removes Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures for operations at certain airports. These regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or revised criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational facilities, adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements. These changes are designed to provide for the safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective September 13, 2017. The compliance date for each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the amendatory provisions.

    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of September 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Availability of matter incorporated by reference in the amendment is as follows:

    For Examination

    1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Ops-M30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Bldg., Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001;

    2. The FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the affected airport is located;

    3. The office of Aeronautical Navigation Products, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or,

    4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    Availability

    All SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are available online free of charge. Visit the National Flight Data Center online at nfdc.faa.gov to register. Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP copies may be obtained from the FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the affected airport is located.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Thomas J. Nichols, Flight Procedure Standards Branch (AFS-420) Flight Technologies and Procedures Division, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125) telephone: (405) 954-4164.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This rule amends Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) by amending the referenced SIAPs. The complete regulatory description of each SIAP is listed on the appropriate FAA Form 8260, as modified by the National Flight Data Center (NFDC)/Permanent Notice to Airmen (P-NOTAM), and is incorporated by reference under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR 97.20. The large number of SIAPs, their complex nature, and the need for a special format make their verbatim publication in the Federal Register expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use the regulatory text of the SIAPs, but refer to their graphic depiction on charts printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the complete description of each SIAP contained on FAA form documents is unnecessary.

    This amendment provides the affected CFR sections, and specifies the SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs with their applicable effective dates. This amendment also identifies the airport and its location, the procedure and the amendment number.

    Availability and Summary of Material Incorporated by Reference

    The material incorporated by reference is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section.

    The material incorporated by reference describes SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs as identified in the amendatory language for part 97 of this final rule.

    The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of each separate SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP as amended in the transmittal. For safety and timeliness of change considerations, this amendment incorporates only specific changes contained for each SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP as modified by FDC permanent NOTAMs.

    The SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, as modified by FDC permanent NOTAM, and contained in this amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). In developing these changes to SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, the TERPS criteria were applied only to specific conditions existing at the affected airports. All SIAP amendments in this rule have been previously issued by the FAA in a FDC NOTAM as an emergency action of immediate flight safety relating directly to published aeronautical charts.

    The circumstances that created the need for these SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP amendments require making them effective in less than 30 days.

    Because of the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are impracticable and contrary to the public interest and, where applicable, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d), good cause exists for making these SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore—(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); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

    Air traffic control, Airports, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 25, 2017. John S. Duncan, Director, Flight Standards Service. Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14, Code of Federal regulations, Part 97, (14 CFR part 97), is amended by amending Standard Instrument Approach Procedures and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, effective at 0901 UTC on the dates specified, as follows:

    PART 97—STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES 1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114, 40120, 44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

    2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows:

    By amending: § 97.23 VOR, VOR/DME, VOR or TACAN, and VOR/DME or TACAN; § 97.25 LOC, LOC/DME, LDA, LDA/DME, SDF, SDF/DME; § 97.27 NDB, NDB/DME; § 97.29 ILS, ILS/DME, MLS, MLS/DME, MLS/RNAV; § 97.31 RADAR SIAPs; § 97.33 RNAV SIAPs; and § 97.35 COPTER SIAPs, Identified as follows:

    * * * Effective Upon Publication

    AIRAC date State City Airport FDC No. FDC date Subject 12-Oct-17 MI Battle Creek W K Kellogg 7/0799 8/2/17 This NOTAM, published in TL 17-20, is hereby rescinded in its entirety. 12-Oct-17 ID Pocatello Pocatello Rgnl 7/1022 8/2/17 This NOTAM, published in TL 17-20, is hereby rescinded in its entirety. 12-Oct-17 OH Mansfield Mansfield Lahm Rgnl 7/5241 8/2/17 This NOTAM, published in TL 17-20, is hereby rescinded in its entirety. 12-Oct-17 CA Bakersfield Meadows Field 7/6052 8/2/17 This NOTAM, published in TL 17-20, is hereby rescinded in its entirety. 12-Oct-17 NY Elmira/Corning Elmira/Corning Rgnl 7/6084 8/2/17 This NOTAM, published in TL 17-20, is hereby rescinded in its entirety. 12-Oct-17 GA Savannah Savannah/Hilton Head Intl 7/9349 8/2/17 This NOTAM, published in TL 17-20, is hereby rescinded in its entirety. 12-Oct-17 IA Dubuque Dubuque Rgnl 7/9350 8/2/17 This NOTAM, published in TL 17-20, is hereby rescinded in its entirety. 12-Oct-17 MI Pontiac Oakland County Intl 7/9870 8/2/17 This NOTAM, published in TL 17-20, is hereby rescinded in its entirety. 12-Oct-17 MS Natchez Hardy-Anders Field Natchez-Adams County 7/0374 8/10/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 31, Amdt 1A. 12-Oct-17 MS Natchez Hardy-Anders Field Natchez-Adams County 7/0375 8/10/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Amdt 1A. 12-Oct-17 TX Decatur Decatur Muni 7/0378 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Orig. 12-Oct-17 NY Schenectady Schenectady County 7/0419 8/10/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 10, Orig-D. 12-Oct-17 VA Moneta Smith Mountain Lake 7/0439 8/10/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 23, Orig-B. 12-Oct-17 AK Kokhanok Kokhanok 7/0447 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 6, Orig-C. 12-Oct-17 AK Kokhanok Kokhanok 7/0448 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 24, Orig-C. 12-Oct-17 WY Guernsey Camp Guernsey 7/0520 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Orig-B. 12-Oct-17 NV Las Vegas Mc Carran Intl 7/0577 8/22/17 VOR RWY 26L/R, Amdt 4. 12-Oct-17 ND Fargo Hector Intl 7/0712 8/22/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Amdt 1A. 12-Oct-17 NC Greensboro Piedmont Triad Intl 7/0800 8/8/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 23R, Orig-B. 12-Oct-17 AR Ash Flat Sharp County Rgnl 7/0852 8/10/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 4, Orig. 12-Oct-17 SC Marion Marion County 7/1016 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 4, Amdt 1. 12-Oct-17 TN Knoxville Mc Ghee Tyson 7/1098 8/10/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 23R, Amdt 2. 12-Oct-17 TN Knoxville Mc Ghee Tyson 7/1100 8/10/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 5L, Amdt 2. 12-Oct-17 GA Pine Mountain Harris County 7/1145 8/10/17 VOR-A, Amdt 5A. 12-Oct-17 NC Greensboro Piedmont Triad Intl 7/1158 8/8/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 5L, Orig-B. 12-Oct-17 OK Goldsby David Jay Perry 7/1921 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 31, Orig. 12-Oct-17 CA Beckwourth Nervino 7/1926 8/10/17 RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 26, Orig-C. 12-Oct-17 AK King Salmon King Salmon 7/2193 8/10/17 ILS OR LOC/DME RWY 12, Amdt 18A. 12-Oct-17 NC Kinston Kinston Rgnl Jetport At Stallings Fld 7/2200 8/10/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 5, Amdt 3. 12-Oct-17 NC Kinston Kinston Rgnl Jetport At Stallings Fld 7/2204 8/10/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 23, Amdt 3. 12-Oct-17 TN Memphis Memphis Intl 7/3222 8/10/17 RNAV (GPS) Z RWY 18L, Amdt 2B. 12-Oct-17 AK Barrow Wiley Post-Will Rogers Memorial 7/3224 8/22/17 ILS OR LOC RWY 7, Amdt 1. 12-Oct-17 MN Sauk Centre Sauk Centre Muni 7/3286 8/10/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Amdt 1. 12-Oct-17 MN Sauk Centre Sauk Centre Muni 7/3287 8/10/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 14, Orig. 12-Oct-17 IL Bloomington/Normal Central Il Rgnl Arpt At Bloomington-Normal 7/3397 8/10/17 ILS OR LOC RWY 20, ILS RWY 20 (CAT II), Amdt 3A. 12-Oct-17 OH Cleveland Burke Lakefront 7/3986 8/14/17 ILS OR LOC RWY 24R, Amdt 1. 12-Oct-17 GA Pine Mountain Harris County 7/4505 8/10/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 9, Orig-A. 12-Oct-17 NM Truth Or Consequences Truth Or Consequences Muni 7/4682 8/8/17 VOR-A, Amdt 9C. 12-Oct-17 NC Statesville Statesville Rgnl 7/4740 8/10/17 ILS OR LOC/DME Y RWY 28, Orig. 12-Oct-17 NC Statesville Statesville Rgnl 7/4742 8/10/17 ILS OR LOC/DME Z RWY 28, Amdt 1. 12-Oct-17 NC Statesville Statesville Rgnl 7/4743 8/10/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 10, Amdt 1. 12-Oct-17 NC Statesville Statesville Rgnl 7/4744 8/10/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 28, Amdt 3A. 12-Oct-17 OR Portland Portland Intl 7/4815 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 10R, Amdt 2A. 12-Oct-17 KY Louisville Louisville Intl-Standiford Field 7/4828 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 35R, Amdt 1C. 12-Oct-17 LA New Orleans Louis Armstrong New Orleans Intl 7/4829 8/14/17 ILS OR LOC RWY 29, Amdt 10. 12-Oct-17 MN Rochester Rochester Intl 7/4830 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 13, Amdt 1. 12-Oct-17 NY Syracuse Syracuse Hancock Intl 7/4831 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) Z RWY 28, Amdt 2B. 12-Oct-17 AK Elim Elim 7/4888 8/22/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 19, Orig-B. 12-Oct-17 TX Fort Worth Fort Worth Alliance 7/4891 8/10/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 16R, Amdt 1. 12-Oct-17 AK Cold Bay Cold Bay 7/4937 8/14/17 LOC/DME BC RWY 33, Amdt 10B. 12-Oct-17 AK Cold Bay Cold Bay 7/4938 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 33, Amdt 2B. 12-Oct-17 CA Calipatria Cliff Hatfield Memorial 7/5126 8/10/17 Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig. 12-Oct-17 AK Kwethluk Kwethluk 7/5560 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Orig-A. 12-Oct-17 AK Kwethluk Kwethluk 7/5561 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Orig-A. 12-Oct-17 CO Denver Denver Intl 7/5909 8/8/17 RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 7, Amdt 1A. 12-Oct-17 CO Denver Denver Intl 7/5912 8/8/17 RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 16L, Amdt 1B. 12-Oct-17 CO Denver Denver Intl 7/5914 8/8/17 RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 16R, Amdt 1B. 12-Oct-17 CO Denver Denver Intl 7/5916 8/8/17 RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 17R, Amdt 1B. 12-Oct-17 CO Denver Denver Intl 7/5921 8/8/17 RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 26, Amdt 1A. 12-Oct-17 CO Denver Denver Intl 7/5922 8/8/17 RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 34L, Amdt 2B. 12-Oct-17 CO Denver Denver Intl 7/5935 8/8/17 RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 34R, Amdt 2A. 12-Oct-17 CO Denver Denver Intl 7/5938 8/8/17 RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 35L, Amdt 2A. 12-Oct-17 CO Denver Denver Intl 7/5939 8/8/17 RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 35R, Amdt 2A. 12-Oct-17 TX Amarillo Rick Husband Amarillo Intl 7/5974 8/8/17 ILS OR LOC RWY 4, Amdt 22D. 12-Oct-17 MN Minneapolis Minneapolis-St Paul Intl/Wold-Chamberlain 7/6114 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) Z RWY 12R, Amdt 4. 12-Oct-17 PR Aguadilla Rafael Hernandez 7/6264 8/22/17 VOR/DME OR TACAN RWY 26, Orig-C. 12-Oct-17 NM Truth Or Consequences Truth Or Consequences Muni 7/6298 8/8/17 RNAV (GPS)-A, Orig. 12-Oct-17 OH Cleveland Cleveland-Hopkins Intl 7/6554 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 24R, Amdt 3C. 12-Oct-17 NC Raleigh/Durham Raleigh-Durham Intl 7/6596 8/8/17 RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 5R, Amdt 2A. 12-Oct-17 MT Libby Libby 7/6820 8/22/17 RNAV (GPS)-A, Orig-C. 12-Oct-17 TX Corpus Christi Corpus Christi Intl 7/7843 8/14/17 ILS OR LOC RWY 36, Amdt 13A. 12-Oct-17 TX La Porte La Porte Muni 7/7970 8/10/17 VOR-A, Orig-A. 12-Oct-17 TX Athens Athens Muni 7/8233 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Orig. 12-Oct-17 GA Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta Intl 7/8923 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) PRM RWY 27L (SIMULTANEOUS CLOSE PARALLEL), Orig. 12-Oct-17 GA Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta Intl 7/8955 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) PRM RWY 9R (SIMULTANEOUS CLOSE PARALLEL), Orig. 12-Oct-17 GA Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta Intl 7/8958 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) PRM Y RWY 10 (SIMULTANEOUS CLOSE PARALLEL), Orig. 12-Oct-17 GA Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta Intl 7/8963 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) PRM Y RWY 26R (SIMULTANEOUS CLOSE PARALLEL), Orig. 12-Oct-17 GA Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta Intl 7/8967 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) PRM Y RWY 28 (SIMULTANEOUS CLOSE PARALLEL), Orig. 12-Oct-17 GA Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta Intl 7/8969 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) PRM Y RWY 8L (SIMULTANEOUS CLOSE PARALLEL), Orig. 12-Oct-17 GA Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta Intl 7/8971 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 27L, Amdt 5. 12-Oct-17 GA Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta Intl 7/8972 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 9R, Amdt 4A. 12-Oct-17 GA Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta Intl 7/8994 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 08L, Amdt 4. 12-Oct-17 GA Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta Intl 7/8996 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 10, Amdt 4. 12-Oct-17 GA Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta Intl 7/8998 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 28, Amdt 4. 12-Oct-17 GA Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta Intl 7/8999 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 26R, Amdt 4. 12-Oct-17 NH Manchester Manchester 7/9345 8/14/17 ILS OR LOC RWY 35, ILS RWY 35 (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 35 (CAT II AND III), Amdt 2B. 12-Oct-17 TX Beaumont/Port Arthur Jack Brooks Rgnl 7/9374 8/10/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 12, Orig. 12-Oct-17 TX Corpus Christi Corpus Christi Intl 7/9447 8/14/17 RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 36, Amdt 2A. 12-Oct-17 TX Lubbock Lubbock Preston Smith Intl 7/9472 8/10/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 26, Amdt 2B. 12-Oct-17 OR Madras Madras Municipal 7/9638 8/10/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 34, Orig-A. 12-Oct-17 OR Madras Madras Municipal 7/9640 8/10/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 16, Amdt 1A. 12-Oct-17 GA Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta Intl 7/9873 8/2/17 RNAV (GPS) RWY 09L, Amdt 4A. [FR Doc. 2017-19076 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Part 1 Income Taxes CFR Correction In Title 26 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1 (§§ 1.301 to 1.400) revised as of April 1, 2017, on page 598, in § 1.381(c)(2)-1, paragraph (d) is removed. [FR Doc. 2017-19397 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1301-00-D DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Part 1 Income Taxes CFR Correction In Title 26 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1 (§§ 1.170 to 1.300), revised as of April 1, 2017, on page 8, the authority citation for § 1.199-2T is revised to read: “Section 1.199-2T also issued under 26 U.S.C. 199(b)(3).” [FR Doc. 2017-19396 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1301-00-D DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 100 [Docket Number USCG-2017-0703] RIN 1625-AA08 Special Local Regulation; Tennessee River, Huntsville, AL AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Temporary final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard is establishing a special local regulation for all navigable waters of the Tennessee River from mile marker (MM) 333.2 to MM 337.0. This action is necessary to provide for the safety of life on these navigable waters near Huntsville, AL during the Swim Hobbs Island event. Entry of persons or vessels into this regulated area is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector Ohio Valley (COTP) or a designated representative.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective from 7 a.m. through 2 p.m. on September 17, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2017-0703 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 notice of enforcement, call Petty Officer Jonathan Braddy, Marine Safety Detachment Nashville, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 615-736-5421, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Table of Abbreviations CFR Code of Federal Regulations COTP Captain of the Port Sector Ohio Valley 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 it is impracticable. We must establish this special local regulation by September 17, 2017 and lack sufficient time to provide a reasonable comment period and then consider those comments before issuing the rule.

    We are issuing this rule, and under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making it effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. This rule is necessary for the safety of life during the Swim Hobbs Island on these navigable waters. Delaying the effective date of this rule would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest because immediate action is needed to protect the persons and property from the dangers associated with the race.

    III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1233. The Captain of the Port Sector Ohio Valley (COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with the race from 7 a.m. through 2 p.m. on September 17, 2017 will present a safety concern for anyone on the navigable waters on the Tennessee River extending from mile marker (MM) 333.2 to MM 337.0. The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure the safety of life and vessels on the navigable waters before, during, and after the scheduled event.

    IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a special local regulation from 7 a.m. through 2 p.m. on September 17, 2017 for all navigable waters from MM 333.2 to MM 337.0 on the Tennessee River in the vicinity of Huntsville, AL. The duration of the regulated area is intended to ensure the safety of vessels and these navigable waters before, during, and after the scheduled event. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the regulated area 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.

    This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, duration, and time-of-day of the regulated area. Vessel traffic will be able to safely navigate through the affected area before and after the scheduled event. Moreover, the Coast Guard will issue Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the regulated area and the rule allows vessels to seek permission to enter the area.

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

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

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

    C. Collection of Information

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

    D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

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

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

    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such 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 temporary special local regulation lasting seven hours that will prohibit entry on all navigable waters of the Tennessee River, from MM 333.2 to MM 337.0. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 35(a) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction and a Record of Environmental Consideration was not necessary.

    G. Protest Activities

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

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100

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

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

    PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS 1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    33 U.S.C. 1233.

    2. Add temporary § 100.35T08-0703 to read as follows:
    § 100.35T08-0703 Special Local Regulation; Tennessee River, Huntsville, AL.

    (a) Location. All navigable waters of the Tennessee River between mile marker (MM) 333.2 and MM 337.0, Huntsville, AL.

    b) Periods of enforcement. This rule will be enforced from 7 a.m. through 2 p.m. on September 17, 2017.

    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in § 100.801 of this part, entry into this area is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector Ohio Valley (COTP) or a designated representative.

    (2) Persons or vessels desiring entry into or passage through the area must request permission from the COTP or a designated representative. U. S. Coast Guard Sector Ohio Valley may be contacted on VHF Channel 13 or 16 or by telephone at 1-800-253-7465.

    (d) Informational broadcasts. The COTP or a designated representative will inform the public through broadcast notices to mariners of the enforcement period for the special local regulation, as well as any changes in the dates and times of enforcement.

    Dated: September 8, 2017. M.B. Zamperini, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Sector Ohio Valley.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19400 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [USCG-2017-0852] Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, Harvey, LA AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the operating schedule that governs the Harvey Canal Fourth Street Bridge across the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (GIWW) mile 0.24 West of Harvey Lock (WHL), at Harvey, Louisiana. The deviation is necessary to allow the contractor to rehabilitate the bridge to continue full operation. This deviation allows the bridge to remain closed-to-navigation for 77 consecutive days.

    DATES:

    This deviation is effective without actual notice from September 13, 2017 through 7 p.m. on Tuesday, November 21, 2017. For the purposes of enforcement, actual notice will be used from September 8, 2017 through September 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this deviation, [USCG-2017-0852] is available at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this deviation.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this temporary deviation, call or email Donna Gagliano, Bridge Administration Branch, Coast Guard; telephone 504-671-2128, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The C.E.C. Inc., acting on behalf of Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development, has requested a temporary deviation from the operating schedule of the Harvey Canal Fourth Street Bascule Bridge across GIWW, mile 0.24 WHL (Harvey Canal), at Harvey, Louisiana. This deviation was requested to replace electrical and hydraulic lines including trunnion shafts along with span and tail locks initial installation to the drawbridge. This bridge is governed by 33 CFR 117.5.

    This deviation allows the bascule bridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position for 77 consecutive days from 6:30 a.m. on September 6, 2017 through 7 p.m. on Tuesday, November 21, 2017.

    This bridge has a vertical clearance of 7 feet above mean high water in the closed-to-navigation position.

    Navigation at the site of the bridge consists mainly of tugs with barges and some recreational pleasure craft. For the duration of the rehabilitation the bridge will not be able to open for emergencies and GIWW Algiers Alternate Route can be used as an alternate route to avoid unnecessary delays. The Coast Guard will inform the users of the waterway through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating schedule for the bridge so that vessel operators can arrange their transits to minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.

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

    Dated: September 8, 2017. Douglas Allen Blakemore, Sr., Bridge Administrator, Eighth Coast Guard District.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19456 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG-2017-0311] Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Quantuck Canal, Westhampton Beach, NY AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of temporary deviation from drawbridge regulation; modification.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard has modified a temporary deviation from the operating schedule that governs the Beach Lane Bridge across the Quantuck Canal, mile 1.1 at Westhampton Beach, New York. This action is necessary to complete rehabilitation of the bascule leaves of the drawbridge. This modified deviation extends the period during which the bridge may open only one bascule span at a time in order to provide passage for vessels requiring an opening.

    DATES:

    This deviation is effective from September 30, 2017 through 11:59 p.m. on October 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this deviation, USCG-2017-0311 is available at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this deviation.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this modified temporary deviation, call or email James M. Moore, Bridge Management Specialist, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 202-372-1518, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Suffolk County Department of Public Works, the owner of the bridge, requested a temporary deviation in order to complete rehabilitation of the bascule leaves and painting of the bridge. The Beach Lane Bridge across the Quantuck Canal at mile 1.1 at Westhampton Beach, New York is a double-leaf bascule bridge with a vertical clearance of 13.9 feet at mean high water and 16.2 feet at mean low water in the closed position. Horizontal clearance is 50.3 feet, but utilization of a work barge placed underneath one of the bascule leaves reduces horizontal clearance to 25 feet. The existing drawbridge operating regulations are listed at 33 CFR 117.799(d).

    On May 15, 2017, the Coast Guard published a temporary deviation entitled “Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Quantuck Canal, Westhampton Beach, NY” in the Federal Register (82 FR 22281). Under that temporary deviation, between April 17, 2017 and September 30, 2017, the Beach Lane Bridge was authorized to open only one bascule span at a time in order to provide passage for vessels requiring an opening. Dual lift span operations would be permitted provided 48 hours of advance notice was furnished to the owner of the bridge.

    Due to unanticipated project delays, the Suffolk County Department of Public Works has requested to continue one-leaf operations until October 13, 2017, allowing for completion of bascule leaf rehabilitation.

    Vessels that can pass under the bridge without an opening may do so at all times. The bridge will be able to open for emergencies. There is no alternate route for vessels to pass.

    The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterways through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating schedule for the bridge so that vessel operators can arrange their transit to minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.

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

    Dated: September 7, 2017. Christopher J. Bisignano, Supervisory Bridge Management Specialist, First Coast Guard District.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19374 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2017-0838] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; Tennessee River, Knoxville, TN AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Temporary final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for all navigable waters of the Tennessee River extending from mile marker (MM) 646.8 to MM 647.0. This action is necessary to provide for the safety of life on the navigable waters near Knoxville, TN, during the University of Tennessee Football Season recurring fireworks displays. Entry of vessels or persons into this zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector Ohio Valley (COTP) or a designated representative.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective without actual notice from September 13, 2017 through 11 p.m. on November 25, 2017. For the purposes of enforcement, actual notice will be used from September 8, 2017 through September 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2017-0838 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 about this proposed rulemaking, call or email Petty Officer Vera Max, Marine Safety Detachment Nashville, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 615-736-5421, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Table of Abbreviations CFR Code of Federal Regulations COTP Captain of the Port Sector Ohio Valley 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 it is impracticable. We must establish this safety zone by September 9, 2017 and lack sufficient time to provide a reasonable comment period and then consider those comments before issuing the 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. Delaying this rule would be contrary to public interest in ensuring the safety of spectators and vessels during the event because immediate action is necessary to prevent possible loss of life and property. Broadcast Notices to Mariners (BNM) and information sharing with the waterway users will update mariners of the restrictions, requirements and enforcement times during this temporary situation.

    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 Sector Ohio Valley (COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with the recurring fireworks displays from 3:30 p.m. on September 9, 2017 through 11 p.m. on November 25, 2017 will be a safety concern for all navigable waters of the Tennessee River extending from Mile Marker (MM) 646.8 to MM 647.0. The purpose of this rule is to ensure safety of life on the navigable waters in the temporary safety zone before, during, and after the University of Tennessee Football Season Fireworks Displays.

    IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a temporary safety zone during each University of Tennessee football home game during the 2017 season that will have a fireworks display. The temporary safety zone will cover all navigable waters of the Tennessee River extending from MM 646.8 to MM 647.0. Transit into and through this area is prohibited from 30 minutes before kickoff until the end of each game. The first game will be on September 9, 2017 at 4 p.m. The safety zone will be enforced from 3:30 p.m. through the end of the game at approximately 8 p.m. The second game will be on September 23, 2017 at 4 p.m. The remaining home game dates are September 30, October 14, November 4, 18, and 25. Game times will be announced approximately two weeks prior and a Local Notice to Mariners will be issued to advise waterway users of the schedule as it is determined. The duration of the temporary safety zone is intended to ensure the safety of life, vessels, and these navigable waters before, during, and after the scheduled fireworks display. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the temporary safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative. Entry requests will be considered and reviewed on a case-by-case basis. The COTP may be contacted by telephone at 1-800-253-7475 or can be reached by VHF-FM channel 16. Public notifications will be made to the local maritime community prior to the event through the Local Notice to Mariners and Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

    V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive Orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on 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.

    This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, duration, and time-of-year of the temporary safety zone. The temporary safety zone will be in effect for approximately 4 and-a-half hours and only on Saturdays during the University of Tennessee football season. The temporary safety zone covers an area of the waterway stretching less than one mile. The Coast Guard expects minimum adverse impact to mariners from the temporary safety zone activation as the game times will have been advertised to the public. Also, mariners may request authorization from the COTP or a designated representative to transit the temporary safety 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 special local regulation 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 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 special local regulated area that would prohibit entry to unauthorized vessels. 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 § 165.T08-0838 to read as follows:
    § 165.T08-0838 Safety zone; Tennessee River, Knoxville, TN.

    (a) Location. The following area is a temporary safety zone area: all navigable waters of the Tennessee River between Mile Marker (MM) 646.8 and MM 647.0, Knoxville, TN.

    (b) Effective period. This section will be enforced from 3:30 p.m. on September 9, 2017 through 11 p.m. on November 25, 2017.

    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in § 165.23 of this part, entry into this zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector Ohio Valley (COTP) or a designated representative. Persons or vessels desiring to enter into or pass through the zone must request permission from the COTP or a designated representative. They may be contacted on VHF-FM radio channel 16 or telephone at 1-800-253-7465

    (2) Persons and vessels permitted to enter this safety zone must transit at the slowest safe speed and comply with all lawful directions issued by the COTP or a designated representative.

    (d) Informational broadcasts. The COTP or a designated representative will inform the public through broadcast notices to mariners of the enforcement period for the temporary safety zone as well as any changes in the planned schedule.

    Dated: September 8, 2017. M.B. Zamperini, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector Ohio Valley.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19399 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG-2017-0304] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; L4D Optic Ground Wire Crossing, St. Clair River, St. Clair, 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 St. Clair, MI. This zone is necessary to protect vessels from potential hazards associated with the L4D Optic Ground Wire Crossing.

    DATES:

    This temporary final rule is effective from 7 a.m. on September 12, 2017 through 7 p.m. September 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2017-0304 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, 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 Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231. The Captain of the Port Detroit (COTP) has determined that potential hazard associated with this project will be a safety concern to anyone within a 2000-foot area of the LD4 Ground Wire. This rule is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable waters within the safety zone while the project is being conducted.

    IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a safety zone from 7 a.m. on September 12, 2017 through 7 p.m. on September 13, 2017. A safety zone is established to include all U.S. navigable waters of the St. Clair river, St. Clair, MI, between the following two lines from bank-to-the U.S./Canadian border: The first line is drawn directly across the channel from position 42°46.139′ N., 082°28.233′ W. (NAD 83); the second line, to the south, is drawn directly across the channel from position 42°45.799′ N., 082°28.251′ W. (NAD 83). This regulated area will be enforced during a one hour period of time between 7 a.m. through 7 p.m. on September 12, 2017. In the event of inclement weather the regulated area will be enforced during a one hour period of time between 7 a.m. through 7 p.m. on September 13, 2017. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the safety 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 these statutes and executive orders.

    A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.

    This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, duration, and time-of-year of the safety zone. Recreational vessel traffic will be able to safely transit around this safety zone with the exception of a one hour time frame between 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. during which the optic ground wire will cross the river on September 12 or 13, 2017. Commercial traffic shall not be impeded. Moreover, the Coast Guard will issue Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zone and the rule allows vessels to seek permission to enter the zone.

    B. Impact on Small Entities

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

    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section 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 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 36 hours that will prohibit entry within 2000-feet of the project site. 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.

    G. Protest Activities

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

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

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

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

    2. Add § 165.T09-0304 to read as follows:
    § 165.T09-0304 Safety Zone; LD4 Optic Ground Wire Crossing, St. Clair River; St. Clair, MI.

    (a) Location. A safety zone is established to include all U.S. navigable waters of the St. Clair river, St. Clair, MI, between the following two lines from bank-to-the U.S./Canadian border: The first line is drawn directly across the channel from position 42°46.139′ N., 082°28.233′ W. (NAD 83); the second line, to the south, is drawn directly across the channel from position 42°45.799′ N., 082°28.251′ W. (NAD 83).

    (b) Enforcement period. The regulated area described in paragraph (a) will be enforced during a one hour period of time between 7 a.m. through 7 p.m. on September 12, 2017. In the event of inclement weather the regulated area will be enforced during a one hour period of time between 7 a.m. through 7 p.m. on September 13, 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 recreational traffic, except as may be permitted by the Captain of the Port Detroit or his on-scene representative. The safety zone shall not impede the safe navigation of commercial vessels.

    (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: September 7, 2017. Jeffrey W. Novak, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Detroit.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19404 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG-2017-0672] Safety Zone; Allegheny River miles 0.0-0.25, Ohio River mile 0.0-0.1, Monongahela River mile 0.0-0.1; Pittsburgh, PA AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of enforcement of regulation.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard will enforce the subject safety zone for the Pittsburgh Steelers Fireworks on all navigable waters of the Allegheny River miles 0.0 to 0.25, Ohio River mile 0.0 to 0.1, Monongahela River mile 0.0 to 0.1, extending the entire width of the rivers. The zone is needed to protect vessels transiting the area and event spectators from the hazards associated with the barge-based fireworks display. During the enforcement period, entry into, transiting, or anchoring in the safety zone is prohibited to all vessels not registered with the sponsor as participants or official patrol vessels, unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port Marine Safety Unit Pittsburgh (COTP) or a designated representative.

    DATES:

    The regulations in 33 CFR 165.801 Table 1, Sector Ohio Valley, No. 57 will be enforced on November 16, 2017, November 26, 2017, and December 10, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions about this notice of enforcement, call or email MST1 Jennifer Haggins, Marine Safety Unit Pittsburgh, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 412-221-0807, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Coast Guard will enforce the Safety Zone for the Pittsburgh Steelers fireworks on the Allegheny River, Monongahela River and Ohio River, listed in 33 CFR 165.801 Table 1, Sector Ohio Valley, No. 57 on November 16, 2017, November 26, 2017, and December 10, 2017. Entry into the safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the COTP or a designated representative. Persons or vessels desiring to enter into or passage through the safety zone must request permission from the COTP or a designated representative. If permission is granted, all persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the COTP or designated representative.

    This notice of enforcement is issued under authority of 33 CFR 165.801 and 5 U.S.C. 552 (a). In addition to this notice in the Federal Register, the Coast Guard will provide the maritime community with advance notification of this enforcement period via Local Notice to Mariners and updates via Marine Information Broadcasts.

    Dated: August 28, 2017. L. McClain, Jr., Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Marine Safety Unit Pittsburgh.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19436 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R07-OAR-2017-0251; FRL 9967-49-Region 7] Approval of Missouri Air Quality Implementation Plans; Final Rule; Determination of Attainment for the 2010 1-Hour Primary Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard; Jefferson County Nonattainment Area AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final action to determine that the Jefferson County nonattainment area, in Missouri, has attained the 2010 1-hour primary Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) per the EPA's Clean Data Policy. This determination of attainment is based upon complete, quality assured, and certified ambient air monitoring data from the 2014-2016 monitoring period, associated dispersion modeling, and supplemental emissions inventory information, which demonstrate that the Jefferson County area attained the 2010 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS.

    DATES:

    This final rule is effective on October 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2017-0251. All documents in the docket are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through https://www.regulations.gov or please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional information.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Tracey Casburn, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at (913) 551-7016, or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    I. Background Information II. EPA's Response to Comments III. What action is EPA taking? IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background Information

    On June 2, 2010 (75 FR 35520), the EPA established a health-based 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS at 75 ppb. Upon promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, section 107(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires the EPA to designate any area that does not meet (or that contributes to ambient air quality in a nearby area that does not meet) the NAAQS as nonattainment. On August 5, 2013, the EPA designated a portion of Jefferson County, Missouri, as nonattainment for the 2010 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS, effective October 4, 2013.1 The designation was based on 2008-2010 monitoring data in Herculaneum, Missouri, which monitored violations of the standard (see section III of this document for additional monitoring information). The effective date of the nonattainment designation was October 4, 2013. This action established an attainment date five years after the effective date for the areas designated as nonattainment for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS (i.e., by October 4, 2018).

    1 78 FR 47191 (August 5, 2013), codified at 40 CFR 81.326.

    On February 2, 2016, the state submitted a request asking the EPA to determine that the nonattainment area attained the 2010 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS per the EPA's Clean Data Policy.2 3 On June 23, 2017, the EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) which proposed to approve the State's requests. See 82 FR 28605. Specifically, the EPA proposed to take the following actions: (1) Determine that the Jefferson County SO2 nonattainment area is attaining the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS; (2) determine that the Jefferson County SO2 nonattainment area has clean monitoring data; (3) suspend the requirements for the state to submit an attainment demonstration, a reasonable further progress plan, contingency measures, and other planning SIPs revisions related to attainment of the 2010 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS until such time, if any, that the EPA subsequently determines, after notice-and-comment rulemaking in the Federal Register, that the area has violated the 2010 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS.

    2 Memorandum of December 14, 2004, from Steve Page, Director, EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards to the EPA Air Division Directors, “Clean Data Policy for the Fine Particle National Ambient Air Quality Standards.” This document is available at: http://www.epa.gov/pmdesignations/guidance.htm.

    3 The memorandum of April 23, 2014, from Steve Page, Director, EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards to the EPA Air Division Directors “Guidance for 1-hr SO2 Nonattainment Area SIP Submissions” provides guidance for the application of the clean data policy to the 2010 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS. This document is available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-06/documents/20140423guidance_nonattainment_sip.pdf.

    The details of Missouri's submittal and the rationale for EPA's proposed action are explained in the NPR and will not be restated here.

    II. EPA's Response to Comments

    The public comment period on EPA's proposed rule opened June 23, 2017, the date of its publication in the Federal Register, and closed on July 24, 2017. During this period, the EPA received one set of public comments on the NPR, which supported the proposed redesignation and provided additional technical information. The EPA acknowledges these supportive comments, and the additional technical information, however, as the comments were essentially in favor of the agency's proposed action, the EPA is not responding to the individual comments.

    III. What action is EPA taking?

    The EPA is finalizing its determination that the Jefferson County 2010 1-hour primary SO2 nonattainment area (hereby referred to as “the nonattainment area”), in Missouri, has attained the 2010 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS.4 This action is based on complete, quality assured, and certified ambient air monitoring data from the 2013-2015 monitoring period, with additional certified monitoring data from 2016, associated dispersion modeling for the 2013-2015 emission years, as well as supplemental 2016 emissions inventory information—which show that the nonattainment area has attained the 2010 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS. 5 6

    4 In accordance with appendix T to 40 CFR part 50, the 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS is met at an ambient air quality monitoring site when the valid 1-hour primary standard design value is less than or equal to 75 parts per billion (ppb). See 40 CFR 50.17(b).

    5 In accordance with appendix T to 40 CFR part 50, a 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS design value is valid if it encompasses three consecutive calendar years of complete data. A year meets data completeness requirements when all 4 quarters are complete. A quarter is complete when at least 75 percent of the sampling days for each quarter have complete data. A sampling day has complete data if 75 percent of the hourly concentration values, including state-flagged data affected by exceptional events which have been approved for exclusion by the Administrator, are reported.

    6 Monitoring data must be reported, quality assured, and certified in accordance with the requirements set forth in 40 CFR part 58.

    The EPA has made the monitoring data, the modeling data, the supplemental emissions inventory information and additional information submitted by the state to support this action available in the docket to this rulemaking through www.regulations.gov and/or at the EPA Region 7 Office (please contact the person identified in the For Further Information Contact section of this preamble for more information).

    IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. General Requirements

    Under the CAA, a determination that a nonattainment area is attaining a NAAQS is an action that affects the status of a geographical area and does not impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources beyond those imposed by state law. A determination of attainment does not in and of itself create any new requirements, but rather results in the applicability of requirements contained in the CAA for areas that have been stated above. Moreover, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable Federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, these actions merely approve state law as meeting federal requirements and do not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. This action results in the suspension of certain Federal requirements and would not impose any additional requirements. For these reasons, this action:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    In addition, this action does not apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications 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).

    B. Congressional Review Act

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

    C. Petitions for Judicial Review

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

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Attainment determination, Incorporation by reference, Sulfur dioxide.

    Dated: August 24, 2017. Edward H. Chu, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7.

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

    PART 52—APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Subpart AA—Missouri 2. Add § 52.1343 to read as follows:
    § 52.1343 Control strategy: Sulfur Dioxide.

    (a) Determination of attainment. EPA has determined, as of September 13, 2017, that the Jefferson County 2010 SO2 nonattainment has attained the 2010 SO2 1-hr NAAQS. This determination suspends the requirements for this area to submit an attainment demonstration, associated reasonably available control measures, reasonable further progress, contingency measures, and other plan elements related to attainment of the standards for as long as the area continues to meet the 2010 SO2 1-hr NAAQS.

    (b) [Reserved]

    [FR Doc. 2017-19339 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0308; FRL-9965-71] EPTC; Pesticide Tolerances AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of EPTC, S-ethyl dipropylthiocarbamate in or on grass, forage at 0.60 ppm and grass, hay at 0.50 ppm. Gowan Company requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

    DATES:

    This regulation is effective September 13, 2017. Objections and requests for hearings must be received on or before November 13, 2017, and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0308, is available at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Michael L. Goodis, Registration Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; main telephone number: (703) 305-7090; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer. The following list of North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them. Potentially affected entities may include:

    • Crop production (NAICS code 111).

    • Animal production (NAICS code 112).

    • Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).

    • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

    B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government Printing Office's e-CFR site at http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl. To access the OCSPP test guidelines referenced in this document electronically, please go to https://www.epa.gov/test-guidelines-pesticides-and-toxic-substances.

    C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0308 in the subject line on the first page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before November 13, 2017. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).

    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0308, by one of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.

    Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the instructions at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/where-send-comments-epa-dockets.

    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets. II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerances

    In the Federal Register of Friday, July 17, 2015 (80 FR 42462) (FRL-9929-13), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 5F8355) by Gowan Company, P.O. Box 5569, Yuma, AZ 85366. The petition requested that 40 CFR part 180 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the herbicide EPTC, S-ethyl dipropylthiocarbamate, in or on grass grown for seed, forage at 0.6 parts per million (ppm) and grass grown for seed, hay at 0.5 ppm. That document referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Gowan Company, the registrant, which is available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response to the notice of filing.

    III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is “safe.” Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines “safe” to mean that “there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable information.” This includes exposure through drinking water and in residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to “ensure that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. . . .”

    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors specified in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the available scientific data and other relevant information in support of this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a determination on aggregate exposure for EPTC, including exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with EPTC follows.

    A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and children.

    On an acute exposure basis, EPTC is highly toxic via inhalation and is moderately toxic via the oral and dermal routes of exposure. It is slightly irritating to eyes and minimally-irritating to skin. It is a weak skin sensitizer.

    EPTC is an S-alkylthiocarbamate, which consistently produced cardiomyopathy and neuronal cell necrosis in studies of varying length of treatment and in different species. Cardiotoxicity was observed in subchronic and long-term studies, and in general, the severity and incidence of the lesion increased with increasing doses of EPTC. In 90-day feeding and inhalation studies and in two chronic feeding/oncogenicity studies, histopathological evaluation revealed myocardial degeneration. Myocardial degeneration in adult rats was also observed in two separate two-generation reproduction studies. In two chronic dog studies, degenerative changes in the cardiac muscle were observed when EPTC was administered in a capsule, but not when administered (at comparable doses) in the diet. In both dog studies, electrocardiograms were taken, but only one high-dose male in the capsule study had changes which were described as “potentially” treatment-related.

    EPTC, as well as other thiocarbamates (molinate, cycloate, pebulate, vernolate and butylate), have toxic effects on the central and peripheral nervous systems. With EPTC, there was an increased incidence and severity of neuronal necrosis/degeneration in both the central and peripheral nervous systems of rats and dogs. In the rat neurotoxicity studies, dose-related increases in the incidence of neuronal necrosis were observed in the brains after acute and subchronic exposure to EPTC. In the rat developmental neurotoxicity study, a marginal decrease in absolute (not relative) pup brain weight (4-6%) was observed in only one sex (male pups) and at only one time point (PND63). Furthermore, this marginal effect had no dose-response, was not seen after perfusion, and had no corresponding necrosis. Therefore, this effect was considered marginal at best and not robust. In both of the combined chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity studies in the rat and in the chronic (capsule) study in the dog, treatment-related neuromuscular lesions were observed. In all of these studies, hindquarter weakness with corresponding histopathology findings of atrophy and degeneration of the skeletal muscle were observed. In the dog study, the lesions were described as Wallerian-type degeneration in the spinal cords and various peripheral nerves.

    EPTC is a reversible acetylcholinesterase (AChE) inhibitor. Toxicology studies with EPTC did not show any consistent pattern of AChE-inhibition between different species, length of treatment, or the type of AChE enzyme measured. In some studies, brain AChE activity was inhibited without any effect on either plasma or erythrocyte AChE activities. In other studies, erythrocyte AChE was inhibited with no inhibition of either plasma or brain AChE. AChE-inhibition was observed at comparable or higher doses than where cardiac/neuronal effects were observed.

    There is no evidence of increased susceptibility following in utero exposure to EPTC in either the rat or rabbit developmental toxicity study or following in utero and/or postnatal exposure in the 2-generation reproduction study in rats. EPTC is classified as “Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans.” This is based on the lack of carcinogenic potential noted in the available studies. There are no concerns for mutagenicity or clastogenicity. There is also no concern for immunotoxicity.

    Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the adverse effects caused by EPTC as well as the no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies scan be found at https://www.regulations.gov in document EPTC: Human Health Risk Assessment for the Proposed Section 3 Registration for Use on Grasses Grown for Seed Production in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0308.

    B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

    Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL) and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified (the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with the POD to calculate a safe exposure level—generally referred to as a population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)—and a safe margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete description of the risk assessment process, see https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/assessing-human-health-risk-pesticides.

    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for EPTC used for human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit.

    Table 1—Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for EPTC for Use in Human Health Risk Assessment Exposure/scenario Point of departure and uncertainty/
  • safety factors
  • RfD, PAD, LOC for risk assessment Study and toxicological effects
    Acute dietary (all populations including infants and children) LOAEL = 200 mg/kg/day
  • UFA = 10x
  • UFH = 10x
  • FQPA SF/UFL = 10x
  • aRfD/aPAD = 0.2 mg/kg/day Acute neurotoxicity rat study.
  • NOAEL not established in males.
  • LOAEL = 200 mg/kg/day based on neuronal cell necrosis in the brain in males.
  • Chronic dietary (all populations including infants and children) POD = 5 mg/kg/day
  • UFA = 10x
  • UFH = 10x
  • FQPA SF = 1x
  • cRfD/cPAD = 0.05 mg/kg/day Co-critical, chronic/carcinogenicity and 2-generation reproduction in rats.
    Incidental oral (short- and intermediate-term) POD = 5 mg/kg/day
  • UFA = 10x
  • UFH = 10x
  • FQPA SF = 1x
  • LOC for MOE = 100 Chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity rat study.
  • NOAEL = 5 mg/kg/day.
  • LOAEL = 25 mg/kg/day based on decreased body weight and increased incidences of myocardial and neuromuscular lesions.
  • Dermal (short- and intermediated-term) POD = 5 mg/kg/day Dermal absorption factor= 5%
  • UFA = 10x
  • UFH = 10x
  • FQPA SF = 1x
  • LOC for MOE = 100 2-generation reproduction toxicity rat study.
  • Parental NOAEL = 2.5 mg/kg/day.
  • Parental LOAEL = 10 mg/kg/day based on decreased body weight and cardiomyopathy.
  • Developmental NOAEL = 10 mg/kg/day.
  • Developmental LOAEL = 40 mg/kg/day based on decreased mean pup weight during lactation days 4 to 21.
  • Reproductive NOAEL = 40 mg/kg/day.
  • Reproductive LOAEL >40 mg/kg/day.
  • Inhalation (short- and intermediated-term) BMDL10 = 5.05 mg/m3 mg/kg/day
  • UFA = 3x
  • UFH = 10x
  • FQPA SF = 1x
  • LOC for MOE = 30 90-day inhalation toxicity study in rats.
  • BMD 10 = 10.84 mg/m 3 based on brain cholinesterase inhibition in males.
  • Residential bystander HEC = 2.288 mg/m3 Occupational Handler HEC = 9.609 mg/m3; HED = 0.91 mg/kg/day Cancer (oral, dermal, inhalation) Classified as “Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans.” based on the lack of carcinogenic potential noted in the available studies. FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. LOC = level of concern. mg/kg/day = milligram per kilogram per day. MOE = margin of exposure. NOAEL = no-observed-adverse-effect-level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). POD = point of departure. RfD = reference dose (a = acute, c = chronic). UF = uncertainty factor. UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies). UFL = use of a LOAEL to extrapolate a NOAEL. HEC = human equivalent concentration. HED = human equivalent dose.
    C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary exposure to EPTC, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing EPTC tolerances in 40 CFR 180.117. EPA assessed dietary exposures from EPTC in food as follows:

    i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring as a result of a 1-day or single exposure. Such effects were identified for EPTC. In estimating acute dietary exposure, EPA used food consumption information from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) 2003-2008 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, What We Eat in America (NHANES/WWEIA). As to residue levels in food, EPA incorporated tolerance-level residues (adjusted for metabolites at 15X, to estimate the concentration of residues of toxicological concern), 100 percent crop treated (PCT) for all commodities, and default processing factors for all processed commodities except for potato granules (1.4X) and for sugar beets (4X).

    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure assessment EPA used the same food consumption data and food residue level information as described above for acute dietary exposure.

    iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has concluded that EPTC does not pose a cancer risk to humans. Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing cancer risk is unnecessary.

    iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information. EPA did not use anticipated residue and/or PCT information in the dietary assessment for EPTC. Tolerance-level residues and 100 PCT were assumed for all food commodities.

    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water.

    The Agency used screening-level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk assessment for EPTC in drinking water. These simulation models take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport characteristics of EPTC. Further information regarding EPA drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be found at https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/about-water-exposure-models-used-pesticide.

    Based on the Tier II Surface Water Concentration Calculator (SWCC) and Pesticide Root Zone Model Ground Water (PRZM-GW) model, the highest estimated drinking water concentration (EDWC) of EPTC for acute exposure is estimated to be 378 parts per billion (ppb) from ground water. For chronic exposure, the highest EDWC is estimated to be 335 ppb from ground water. These EDWCs were directly entered into the dietary exposure models for both acute and chronic dietary risk assessments to assess the contribution from drinking water.

    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term “residential exposure” is used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control, termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets). EPTC is not registered for any specific use patterns that would result in residential exposure.

    4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the Agency consider “available information” concerning the cumulative effects of a particular pesticide's residues and “other substances that have a common mechanism of toxicity.” Although thiocarbamates share some chemical and toxicological characteristics, the toxicological database does not support a testable hypothesis for a common mechanism of action. Therefore, for the purposes of this tolerance action EPA has assumed that EPTC does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/cumulative-assessment-risk-pesticides.

    D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA Safety Factor (SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different factor.

    2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. As discussed in Unit III.A., there was no qualitative or quantitative evidence of increased susceptibility to developing fetuses following in utero exposure to EPTC in the rabbit and rat developmental toxicity studies, or to offspring in the rat two-generation reproduction toxicity study. Although there was evidence of increased qualitative and quantitative susceptibility of offspring observed in the rat developmental neurotoxicity study. The effect on a marginal decreased absolute brain weight was observed only in male pups at one time-point on postnatal day 63. This effect was considered marginal and not robust since it had no dose-response, was not seen after perfusion, and had no corresponding necrosis. Therefore, there is low concern for susceptibility.

    3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the FQPA SF were reduced to 1X for assessing chronic dietary exposure but retained at 10X for assessing acute dietary exposure to account for extrapolating a NOAEL from a LOAEL. That decision is based on the following findings:

    i. The toxicity database for EPTC is complete and adequate to assess potential risk to infants and children.

    ii. There is indication that EPTC has toxic effects on the central and peripheral nervous systems. Neuronal necrosis and degeneration were observed in both the central and peripheral nervous systems of rats and dogs after acute and subchronic exposure. Treatment-related neuromuscular lesions were also observed in chronic rat and dog studies. In all of these studies hindquarter weakness was noted, and at necropsy evaluation atrophy and degeneration of the skeletal muscle was observed. In the dog study, the lesions were described as Wallerian-type degeneration in the spinal cords and various peripheral nerves. AChE inhibition was also seen in a number of toxicology studies; however, no consistent pattern was witnessed across studies with respect to AChE inhibition between different species, length of treatment, or the type of AChE enzyme measured. All studies provide clear NOAELs and LOAELs, except the acute neurotoxicity study, and because the Agency is relying on that study for selection of the acute dietary exposure endpoint, EPA is retaining the 10X FQPA safety factor to account from the extrapolation from the LOAEL to the NOAEL.

    iii. There is no evidence that EPTC results in increased susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal developmental studies or in young rats in the two-generation reproduction study. Evidence of increased susceptibility to offspring was observed in the developmental neurotoxicity study; however, this effect was considered marginal and not robust. Therefore, there is low concern for the susceptibility.

    iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based on 100 PCT and tolerance-level residues. EPA made conservative (protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used to assess exposure to EPTC in drinking water. These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by EPTC.

    E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water, and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE exists.

    1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food and water to EPTC will occupy 46% of the aPAD for children between 1-2 years old, the population subgroup receiving the greatest exposure.

    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to EPTC from food and water will utilize 65% of the cPAD for children between 1-2 years old, the population subgroup receiving the greatest exposure. There are no residential uses for EPTC.

    3. Short- and intermediate-term risks. Short- and intermediate-term aggregate exposures takes into account short-term (1 to 30 days) and intermediate-term (1 to 6 months) residential exposure plus chronic exposure from food and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Short- and intermediate-term adverse effects were identified; however, EPTC is not registered for any use patterns that would result in residential exposure. Because there is no residential exposure and chronic dietary exposure has already been assessed under the appropriately protective PADs (which is at least as protective as the PODs used to assess short- and intermediate-term risks), no further assessment of short- and intermediate-term risks are necessary, and EPA relies on the chronic dietary risk assessment for evaluating short- and intermediate-term risks for EPTC.

    4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies, EPTC is not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.

    5. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate exposure to EPTC residues.

    IV. Other Considerations A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    An adequate gas chromatography with micro coulometric (GLC/MC) detection method (RR-50) listed under Method A in the Pesticide Analytical Manual (PAM Volume II, Section 180.117; is available for enforcing tolerances of EPTC per se in plant commodities. For the determination of hydroxylated metabolites (free or conjugated) of EPTC in or on plant commodities, an adequate gas chromatography with nitrogen-phosphorus detection (GC/NPD) enforcement method (Method RR-96-089B) is also available.

    These methods may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905; email address: [email protected]

    B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain the reasons for departing from the Codex level. The Codex has not established any MRLs for EPTC.

    C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances

    The Agency is establishing tolerances for the forage and hay forms of “grass” rather than “grass grown for seed” as requested to conform with its food and feed commodity vocabulary. Also, the Agency is establishing the tolerance levels to conform with its policy of significant figures.

    V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of EPTC, S-ethyl dipropylthiocarbamate, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on grass, forage at 0.60 ppm and grass, hay at 0.50.

    VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d) in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order 12866, entitled “Regulatory Planning and Review” (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not contain any information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations” (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerances in this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), do not apply.

    This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this action alter the relationships or distribution of power and responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled “Federalism” (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled “Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments” (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).

    This action does not involve any technical standards that would require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

    VII. Congressional Review Act

    Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: August 16, 2017. Michael L. Goodis, Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

    PART 180—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.

    2. In § 180.117, add alphabetically the commodities to the table in paragraph (a) to read as follows:
    § 180.117 S-ethyl dipropylthiocarbamate; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *

    Commodity Parts per
  • million
  • *    *    *    *    * Grass, forage 0.60 Grass, hay 0.50 *    *    *    *    *
    [FR Doc. 2017-19452 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    82 176 Wednesday, September 13, 2017 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2017-0810; Product Identifier 2017-NM-045-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc., Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 702), Model CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705), Model CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900), and Model CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet Series 1000) airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by a report of a smoke-in-cabin event due to a non-sustaining electrical fire. This proposed AD would require installation of protective sleeves on the bonding jumper wires of affected galleys and lavatories. We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by October 30, 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 Bombardier, Inc., 400 Côte Vertu Road West, Dorval, Québec H4S 1Y9, Canada; Widebody Customer Response Center North America toll-free telephone: 1-866-538-1247 or direct-dial telephone: 1-514-855-2999; fax: 514-855-7401; email: [email protected]; Internet: http://www.bombardier.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

    Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-0810; 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 NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone: 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Assata Dessaline, Aerospace Engineer, Avionics and Administrative Services Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone: 516-228-7301; fax: 516-794-5531.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2017-0810; Product Identifier 2017-NM-045-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this NPRM based on those comments.

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

    Discussion

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation authority for Canada, has issued Canadian AD CF-2016-20R1, dated February 3, 2017 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 702), Model CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705), Model CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900), and Model CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet Series 1000) airplanes. The MCAI states:

    A CRJ900 aeroplane reported a smoke in cabin event due to a non-sustaining electrical fire. The source of smoke was traced to a burnt heated water supply line behind the #2 Galley. The surrounding insulation was also found burnt.

    The root cause of this electrical fire was an electrical short between an un-insulated bonding jumper and a terminal block carrying 115 volts AC. The circuit resistance was high enough and the circuit breakers that protect the wiring did not trip open.

    Electrical short of a bonding jumper may result in in-flight smoke or fire events as well as failure of avionics equipment due to possible water spray or leakage from a damaged water supply line. The likelihood of this happening is increased by the removal and installation of the galley or lavatory during maintenance, allowing the bonding jumper to become wedged under the terminal block.

    Revision 1 of this [Canadian] AD is issued to mandate [the installation of protective sleeves on the galley and lavatory bonding jumper wires in accordance with] Bombardier Service Bulletin (SB) 670BA-25-101 Revision B dated 12 January 2017. * * *

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-0810.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Bombardier, Inc., has issued Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-25-101, Revision B, dated January 12, 2017. The service information describes procedures for installation of protective sleeves on the bonding jumper wires of affected galleys and lavatories. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

    FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 544 airplanes of U.S. registry.

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

    Estimated Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Cost on U.S. operators
    Install protective sleeves 10 work-hours × $85 per hour = $850 Negligible $850 $462,400
    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.

    This proposed AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes to the Director of the System Oversight Division.

    Regulatory Findings

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

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

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

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

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Bombardier, Inc.: Docket No. FAA-2017-0810; Product Identifier 2017-NM-045-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by October 30, 2017.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the airplanes identified in paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(3) of this AD, certificated in any category, all certificated models.

    (1) Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 702) airplanes, serial numbers 10001 through 10344 inclusive.

    (2) Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705) and Model CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes, serial numbers 15001 through 15382 inclusive.

    (3) Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet Series 1000) airplanes, serial numbers 19001 through 19044 inclusive.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 25, Equipment/furnishings.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report of a smoke-in-cabin event due to a non-sustaining electrical fire. We are issuing this AD to prevent an electrical short of a bonding jumper wire that may result in in-flight smoke or fire events as well as failure of avionics equipment due to possible water spray or leakage from a damaged water supply line.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Protective Sleeve Installation

    (1) For airplanes on which the actions specified in Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-25-101, dated December 17, 2015; or Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-25-101, Revision A, dated October 31, 2016, have not been done, as of the effective date of this AD: Within 6,600 flight hours or 36 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, install protective sleeves on the bonding jumper wires of affected galleys and lavatories, in accordance with Part A through Part E, as applicable, of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-25-101, Revision B, dated January 12, 2017.

    (2) For airplanes on which the actions specified in Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-25-101, dated December 17, 2015; or Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-25-101, Revision A, dated October 31, 2016, have been done, as of the effective date of this AD: Within 6,600 flight hours or 36 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, inspect, and if required, install protective sleeves on the bonding jumper wires of affected galleys and lavatories, in accordance with Part F of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-25-101, Revision B, dated January 12, 2017.

    (h) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:

    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New York ACO Branch, 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 ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing Operational Safety, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone: 516-228-7300; fax: 516-794-5531. Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.

    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or Bombardier Inc.'s TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO). If approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized signature.

    (i) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) Canadian AD CF-2016-20R1, dated February 3, 2017, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-0810.

    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Assata Dessaline, Aerospace Engineer, Avionics and Administrative Services Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone: 516-228-7301; fax: 516-794-5531.

    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 Côte Vertu Road West, Dorval, Québec H4S 1Y9, Canada; Widebody Customer Response Center North America toll-free telephone: 1-866-538-1247 or direct-dial telephone: 1-514-855-2999; fax: 514-855-7401; email: [email protected]; Internet: http://www.bombardier.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 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 August 31, 2017. Dionne Palermo, Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19304 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2017-0811; Product Identifier 2017-NM-068-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc., Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 702) airplanes; Model CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705) airplanes; Model CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes; and Model CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet Series 1000) airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by a report of rudder yoke components that had not been properly inspected at the supplier. This proposed AD would require replacement of the left and right rudder yoke assemblies. We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by October 30, 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 Bombardier, Inc., 400 Côte Vertu Road West, Dorval, Québec H4S 1Y9, Canada; Widebody Customer Response Center North America toll-free telephone: 1-866-538-1247 or direct-dial telephone: 1-514-855-2999; fax: 514-855-7401; email: [email protected]; Internet: http://www.bombardier.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

    Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-0811; 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 NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone: 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Aziz Ahmed, Airframe and Mechanical Systems Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone: 516-228-7329; fax: 516-794-5531.

    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-2017-0811; Product Identifier 2017-NM-068-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this NPRM based on those comments.

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

    Discussion

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation authority for Canada, has issued Canadian AD CF-2017-10, dated February 27, 2017 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 702) airplanes; Model CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705) airplanes; Model CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes; and Model CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet Series 1000) airplanes. The MCAI states:

    Bombardier Aerospace has informed Transport Canada that a number of rudder yoke components were received which had not been properly inspected at the supplier. The rudder yoke supplier discovered that the crack detection inspection was omitted following the manufacturing of some components. A cracked rudder yoke may affect rudder function on the affected side and could result in difficulties in maneuvering the aeroplane.

    This [Canadian] AD was issued to mandate the replacement of the left and right rudder yoke assemblies.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-0811.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Bombardier, Inc., has issued Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-27-073, dated November 23, 2016. This service information describes procedures for replacement of the left and right rudder yoke 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 and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 48 airplanes of U.S. registry.

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

    Estimated Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Cost on U.S. operators
    Replacement of rudder yoke assemblies 51 work-hours × $85 per hour = $4,335 Negligible $4,335 $208,080

    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 available 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.

    This proposed AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes to the Director of the System Oversight Division.

    Regulatory Findings

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

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

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

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

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Bombardier, Inc.: Docket No. FAA-2017-0811; Product Identifier 2017-NM-068-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by October 30, 2017.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the airplanes identified in paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(3) of this AD, certificated in any category.

    (1) Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 702) airplanes, serial number 10343.

    (2) Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705) airplanes and Model CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes, serial numbers 15326 through 15370 inclusive.

    (3) Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet Series 1000) airplanes, serial numbers 19041 and 19042.

    (d) Subject

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

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report of rudder yoke components that had not been properly inspected at the supplier. We are issuing this AD to prevent a cracked rudder yoke, which may affect rudder function on the affected side and could result in difficulties in maneuvering the airplane.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Replacement of Left and Right Rudder Yoke Assemblies

    Within 6,600 flight hours after the effective date of this AD, replace the left and right rudder yoke assemblies, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-27-073, dated November 23, 2016.

    (h) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:

    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New York ACO Branch, 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 ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing Operational Safety, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone: 516-228-7300; fax: 516-794-5531. Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.

    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or Bombardier Inc.'s TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO). If approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized signature.

    (i) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) Canadian AD CF-2017-10, dated February 27, 2017, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-0811.

    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Aziz Ahmed, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Mechanical Systems Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone: 516-228-7329; fax: 516-794-5531.

    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 Côte Vertu Road West, Dorval, Québec H4S 1Y9, Canada; Widebody Customer Response Center North America toll-free telephone: 1-866-538-1247 or direct-dial telephone: 1-514-855-2999; fax: 514-855-7401; email: [email protected]; Internet: http://www.bombardier.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 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 August 31, 2017. Dionne Palermo, Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19306 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2016-9450; Product Identifier 2016-NE-25-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Honeywell International Inc. Turboprop and Turboshaft Engines AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Honeywell International Inc. TPE331 turboprop and TSE331 turboshaft engines. This proposed AD was prompted by recent reports of failures of the direct drive fuel control gears and bearings in the hydraulic torque sensor gear assembly, part number (P/N) 3101726-3. This proposed AD would require initial and repetitive engine oil filter sampling and analysis of the affected engines. This proposed AD would also require inspection of hydraulic torque sensor gear assemblies that do not meet oil filter inspection requirements. This proposed AD would further require improved component overhaul procedures that would remove from service, by attrition, certain P/N hydraulic torque sensor gear assemblies. We are proposing this AD to correct the unsafe condition on these products.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by October 30, 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 Honeywell International Inc., 111 S 34th Street, Phoenix, AZ 85034-2802; phone: 800-601-3099; Internet: https://myaerospace.honeywell.com/wps/portal. You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine and Propeller Standards Branch, Policy and Innovation Division, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 781-238-7125.

    Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-9450; 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:

    Joseph Costa, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Los Angeles ACO Branch, Compliance and Airworthiness Division, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-5246; fax: 562-627-5210; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this NPRM. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2016-9450; Directorate Identifier 2016-NE-25-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this NPRM 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 NPRM.

    Discussion

    We received reports of failures of the direct drive fuel control gears and bearings in the hydraulic torque sensor gear assembly, P/N 3101726-3. These failures are similar to previous failures in hydraulic torque sensor gear assemblies, P/Ns 3101726-1 and 3101726-2, that resulted in in-flight shutdowns and accidents in single and twin-engine airplanes.

    After recent failures of the hydraulic torque sensor gear assembly, P/N 3101726-3, installed in six engines, we re-performed oil filter analyses on samples taken prior to these failures. We found the wear metals, including, but not limited to, M50 steel platelets, in the engine oil filter samples. The FAA has found that the oil filter analysis for wear metals provides an effective means of identifying premature wear of the components in the hydraulic torque sensor gear assembly.

    This proposed AD would require initial and repetitive oil filter analysis for wear metals from the hydraulic torque sensor gear assembly. This AD also requires the use of later revisions of the hydraulic torque sensor gear assembly component overhaul manuals that provide improved maintenance instructions and removes from service, by attrition, hydraulic torque sensor gear assemblies, P/N 3101726-1 and certain P/N 3101726-2 of a pre-Series 9 configuration. This condition, if not corrected, could result in failure of the hydraulic torque sensor gear assembly, in-flight shutdown, and reduced control of the airplane.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Honeywell has issued Honeywell Service Information Letter (SIL) P331-97, Revision 11, dated July 23, 2008. The SIL describes procedures for conducting the spectrometric oil and filter analysis program to sample and analyze metal particles in the engine lubricating system. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

    Other Related Service Information

    We reviewed the improved procedures and limitations in the Honeywell Torque Sensor Gear Assembly Overhaul Manual with Illustrated Parts List, 72-00-17, Revision 10, dated October 31, 2013, for the TPE331 and TSE331 torque sensor gear assemblies. We also reviewed Honeywell's TPE331 Line Maintenance Training Manual which provides guidance for obtaining oil filter samples. In addition, we reviewed Honeywell Service Bulletins (SBs) TPE331-72-0402, Revision 6, dated November 26, 1997; TPE331-72-0403, Revision 5, dated January 20, 1989; TPE331-72-0404, Revision 8, dated September 13, 2016; TPE331-72-0823, Revision 3, dated September 13, 1996; TSE331-72-5003, Revision 3, dated January 20, 1989; and TPE331-72-0180, Revision 36, dated April 7, 2016. The SBs address the inspection intervals for the oil and filter analysis for the affected TPE331 and TSE331 engines.

    FAA's Determination

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

    Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD requires initial and repetitive engine oil filter analysis of the affected TPE331 and TSE331 engines. This proposed AD also requires inspection of affected hydraulic torque sensor gear assemblies, and replacement or overhaul of those torque sensor gear assemblies that do not meet inspection requirements. This proposed AD restricts the use of earlier versions of the hydraulic sensor gear component overhaul manual.

    Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information

    Honeywell service information does not recommend oil filter sampling and analysis and hydraulic torque sensor gear assembly inspection within specified times for applicable engines. Because of recent failures, this proposed AD defines specific time requirements for performing engine oil filter sampling and analysis for all applicable TPE331 and TSE331 engines and, if necessary, hydraulic torque sensor gear assembly inspections. This proposed AD would require the oil filter sample analysis, which is only part of Honeywell's recommended spectrometric oil and oil filter analysis program.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 3,831 engines installed on airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

    We estimate that 3,831 engines will require a records review to determine if they have an affected hydraulic torque sensor gear assembly installed.

    Estimated Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Cost on U.S. operators
    Records review 1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 $0 $85 $325,635

    We estimate that 2,542 engines operating under Parts 121 or 135 and 544 engines operating under Part 91 will be required to perform oil filter sampling and analysis.

    Estimated Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Cost on U.S.
  • operators
  • Oil filter sampling and analysis: Part 91 operators 4 work-hours × $85 per hour = $340 $844 $1184 $644,096 per year. Oil filter sampling and analysis: Part 121 and 135 operators 1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 211 296 752,432 per year.

    We estimate that 242 engines will require that the hydraulic torque sensor gear assembly be overhauled during the first year of inspection.

    Estimated Overhaul Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Replace or overhaul hydraulic torque sensor gear assembly 10 work-hours × $85 per hour = $850 $10,000 $10,850

    We estimate that 217 engines will require hydraulic torque sensor gear assembly inspection after an unacceptable oil filter analysis during the first year of inspection.

    On-Condition Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Inspect and reassemble hydraulic torque sensor gear assembly 5 work-hours × $85 per hour = $425 $3,000 $3,425
    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.

    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable to engines, propellers, and appliances to the Manager, Engine and Propeller Standards Branch, Policy and Innovation Division.

    Regulatory Findings

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

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

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

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

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

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Honeywell International Inc. (Type Certificate previously held by AlliedSignal, Garrett Engine Division; Garrett Turbine Engine Company; and AiResearch Manufacturing Company of Arizona): Docket No. FAA-2016-9450; Product Identifier 2016-NE-25-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by October 30, 2017.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Honeywell International Inc. (Honeywell) TPE331-1, -2, -2UA, -3U, -3UW, -5, -5B, -6, -6A, -8, -10, -10AV, -10N, -10P, -10R, -10T, -10U, -10UA, -10UF, -10UR model turboprop and TSE331-3U turboshaft engines with hydraulic torque sensor gear assemblies, part numbers (P/Ns) 3101726-1, -2, or -3, installed.

    (d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 7210, Turbine Engine Reduction Gear.

    (e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by recent reports of failures of the direct drive fuel control gears and bearings in the hydraulic torque sensor gear assembly, P/N 3101726-3. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of the hydraulic torque sensor gear assembly, in-flight shutdown, and reduced control of the airplane.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Oil Filter Sampling and Analysis

    (1) Obtain an initial engine oil filter sample of the affected engines within 150 hours time in service after the effective date of this AD. Guidance for obtaining oil filter samples can be found in Honeywell's engine training manuals; for example, see the TPE331 Line Maintenance Training Manual.

    (2) Submit engine oil filter sample within 3 days of sampling to an ISO/IEC 17025-accredited laboratory capable of performing analysis using ASTM D5185, Standard Test Method for Multielement Determination of Used and Unused Lubricating Oils and Base Oils by Inductively Coupled Plasma Atomic Emission Spectrometry (ICP-AES). A list of Honeywell-authorized laboratories capable of performing this analysis can be found in paragraph 1.D.(10) of Honeywell Service Information Letter (SIL) P331-97, Revision 11, dated July 23, 2008.

    (3) Perform an oil filter analysis for wear metals and evaluate filter contents using paragraphs 1.D.(4) and (5) of Honeywell SIL P331-97, Revision 11, dated July 23, 2008. Guidelines for interpreting analysis results can be found in paragraph (8) of Honeywell SIL P331-97.

    (4) For those engines where the oil filter analysis indicates the need for an inspection or resample, as specified in Figures 1, 2 or 3 of the Honeywell SIL P331-97, Revision 11, dated July 23, 2008, accomplish the following:

    (i) If Figures 1, 2, or 3 indicate an inspection is required, within 5 days, inspect the torque sensor gear assembly using paragraph (g)(5) of this AD.

    (ii) If Figures 1, 2, or 3 indicate a resample is required, perform a repeat oil filter sample and analysis, within 25 hours time in service from the previous sample, to evaluate for wear metals in accordance with paragraphs (g)(1), (2) and (3) of this AD.

    (A) If the resample indicates a second resample or inspection is required, within 5 days, inspect the hydraulic torque sensor gear assembly using paragraph (g)(5) of this AD.

    (B) Reserved.

    (5) Inspect the hydraulic torque sensor gear assembly using the following steps:

    (i) Remove bearings, P/Ns 358893-1, 3103035-1, 3103585-1 or 70100168-1, from the assembled spur gear and fuel control drive gearshaft and inspect or replace. Guidance for performing the inspection can be found in Section 70-00-00, Standard Practices of the applicable TPE331 engine maintenance manual. For example, see paragraph 5., “Bearing Inspection,” on pages 11-12 of Honeywell Maintenance Manual 70-00-00, TPE331-10 (Report No. 72-00-27), dated February 29, 2000.

    (ii) Visually inspect the gearshaft teeth for scoring, pitting, chipping, metal deposits or corner breakage. Visual defects on gear teeth are acceptable if defects cannot be felt using a 0.031 inch diameter stylus. No corner breakage is allowed.

    (iii) For any hydraulic torque sensor gear assembly that fails the inspection required by paragraph (g)(5) of this AD, remove the affected hydraulic torque sensor gear assembly and, before further flight, replace with a part eligible for installation.

    (6) Thereafter, repeat the steps identified in paragraphs (g)(1) through (5) of this AD every additional 150 hours time in service after last oil filter sampling.

    (h) Hydraulic Torque Sensor Gear Assembly Overhaul

    After the effective date of this AD, do not use the Honeywell Torque Sensor Gear Assembly Overhaul Manual with Illustrated Parts List, 72-00-17, Revision No. 9, dated, July 20, 1992, or earlier versions, to overhaul TPE331 or TSE331 hydraulic torque sensor gear assemblies, P/Ns 3101726-1, -2, or -3.

    (i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, FAA, Los Angeles ACO Branch, Compliance and Airworthiness Division, 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 Los Angeles ACO Branch, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (j)(1) of this AD.

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

    (j) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Joseph Costa, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Los Angeles ACO Branch, Compliance and Airworthiness Division, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-5246; fax: 562-627-5210; email: [email protected]

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

    (3) You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine and Propeller Standards Branch, Policy and Innovation Division, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 781-238-7125.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on September 7, 2017. Robert J. Ganley, Manager, Engine and Propeller Standards Branch, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19314 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION 16 CFR Parts 1420 [CPSC Docket No. 2017-0032] Amendment to Standard for All-Terrain Vehicles; Notice of Proposed Rulemaking AGENCY:

    Consumer Product Safety Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking.

    SUMMARY:

    The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (CPSIA) required the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC or the Commission) to publish, as a mandatory consumer product safety standard, the American National Standard for Four-Wheel All-Terrain Vehicles Equipment Configuration, and Performance Requirements, developed by the Specialty Vehicle Institute of America (ANSI/SVIA 1-2007). CPSC published that mandatory consumer product safety standard on November 14, 2008. ANSI/SVIA issued a 2017 edition of its standard in June 2017. In accordance with the CPSIA, CPSC proposes to amend the Commission's mandatory ATV standard to reference the 2017 edition of the ANSI/SVIA standard.

    DATES:

    Submit comments by November 27, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments related to the proposed rule, identified by Docket No. CPSC-2017-0032, may be submitted electronically or in writing:

    Electronic Submissions: Submit electronic comments to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. The Commission does not accept comments submitted by email, except through www.regulations.gov. The Commission encourages you to submit electronic comments by using the Federal eRulemaking Portal, as described above.

    Written Submissions: Submit written submissions by mail/hand delivery/courier to: Office of the Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Room 820, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814; telephone (301) 504-7923.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed rulemaking. All comments received may be posted without change, including any personal identifiers, contact information, or other personal information provided, to: http://www.regulations.gov. Do not submit confidential business information, trade secret information, or other sensitive or protected information that you do not want to be available to the public. If furnished at all, such information should be submitted in writing.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to: http://www.regulations.gov, and insert the docket number, CPSC-2017-0032, into the “Search” box, and follow the prompts.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Caroleene Paul, Project Manager, Directorate for Engineering Sciences, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 5 Research Place, Rockville, MD 20850; telephone: (301) 987-2225; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background and Statutory Authority

    The CPSIA directed the Commission to “publish in the Federal Register as a mandatory consumer product safety standard the American National Standard for Four Wheel All-Terrain Vehicles Equipment Configuration, and Performance Requirements developed by the Specialty Vehicle Institute of America (American National Standard ANSI/SVIA 1-2007).” 15 U.S.C. 2089(a)(1), as added by section 232 of the CPSIA. Accordingly, on November 14, 2008, CPSC published a final rule mandating ANSI/SVIA 1-2007 as a consumer product safety standard. 73 FR 67385. The final rule was codified at 16 CFR part 1420. The Commission has revised the mandatory standard once in accordance with the revision procedures set out in the CPSIA. On February 29, 2012, the Commission published a final rule that amended the Commission's ATV standard to reference the 2010 edition of the ANSI/SVIA standard. 77 FR 12197. On June 14, 2017, ANSI notified the Commission that the 2010 edition of the ANSI/SVIA standard had been revised, and that the new standard, ANSI/SVIA 1-2017, was approved on June 8, 2017.

    Section 42(b) of the CPSA provides that, if ANSI/SVIA 1-2007 is revised after the Commission has published a Federal Register notice mandating the standard as a consumer product safety standard, ANSI must notify the Commission of the revision, and the Commission has 120 days after it receives that notification to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking to amend the Commission's mandatory ATV standard “to include any such revision that the Commission determines is reasonably related to the safe performance of [ATVs] and notify the Institute of any provision it has determined not to be so related.” 15 U.S.C. 2089(b)(1) and (2). Thereafter, the Commission has 180 days after publication of the proposed amendment to publish a final amendment to revise the ATV standard. Id.

    II. Evaluation of ANSI/SVIA 1-2017

    ANSI/SVIA 1-2017 contains requirements and test methods relating to ATVs, including vehicle equipment and configuration, vehicle speed capability, brake performance, pitch stability, electromagnetic compatibility, and sound level limits. The Commission reviewed the 2017 edition of the ANSI/SVIA standard and compared it with the 2010 edition, which is currently the mandated consumer product safety standard for ATVs. The Commission considers the following revisions to be material changes:

    Requirements for stop lamps or combination tail-stop lamps on all categories of ATVs;

    Requirements for reflectors for all categories of ATVs.

    The standard provides that it will take effect “beginning with 2019 model year vehicles.” As explained below, the Commission believes that these revisions are reasonably related to the safe performance of ATVs.

    A. Stop Lamps and Reflectors

    ANSI/SVIA 1-2017 Section 4.17, Lighting & Reflective Equipment, states that all ATVs shall be equipped with lighting and reflective devices.

    1. Stop Lamps

    ANSI/SVIA 1-2017 requires stop lamps or combination tail-stop lamps on all adult and transition category ATVs. In May 2015, CPSC requested that SVIA consider adding requirements relating to stop lamps to increase the detectability of ATVs. CPSC staff reviewed 1 year (2007) of ATV-related fatality data involving two ATVs colliding, and identified 13 rear-end collisions. Of the 13 incidents, eight involved a leading ATV slowing or stopping and a following ATV colliding with the leading vehicle. Although this is only a preliminary analysis, the data illustrate a hazard pattern of rear-end collisions related to braking. CPSC staff subsequently worked with SVIA to develop the stop lamp requirements contained in ANSI/SVIA 1-2017. The Commission believes that adding stop lamp requirements in ANSI/SVIA 1-2017 improves the optional provision in the 2010 edition of the voluntary standard, and that this addition may reduce rear-end collisions related to non-detection of a vehicle braking.

    2. Reflectors

    ANSI/SVIA 1-2017 requires one amber reflector on each side of the ATV (mounted as far forward as practicable), one red reflector on each side of the ATV (mounted as far rearward as practicable), one red reflector on the rear of the vehicle, and one white reflector on the front of the ATV, if not equipped with a headlamp or conspicuity light. These requirements are for all categories of ATV. In May 2015, CPSC requested that SVIA consider adding requirements relating to reflectors, and worked with SVIA in developing the reflector requirements contained in ANSI/SVIA 1-2017.

    Reflector use may increase the detectability of ATVs. CPSC staff's preliminary review of 331 fatal ATV-related vehicular collision incidents found that more than 30 percent of these incidents occurred at night and an additional 5 percent occurred in low light (i.e., dusk). Although many factors contribute to incidents, increasing the visibility of ATVs at night will raise the likelihood that the driver of an oncoming vehicle will detect the ATV. Early detection of an ATV may allow the driver of an oncoming vehicle sufficient time to react and avoid a collision.

    Because fatalities occur when ATVs cross public roads between fields or trails, CPSC believes that the requirement for side reflectors is crucial to any new efforts to increase vehicle visibility. The Commission believes that the ANSI/SVIA 1-2017 reflector requirements improve the 2010 edition of the voluntary standard (which lacked a reflector requirement), and that requirements for reflectors to increase the visibility of an ATV at night may reduce vehicular collisions related to non-detection of other vehicles.

    III. Effective Date

    The CPSIA provides a timetable for the Commission to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking (within 120 days of receiving notification of a revised ANSI/SVIA standard) and to issue a final rule (within 180 days of publication of the proposed rule), but it does not set an effective date. Since issuing the ATV standard in 2009, the Commission has revised it once, in accordance with the revision procedures set out in the CPSIA. Based on comments to the NPR from several ATV companies, the final rule amending the Commission's ATV standard to reference the 2010 edition of the ANSI/SVIA standard provided for an effective date of 60 days from publication of the final rule.

    Data from CPSC's ATV Special Study show that 97 percent of consumers who reported that their vehicle had a tail lamp, also claimed that the vehicle had a stop lamp. This suggests that adding stop lamps to ATVs to meet the new ANSI/SVIA 1-2017 requirements will require minimal changes to current production. Additionally, reflectors are a low-technology product that can be obtained in bulk as sheets or rolls of tape. Attaching reflectors in the correct positions on ATVs does not require test and evaluation effort. This suggests that adding reflectors to ATVs to meet the new ANSI/SVIA 1-2017 requirements will require minimal design and labor changes. CPSC believes that the revisions to the 2010 edition of the voluntary standard will not require significant vehicle design and testing, and that a 60-day effective date for this proposed rule will allow companies sufficient time to update their certification labels. Thus, the Commission proposes that the rule would take effect 60 days after publication of a final rule in the Federal Register, and it would apply to ATVs manufactured or imported on or after that date.

    IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) requires that agencies review a proposed rule for the rule's potential economic impact on small entities, including small businesses. Section 603 of the RFA generally requires that agencies prepare an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) and make the analysis available to the public for comment when the agency publishes an NPR. 5 U.S.C. 603. Section 605 of the RFA provides that an IRFA is not required if the agency certifies that the rule, if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. As explained in this section, the Commission certifies that ANSI/SVIA standard, if promulgated as a final rule, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 5 U.S.C. 605(b).

    The proposed rule would revise the mandatory ATV standard to incorporate the revisions in the 2017 edition of the ANSI/SVIA standard. The most significant changes involve requirements for brake-actuated stop lamps and reflectors. CSPC believes that the vast majority of ATVs already comply with these requirements. Consequently, the Commission anticipates that the cost of the changes required to bring ATVs that do not comply into compliance with the rule will be very low on a per-unit basis. Furthermore, other changes to the standard either increase the options for manufacturers in designing and equipping their vehicles, or are minor changes that clarify—but do not change—the standard's requirement. For these reasons, the Commission certifies that the proposed rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    V. The Proposed Rule

    The proposed rule would revise § 1420.3, “Requirements for four-wheel ATVs.” The current rule refers to the ANSI/SVIA 1-2010 standard; the proposed rule would replace this reference with the ANSI/SVIA 1-2017 edition of the standard.

    VI. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This proposed amendment would not impose any information collection requirements. Accordingly, this rule is not subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.

    VII. Environmental Considerations

    The Commission's regulations provide a categorical exemption for the Commission's rules from any requirement to prepare an environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement as they “have little or no potential for affecting the human environment.” 16 CFR 1021.5(c)(2). This proposed amendment falls within the categorical exemption.

    VIII. Incorporation by Reference

    The Commission proposes to incorporate by reference ANSI/SVIA 1-2017. The Office of the Federal Register (OFR) has regulations concerning incorporation by reference. 1 CFR part 51. For a proposed rule, agencies must discuss in the preamble to the NPR ways that the materials the agency proposes to incorporate by reference are reasonably available to interested persons or how the agency worked to make the materials reasonably available. In addition, the preamble to the proposed rule must summarize the material. 1 CFR 51.5(a).

    In accordance with the OFR's requirements, section II of this preamble summarizes the provisions of ANSI/SVIA 1-2017 that the Commission proposes to incorporate by reference. ANSI/SVIA 1-2017 is copyrighted. Interested persons may purchase a copy of ANSI/SVIA 1-2017 from Specialty Vehicle Institute of America, 2 Jenner, Suite 150, Irvine, CA 92618-3806; telephone: 949-727-3727 ext. 3023; www.svia.org. One may also inspect a copy at CPSC's Office of the Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, Room 820, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, telephone: 301-504-7923.

    IX. Preemption

    Section 26(a) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2075(a), provides that when a consumer product safety standard is in effect and applies to a product, no state or political subdivision of a state may either establish or continue in effect a standard or regulation that prescribes requirements for the performance, composition, contents, design, finish, construction, packaging, or labeling of such product dealing with the same risk of injury unless the state requirement is identical to the federal standard. Section 26(c) of the CPSA also provides that states or political subdivisions of states may apply to the Commission for an exemption from this preemption under certain circumstances. Section 232(a)(1) of the CPSIA refers to the rules to be issued under that section as “consumer product safety standards.” Therefore, the preemption provision of section 26(a) of the CPSA would apply to a rule issued under section 232 of the CPSIA.

    X. Notice of Requirements

    The CPSA establishes certain requirements for product certification and testing. Certification of children's products subject to a children's product safety rule must be based on testing conducted by a CPSC-accepted third-party conformity assessment body. 15 U.S.C. 2063(a)(2). The Commission is required to publish a notice of requirements (NOR) for the accreditation of third-party conformity assessment bodies to assess conformity with a children's product safety rule to which a children's product is subject. Id. 2063(a)(3). On August 27, 2010, the Commission published an NOR for accreditation of third-party conformity assessment bodies for testing ATVs designed or intended primarily for children 12 years of age or younger. 75 FR 52616. Because the revisions to the 2010 edition of the ANSI/SVIA standard would not substantially alter third-party conformance testing requirements for ATVs designed or intended primarily for children 12 years of age or younger, the current NOR for third-party testing of youth ATVs will remain unchanged. Thus, the Commission considers the existing accreditations that the Commission has accepted for testing to the ATV standard also cover testing to the revised ATV standard.

    XI. Request for Comments

    This NPR begins a rulemaking proceeding under section 232 of the CPSIA to amend the Commission's mandatory ATV standard to reference the 2017 edition of the ANSI/SVIA standard. We invite all interested persons to submit comments on any aspect of this proposal. During the comment period, ANSI/SVIA 1-2017, American National Standard for Four-Wheel All-Terrain Vehicles Equipment Configuration, and Performance Requirements, is available for inspection at the CPSC's Office of the Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, Room 820, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, telephone 301-504-7923. Comments should be submitted in accordance with the instructions in the ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this notice.

    List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 1420

    Consumer protection, Imports, Incorporation by reference, Infants and children, Information, Labeling, Law enforcement, Recreation and recreation areas, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Safety.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Commission proposes to amend Title 16 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:

    PART 1420—REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL-TERRAIN VEHICLES 1. The authority citation for part 1420 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008, Pub. Law 110-314, § 232, 122 Stat. 3016 (August 14, 2008).

    2. In the second sentence of § 1420.1, remove the words, “April 30, 2012,” and add in their place “(date 60 days after publication of a final rule in the Federal Register).” 3. Revise § 1420.3 to read as follows:
    § 1420.3 Requirements for four-wheel ATVs.

    Each ATV shall comply with all applicable provisions of the American National Standard for Four-Wheel All-Terrain Vehicles (American National Standards Institute, Inc. ANSI/SVIA 1-2017), approved on June 8, 2017. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. You may obtain a copy from Specialty Vehicle Institute of America, 2 Jenner, Suite 150, Irvine, CA 92618-3806; telephone: 949-727-3727 ext.3023; www.svia.org. You may inspect a copy at the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, Room 820, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, telephone: 301-504-7923, or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Alberta E. Mills, Acting Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19341 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 112 [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0921] RIN 0910-ZA50 Standards for the Growing, Harvesting, Packing, and Holding of Produce for Human Consumption; Extension of Compliance Dates for Subpart E AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, the Agency, or we) is proposing to extend, for covered produce other than sprouts, the dates for compliance with the agricultural water provisions in the Standards for the Growing, Harvesting, Packing, and Holding of Produce for Human Consumption rule. We are proposing to extend the compliance dates to address questions about the practical implementation of compliance with certain provisions and to consider how we might further reduce the regulatory burden or increase flexibility while continuing to achieve our regulatory objectives, in keeping with the Administration's policies.

    DATES:

    Submit either electronic or written comments on this proposed rule by November 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments on the extension of the compliance period as follows. Please note that late, untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments must be submitted on or before November 13, 2017. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until midnight Eastern Time at the end of November 13, 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-2011-N-0921 for “Standards for the Growing, Harvesting, Packing, and Holding of Produce for Human Consumption; Extension of Compliance Dates for Subpart E.” 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:

    Samir Assar, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS-317), Food and Drug Administration, 5001 Campus Dr., College Park, MD 20740, 240-402-1636.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    This proposed extension of compliance dates concerns one of the seven foundational rules that we have established in Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations (21 CFR) as part of our implementation of the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA; Pub. L. 111-353): “Standards for the Growing, Harvesting, Packing, and Holding of Produce for Human Consumption” (the produce safety regulation, published in the Federal Register of November 27, 2015, 80 FR 74354) (https://www.fda.gov/fsma).

    In the preamble of the final rule establishing the produce safety regulation, we stated that the produce safety regulation would be effective on January 26, 2016, and provided for compliance dates of 1 to 6 years from the effective date depending on farm size, commodity, and provision(s) (see table entitled “compliance dates” in the preamble of the final rule establishing the produce safety regulation, 80 FR 74354 at 74357, as corrected in a technical amendment at 81 FR 26466, May 3, 2016). (Some of the compliance dates identified in the technical amendment fall on weekends (i.e., January 26, 2019, is a Saturday and January 26, 2020, is a Sunday) and should therefore be read as referring to the next business day (i.e., January 28, 2019, and January 27, 2020, respectively). We use the latter dates throughout this document.)

    For the majority of agricultural water provisions at subpart E (and for most of the other provisions in the rule), with respect to covered produce other than sprouts, we provided compliance periods of 4 years from the effective date of the rule for very small businesses, 3 years for small businesses, and 2 years for all other businesses. We provided an additional 2 years beyond those compliance periods for certain water quality requirements in § 112.44 and related provisions in §§ 112.45 and 112.46. See table 1.

    In a final rule, “The Food and Drug Administration Food Safety Modernization Act: Extension and Clarification of Compliance Dates for Certain Provisions of Four Implementing Rules” (81 FR 57784, August 24, 2016) we also extended the compliance date for certain “customer provisions” in the produce safety regulation (§ 112.2(b)(3)) and clarified the compliance dates for certain agricultural water testing provisions as originally established in the produce safety regulation.

    Table 1—As Stated in Produce Safety Regulation, Compliance Dates for Requirements in Subpart E (Agricultural Water) for Covered Activities Involving Covered Produce (Except Sprouts Subject to Subpart M) Compliance dates of 2-4 years applicable to the farm based on its size Extended compliance date of additional 2 years beyond the compliance date based on size of farm § 112.41 § 112.44. § 112.42 § 112.45(a) with respect to § 112.44(a) criterion. § 112.43 § 112.45(b). § 112.45(a) with respect to safe and adequate standard § 112.46(b)(1) with respect to untreated ground water. § 112.46(a) § 112.46(b)(2) and (b)(3). § 112.46(b)(1) with respect to untreated surface water 112.46(c). § 112.47 § 112.48 § 112.49 § 112.50 II. Proposed Extension of Subpart E Compliance Dates for Produce Other Than Sprouts

    FDA has received feedback from numerous stakeholders raising issues regarding the practicality of some of the agricultural water requirements in the produce safety regulation as applied to covered produce other than sprouts. Many of these concerns relate to the testing requirements for pre-harvest agricultural water, which are different for sprouts than they are for other types of covered produce. We are proposing this extension in light of the feedback we have received and under Executive Orders 13777, 13771, and 13563. Additional time would allow us to consider approaches to address these issues, as well as opportunities there may be to reduce the cost and enhance the flexibility of these requirements beyond those reflected in the final rule.

    As part of this proposed extension, we also propose to simplify the subpart E compliance period structure such that all the compliance dates for subpart E provisions as applied to non-sprout produce would occur at the same time, retaining date staggering based on farm size. Accordingly, covered farms would have 2 years beyond the previously published compliance dates for the water quality requirements in § 112.44 and related provisions in §§ 112.45 and 112.46, to comply with all of subpart E. Put another way, we propose to extend the compliance dates for provisions in the first column of table 1 by 4 years, and propose to extend the compliance dates for provisions in the second column of table 1 by 2 years, so that the compliance dates for non-sprout covered produce for all provisions of subpart E would be those in table 2.

    Table 2—Proposed Compliance Dates for Requirements in Subpart E for Covered Activities Involving Covered Produce (Except Sprouts Subject to Subpart M) Size of covered farm Proposed time periods starting from the effective date of the November 27, 2015, produce safety final rule (January 26, 2016) Compliance period Compliance date Very Small Business 8 years January 26, 2024. Small Business 7 years January 26, 2023. All Other Businesses 6 years January 26, 2022.

    We believe the simpler compliance date structure would alleviate confusion, and because we are proposing it as part of a proposal to provide additional time for compliance with all of the provisions, we expect it to alleviate burden. We do not anticipate that the change would result in any practical or logistical compliance challenges. We request comment on whether this change to the compliance date structure would be helpful.

    This proposed rule is limited in scope to extending the compliance dates for covered produce other than sprouts. The proposed rule does not address the underlying requirements in subpart E, but only the compliance dates for those requirements (for covered produce other than sprouts). We will continue to work with stakeholders on the issues raised regarding the agricultural water requirements.

    Our goal is to complete this rulemaking as quickly as possible. However, we are aware that many farms have been working well in advance of their compliance dates to come into compliance. As we continue to work with stakeholders on issues raised regarding the agricultural water requirements, we intend to exercise enforcement discretion for covered produce other than sprouts relative to the agricultural water provisions in subpart E of the produce safety regulation. This means that while we are considering these issues, we do not intend to enforce the requirements in subpart E of the regulation for covered produce other than sprouts. Thus, by announcing we intend to exercise enforcement discretion for covered produce other than sprouts relative to the agricultural water provisions in subpart E, farms may choose to continue with their current water testing programs or allocate their resources differently to avoid incurring additional costs based on our proposal to extend the agricultural water compliance dates. And, as explained above, when we finalize compliance dates, we intend to continue to work with stakeholders to address agricultural water questions and with farms to prepare for compliance.

    This proposed rule also would not change the compliance dates for sprouts. In the final produce safety regulation, we provided staggered compliance periods based on farm size for covered activities involving sprouts. The compliance date for activities involving sprouts for very small businesses is January 28, 2019. The compliance date for activities involving sprouts for small businesses is January 26, 2018. The compliance date for activities involving sprouts for all other businesses is January 26, 2017. Because sprouts present a unique safety risk, the final produce safety regulation established sprout-specific requirements on multiple topics, including agricultural water. The agricultural water requirements for sprouts are different from the agricultural water requirements for other produce commodities (compare §§ 112.44(a)(1) and 112.44(b)). Moreover, based on the information available to us, many sprout farms use municipal water for growing activities; and under the produce safety regulation, covered farms are not required to test water from a public supply when certain conditions are met (see 21 CFR 112.46(a)(1) and (2)). We also established earlier compliance dates for sprouts than for other covered produce, and the first compliance date for covered sprout farms (January 26, 2017) has already passed. We have not received any significant feedback from sprout farms that subpart E has posed particular challenges. Accordingly, we are proposing to take no action with regard to compliance dates for activities involving sprouts and thus the compliance dates for covered farms with respect to sprouts are the original compliance dates, including for the agricultural water provisions in Subpart E.

    Table 3 summarizes the compliance dates for the produce safety regulation as they would be if this proposed rule is finalized. Time periods start from effective date of the produce safety rule (January 26, 2016) except as otherwise specified.

    EP13SE17.001 III. Economic Analysis of Impacts

    We have examined the impacts of this proposed rule under Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4), and Executive Order 13771 on Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs (January 30, 2017). Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct us to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity). Executive Order 13563 states the importance of quantifying costs and benefits, reducing costs and burdens, and harmonizing rules. We conclude that this proposed rule would not increase compliance costs and would instead reduce compliance costs by delaying certain compliance dates. Moreover, it would serve an important purpose of providing us an opportunity to consider how to reduce burdens on the public. We conclude that this proposed rule is an economically significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866.

    This rule would extend, for non-sprout covered produce, the compliance date for all of the provisions of subpart E to 4 years after the relevant farm's compliance date for all other provisions of the produce safety regulation (which varies based on establishment size). The estimated costs and benefits accrued in any given year of compliance with the produce safety regulation, relative to the first year of compliance, would not change. However, because the compliance dates for certain provisions would be extended, the discounted value of both total costs and total benefits would decrease.

    There would be a reduction in costs (i.e., cost savings) associated with extending, for non-sprout covered produce, the compliance date for all of the provisions of subpart E to 4 years after the relevant farm's compliance date for the rest of the produce safety regulation. With respect to their non-sprout covered produce, covered farms would have 4 years from the compliance date for the other provisions of produce safety regulation to comply with the provisions in subpart E. Thus, while all initial start-up costs and recurring costs would remain the same as estimated in the final regulatory impact analysis for the produce safety regulation (Ref. 1), the annualized total costs, discounted at 3 percent over 10 years, would decrease by about 3 percent from $404 million to $392 million, resulting in a savings of $12 million. No additional costs would be incurred by state, local, and tribal governments or the private sector as a result of this proposed rule.

    There would be a reduction in benefits associated with extending the compliance dates as described previously. Consumers eating non-sprout covered produce would not enjoy the potential health benefits (i.e., reduced risk of illness) provided by the provisions of subpart E until 2 to 4 years (depending on the specific provision) later than originally established in the produce safety regulation. Thus, the annualized total benefits to consumers, discounted at 3 percent over 10 years, would decrease by $108 million from $1.033 billion to $925 million. Estimated changes in benefits and costs as a result of this proposed extension are summarized in the following table.

    Table 4—Summary of the Changes in Benefits and Costs as a Result of This Proposed Rule, Annualized Over 10 Years, in Millions of 2016 Dollars Costs to
  • industry under 2015 final rule
  • Costs to
  • industry with the proposed
  • compliance
  • extension
  • Benefits of
  • reduced risk of illness under 2015 final rule
  • Benefits of
  • reduced risk of illness with the proposed
  • compliance
  • extension
  • Annualized 3% $404 $392 $1,033 $925 Annualized 7% 382 370 983 874 Net Present Value 3% 3,443 3,340 8,811 7,886 Net Present Value 7% 2,681 2,598 6,901 6,143

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires us to analyze regulatory options that would minimize any significant impact of a rule on small entities when “the agency publishes a general notice of proposed rulemaking.” (5 U.S.C. 601(2)). We have analyzed this proposed rule under the Regulatory Flexibility Act and determined that, because it would only extend certain compliance dates for agricultural water provisions in the produce safety regulation, it would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (section 202(a)) requires us to prepare a written statement, which includes an assessment of anticipated costs and benefits, before issuing “any rule that includes any Federal mandate that may result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year.” The current threshold after adjustment for inflation is $148 million, using the most current (2016) Implicit Price Deflator for the Gross Domestic Product. We have determined that this proposed rule would not result in an expenditure in any year that meets or exceeds this amount.

    Executive Order 13771, entitled Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs, was issued on January 30, 2017. Section 2(a) of Executive Order 13771 requires an agency, unless prohibited by law, to identify at least two existing regulations to be repealed when the agency publicly proposes for notice and comment or otherwise promulgates a new regulation. In furtherance of this requirement, section 2(c) of Executive Order 13771 requires that the new incremental costs associated with new regulations shall, to the extent permitted by law, be offset by the elimination of existing costs associated with at least two prior regulations. This proposed rule is expected to be an Executive Order 13771 deregulatory action. Details on the estimated cost savings of this proposed rule can be found in the rule's economic analysis.

    For interested persons, the detailed preliminary regulatory impact analysis is available in the docket for this rule (Ref. 2) at https://www.regulations.gov, and at https://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/ReportsManualsForms/Reports/EconomicAnalyses/default.htm.

    IV. Analysis of Environmental Impact

    We have determined under 21 CFR 25.30(j) that this action is of a type that does not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required.

    V. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This proposed rule contains no collection of information. Therefore, clearance by the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 is not required.

    VI. Federalism

    We have analyzed this proposed rule in accordance with the principles set forth in Executive Order 13132. FDA has determined that the proposed rule does not contain policies that have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Accordingly, we conclude that the proposed rule does not contain policies that have federalism implications as defined in the Executive order and, consequently, a federalism summary impact statement is not required.

    VII. Executive Order 13175

    We have analyzed this proposed rule in accordance with the principles set forth in Executive Order 13175. We have determined that the proposed rule does not contain policies that have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Accordingly, we conclude that the proposed rule does not contain policies that have tribal implications as defined in the Executive order and, consequently, a tribal summary impact statement is not required.

    VIII. References

    The following references are on display in the Dockets Management Staff (see ADDRESSES) and is available for viewing by interested persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday; they are also available electronically at https://www.regulations.gov. FDA has verified the Web site address, as of the date this document publishes in the Federal Register, but Web sites are subject to change over time.

    1. FDA, “Final Regulatory Impact Analysis, Standards for the Growing, Harvesting, Packing and Holding of Produce for Human Consumption.” November 2015. Available at: https://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/ReportsManualsForms/Reports/EconomicAnalyses/ucm472310.htm. 2. FDA, “Preliminary Regulatory Impact Analysis, Preliminary Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, and Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Analysis for the Standards for the Growing, Harvesting, Packing, and Holding of Produce for Human Consumption; Extension of Compliance Dates for Subpart E; Proposed Rule,” 2017. Available at: https://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/ReportsManualsForms/Reports/EconomicAnalyses/. Dated: September 8, 2017. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19434 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    82 176 Wednesday, September 13, 2017 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request September 8, 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 required 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 October 13, 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.

    Farm Service Agency

    Title: Transfer of Farm Records between Counties.

    OMB Control Number: 0560-0253.

    Summary of Collection: Most Farm Service Agency (FSA) programs are administered on the basis of “farm”. For program purposes, a farm is a collection of tracts of land that have the same owner and the same operator. Land with different owners may be considered to be a farm if all the land is operated by one person and additional criteria are met. A farm is typically administered in the FSA county office where the farm is physically located. A farm can be transferred from the physical location county office if the principal dwelling of the farm operator has changed, a change has occurred in the operation of the land, or there has been a change that would cause the receiving administrative county office to be more accessible. FSA-179, “Transfer of Farm Record between Counties,” is used as the request for a farm transfer from one county to another initiated by the producer.

    Need and Use of the Information: The information collected on the FSA-179 is collected only if a farm transfer is being requested and is collected in a face-to-face setting with county office personnel. The information is used by county office employees to document which farm is being transferred, what county it is being transferred to, and why it is being transferred. The FSA-179 assists county committees in determining why the farm transfer is being requested and that it is not being requested for the purpose of increased program benefits, avoiding payment reductions, establishing eligibility to transfer base acres, or for circumventing any other programs provision. Without the information county offices will be unable to determine whether the producer desires to transfer a farm.

    Description of Respondents: Farms.

    Number of Respondents: 21,240.

    Frequency of Responses: Reporting: On occasion.

    Total Burden Hours: 24,780.

    Ruth Brown, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19392 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-05-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Foreign Agricultural Service Assessment of Fees for Dairy Import Licenses for the 2018 Tariff-Rate Import Quota Year AGENCY:

    Foreign Agricultural Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces a fee of $300 to be charged for the 2018 tariff-rate quota (TRQ) year for each license issued to a person or firm by the Department of Agriculture authorizing the importation of certain dairy articles, which are subject to tariff-rate quotas set forth in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) of the United States.

    DATES:

    September 13, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Abdelsalam El-Farra, Dairy Import Licensing Program, Import Policies and Export Reporting Division, STOP 1021, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250-1021 or telephone at (202) 720-9439.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Dairy Tariff-Rate Quota Import Licensing Regulation promulgated by the Department of Agriculture and codified at 7 CFR 6.20-6.36 provides for the issuance of licenses to import certain dairy articles that are subject to TRQs set forth in the HTS. Those dairy articles may only be entered into the United States at the in-quota TRQ tariff-rates by or for the account of a person or firm to whom such licenses have been issued and only in accordance with the terms and conditions of the regulation.

    Licenses are issued on a calendar year basis, and each license authorizes the license holder to import a specified quantity and type of dairy article from a specified country of origin. The use of such licenses is monitored by the Dairy Import Licensing Program, Import Policies and Export Reporting Division, Foreign Agricultural Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

    The regulation at 7 CFR 6.33(a) provides that a fee will be charged for each license issued to a person or firm by the Licensing Authority in order to defray the Department of Agriculture's costs of administering the licensing system under this regulation.

    The regulation at 7 CFR 6.33(a) also provides that the Licensing Authority will announce the annual fee for each license and that such fee will be set out in a notice to be published in the Federal Register. Accordingly, this notice sets out the fee for the licenses to be issued for the 2018 calendar year.

    Notice:

    The total cost to the Department of Agriculture of administering the licensing system for 2018 has been estimated to be $749,300.00 and the estimated number of licenses expected to be issued is 2,500. Of the total cost, $479,200.00 represents staff and supervisory costs directly related to administering the licensing system, and $270,100.00 represents other miscellaneous costs, including travel, postage, publications, forms, and ADP system support.

    Accordingly, notice is hereby given that the fee for each license issued to a person or firm for the 2018 calendar year, in accordance with 7 CFR 6.33, will be $300 per license.

    Issued at Washington, DC the 7th day of September, 2017. Ronald Lord, Licensing Authority.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19410 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-10-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Foreign Agricultural Service Adjustment of Appendices Under the Dairy Tariff-Rate Quota Import Licensing Regulation for the 2017 Tariff-Rate Quota Year AGENCY:

    Foreign Agricultural Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces the revised appendices under the Dairy Tariff-Rate Import Quota Licensing Regulation for the 2017 quota year reflecting the cumulative annual transfers from Appendix 1 to Appendix 2 for certain dairy product import licenses permanently surrendered by licensees or revoked by the Licensing Authority.

    DATES:

    September 13, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Abdelsalam El-Farra, Dairy Import Licensing Program, Import Policies and Export Reporting Division, U.S. Department of Agriculture, at (202) 720-9439; or by email at: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Foreign Agricultural Service, under a delegation of authority from the Secretary of Agriculture, administers the Dairy Tariff-Rate Quota Import Licensing Regulation codified at 7 CFR 6.20-6.36 that provides for the issuance of licenses to import certain dairy articles under tariff-rate quotas (TRQs) as set forth in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States. These dairy articles may only be entered into the United States at the low-tier tariff by or for the account of a person or firm to whom such licenses have been issued and only in accordance with the terms and conditions of the regulation.

    Licenses are issued on a calendar year basis, and each license authorizes the license holder to import a specified quantity and type of dairy article from a specified country of origin. The Import Policies and Export Reporting Division, Foreign Agricultural Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, issues these licenses and, in conjunction with U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, monitors their use.

    The regulation at 7 CFR 6.34(a) states: “Whenever a historical license (Appendix 1) is not issued to an applicant pursuant to the provisions of § 6.23, is permanently surrendered or is revoked by the Licensing Authority, the amount of such license will be transferred to Appendix 2.” Section 6.34(b) provides that the cumulative annual transfers will be published by notice in the Federal Register each year. Accordingly, this document sets forth the revised Appendices for the 2017 tariff-rate quota year below.

    Issued at Washington, DC on July 21, 2017. Ronald Lord, Licensing Authority. Articles Subject to: Appendix 1, Historical Licenses; Appendix 2 Non-Historical Licenses; and Appendix 3, Designated Importers Licenses for Quota Year 2017 [Quantities in Kilograms] Non-cheese articles Appendix 1 Appendix 2 Sum of
  • Appendix 1&2
  • Appendix 3
  • Tokyo R.
  • Appendix 4
  • Uruguay R.
  • Grand total
    BUTTER (NOTE 6) 4,436,693 2,540,307 6,977,000 6,977,000 EU-27 63,058 33,103 96,161 New Zealand 76,503 74,090 150,593 Other Countries 37,155 36,780 73,935 Any Country 4,259,977 2,396,334 6,656,311 DRIED SKIM MILK (NOTE 7) 5,261,000 5,261,000 5,261,000 Australia 0 600,076 600,076 Canada 0 219,565 219,565 Any Country 0 4,441,359 4,441,359 DRIED WHOLE MILK (NOTE 8) 0 3,321,300 3,321,300 3,321,300 New Zealand 0 3,175 3,175 Any Country 0 3,318,125 3,318,125 DRIED BUTTERMILK/WHEY (NOTE 12) 0 224,981 224,981 224,981 Canada 0 161,161 161,161 New Zealand 0 63,820 63,820 BUTTER SUBSTITUTES CONTAINING OVER 45 PERCENT OF BUTTERFAT AND/OR BUTTER OIL (NOTE 14) 0 6,080,500 6,080,500 6,080,500 Any Country 0 6,080,500 6,080,500 TOTAL: NON-CHEESE ARTICLES 4,436,693 17,428,088 21,864,781 21,864,781 CHEESE ARTICLES CHEESE AND SUBSTITUTES FOR CHEESE (NOTE 16) 17,866,451 13,603,280 31,469,731 9,661,128 7,496,000 48,626,859 Argentina 0 7,690 7,690 92,310 100,000 Australia 535,628 5,542 541,170 758,830 1,750,000 3,050,000 Canada 968,331 172,669 1,141,000 1,141,000 Costa Rica 0 0 0 1,550,000 1,550,000 EU-27 14,082,918 9,184,738 23,267,656 1,132,568 3,446,000 27,846,224 Of which Portugal is: 65,838 63,471 129,309 223,691 353,000 Israel 79,696 0 79,696 593,304 673,000 Iceland 29,054 264,946 294,000 29,000 323,000 New Zealand 1,369,036 3,446,436 4,815,472 6,506,528 11,322,000 Norway 122,860 27,140 150,000 150,000 Switzerland 512,184 159,228 671,412 548,588 500,000 1,720,000 Uruguay 0 0 0 250,000 250,000 Other Countries 100,906 100,729 201,635 201,635 Any Country 0 300,000 300,000 300,000 BLUE-MOLD CHEESE (NOTE 17) 1,935,426 545,575 2,481,001 430,000 2,911,001 Argentina 2,000 0 2,000 2,000 EU-27 1,933,426 545,574 2,479,000 350,000 2,829,000 Chile 0 0 0 80,000 80,000 Other Countries 0 1 1 1 CHEDDAR CHEESE (NOTE 18) 2,310,333 1,973,523 4,283,856 519,033 7,620,000 12,422,889 Australia 891,246 93,253 984,499 215,501 1,250,000 2,450,000 Chile 0 0 0 220,000 220,000 EU-27 52,404 210,596 263,000 1,050,000 1,313,000 New Zealand 1,265,070 1,531,398 2,796,468 303,532 5,100,000 8,200,000 Other Countries 101,613 38,276 139,889 139,889 Any Country 0 100,000 100,000 100,000 AMERICAN-TYPE CHEESE (NOTE 19) 1,214,314 1,951,239 3,165,553 357,003 0 3,522,556 Australia 761,890 119,108 880,998 119,002 1,000,000 EU-27 136,075 217,925 354,000 354,000 New Zealand 208,610 1,553,389 1,761,999 238,001 2,000,000 Other Countries 107,739 60,817 168,556 168,556 EDAM AND GOUDA CHEESE (NOTE 20) 4,313,885 1,292,517 5,606,402 0 1,210,000 6,816,402 Argentina 105,418 19,582 125,000 110,000 235,000 EU-27 4,092,659 1,196,341 5,289,000 1,100,000 6,389,000 Norway 111,046 55,954 167,000 167,000 Other Countries 4,762 20,640 25,402 25,402 ITALIAN-TYPE CHEESES (NOTE 21) 6,107,184 1,413,363 7,520,547 795,517 5,165,000 13,481,064 Argentina 3692345 433,138 4,125,483 367,517 1,890,000 6,383,000 EU-27 2,414,839 967,161 3,382,000 2,025,000 5,407,000 Romania 0 0 0 500,000 500,000 Uruguay 0 0 0 428,000 750,000 1,178,000 Other Countries 0 13,064 13,064 13,064 SWISS OR EMMENTHALER CHEESE (NOTE 22) 4,442,574 2,208,740 6,651,314 823,519 380,000 7,854,833 EU-27 3,188,290 1,963,704 5,151,994 393,006 380,000 5,925,000 Switzerland 1,220,786 198,701 1,419,487 430,513 1,850,000 Other Countries 33,498 46,335 79,833 79,833 CHEESE AND SUBSTITUTES FOR CHEESE (NOTE 23) 1,183,816 3,241,092 4,424,908 1,050,000 0 5,474,908 EU-27 1,183,816 3,241,091 4,424,907 4,424,907 Israel 0 0 0 50,000 50,000 New Zealand 0 0 0 1,000,000 1,000,000 Other Countries 0 1 1 1 SWISS OR EMMENTHALER CHEESE WITH EYE FORMATION (NOTE 25) 13,241,278 9,056,053 22,297,331 9,557,945 2,620,000 34,475,276 Argentina 0 9,115 9,115 70,885 80,000 Australia 209,698 0 209,698 290,302 500,000 Canada 0 0 0 70,000 70,000 EU-27 9,911,629 6,565,199 16,476,828 4,003,172 2,420,000 22,900,000 Iceland 0 149,999 149,999 150,001 300,000 Israel 27,000 0 27,000 27,000 Norway 2,285,329 1,369,981 3,655,310 3,227,690 6,883,000 Switzerland 759,369 924,736 1,684,105 1,745,895 200,000 3,630,000 Other Countries 48,253 37,023 85,276 85,276 TOTAL: CHEESE ARTICLES 52,615,261 35,285,382 87,900,643 22,764,145 24,921,000 135,585,788 TOTAL: CHEESE & NON-CHEESE 57,051,954 52,713,470 109,765,424 22,764,145 24,921,000 157,450,569
    [FR Doc. 2017-19351 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-10-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Rural Housing Service Notice of Request for Extension of a Currently Approved Information Collection AGENCY:

    Rural Housing Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Proposed collection; Comments requested.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the Rural Housing Service's (RHS) intention to request an extension for a currently approved information collection in support of the program for the Guaranteed Rural Rental Housing Program.

    DATES:

    Comments on this Notice must be received by November 13, 2017 to be assured of consideration.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Tammy Daniels, Financial and Loan Analyst, Multi-Family Housing Guaranteed Loan Division, Rural Development, USDA, STOP 0781-Room 1263S, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250, telephone: (202) 720-0021.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Guaranteed Rural Rental Housing Program.

    OMB Number: 0575-0174.

    Expiration Date of Approval: January 31, 2018.

    Type of Request: Extension of a Currently Approved Information Collection.

    Abstract: On March 28, 1996, President Clinton signed the “Housing Opportunity Program Extension Act of 1996.” One of the provisions of the Act was the authorization of the Section 538 Guaranteed Rural Rental Housing Loan Program, adding the program to the Housing Act of 1949. The program has been designed to increase the supply of affordable Multi-Family Housing (MFH) through partnerships between RHS and major lending sources, as well as State and local housing finance agencies and bond issuers. Qualified lenders will be authorized to originate, underwrite, and close loans for MFH projects. To be considered, these projects must be either new construction or acquisition with rehabilitation with at least $6,500 per unit.

    The housing must be available for occupancy only to low- or moderate-income families or persons, whose incomes at the time of initial occupancy do not exceed 115 percent of the median income of the area. After initial occupancy, the tenant's income may exceed these limits; however, rents, including utilities, are restricted to no more than 30 percent of the 115 percent of area median income for the term of the loan.

    The Secretary is authorized under Section 510 (k) of the Housing Act of 1949 to prescribe regulations to ensure that these Federally-funded loans are made to eligible applicants for authorized purposes. The lender must evaluate the eligibility, cost, benefits, feasibility, and financial performance of the proposed project. The Agency collects this information from the lender to determine if funds are being used to meet the goals and mission of Rural Development. The information submitted by the lender to the Agency is used by the Agency to manage, plan, evaluate, and account for Government resources.

    Estimate of Burden: Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average .58 man hours per response.

    Respondents: Non-profit and for-profit lending corporations and public bodies.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 150.

    Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 16.7.

    Estimated Number of Responses: 2,498.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 1,461 hours.

    Copies of this information collection can be obtained from Jeanne Jacobs, Regulations and Paperwork Management Branch, at (202) 692-0040.

    Comments: Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information 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 Jeanne Jacobs, Regulations and Paperwork Management Branch, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Rural Development, STOP 0742, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250. 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: August 31, 2017. Richard A. Davis, Acting Administrator, Rural Housing Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19422 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-XV-P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meeting of the Texas Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    U.S. 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 Texas Advisory Committee (Committee) to the Commission will be held at 2:00 p.m. (Central Time) September 27, 2017. The purpose of the meeting is for the Committee to discuss and likely vote on project topic of study.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Wednesday, September 27, 2017, at 2:00 p.m. CDT

    PUBLIC CALL INFORMATION:

    Dial: 866-719-0110.

    Conference ID: 9903479.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ana Victoria Fortes (DFO) at [email protected] or (213) 894-3437.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This meeting is available to the public through the following toll-free call-in number: 866-719-0110, conference ID number: 9903479. Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. 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 telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-977-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.

    Members of the public are entitled to make comments during the open period at the end of the meeting. Members of the public may also submit written comments; the comments must be received in the Regional Programs Unit within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be mailed to the Western Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 300 North Los Angeles Street, Suite 2010, Los Angeles, CA 90012. They may be faxed to the Commission at (213) 894-0508, or emailed Ana Victoria Fortes at [email protected] Persons who desire additional information may contact the Regional Programs Unit at (213) 894-3437.

    Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing prior to and after the meeting at http://facadatabase.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=276. Please click on the “Meeting Details” and “Documents” links. Records generated from this meeting may also be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's Web site, http://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Regional Programs Unit at the above email or street address.

    Agenda I. Welcome II. Approval of June 28, 2017 Minutes III. Discussion on FY17 Civil Rights Project Ideas IV. Public Comment V. Next Steps VI. Adjournment Dated: September 8, 2017. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19431 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-583-848] Certain Stilbenic Optical Brightening Agents From Taiwan: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015-2016 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    On June 6, 2017, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain stilbenic optical brightening agents (stilbenic OBAs) from Taiwan. The period of review (POR) is May 1, 2015, through April 30, 2016. For the final results of this review, we continue to find that subject merchandise has not been sold in the United States by Teh Fong Ming International Co., Ltd. (TFM) at prices below normal value during the POR.

    DATES:

    Effective September 13, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Catherine Cartsos, AD/CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-1757.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On June 6, 2017, the Department published the Preliminary Results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on stilbenic OBAs from Taiwan.1 The administrative review covers one producer/exporter of the subject merchandise, TFM. The Department gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on the Preliminary Results. We received no comments. Hence, these final results are unchanged from the Preliminary Results.

    1See Certain Stilbenic Optical Brightening Agents from Taiwan: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015-2016, 82 FR 26060 (June 6, 2017) (Preliminary Results).

    The Department conducted this review in accordance with section 751(a)(2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).

    Scope of the Order

    The stilbenic OBAs covered by this order are all forms (whether free acid or salt) of compounds known as triazinylaminostilbenes (i.e., all derivatives of 4,4′-bis [1,3,5- triazin-2-yl]“ 2 amino-2,2′-stilbenedisulfonic acid), except for compounds listed in the following paragraph. The stilbenic OBAs covered by this order include final stilbenic OBA products, as well as intermediate products that are themselves triazinylaminostilbenes produced during the synthesis of stilbenic OBA products.

    2 The brackets in this sentence are part of the chemical formula.

    Excluded from this order are all forms of 4,4′-bis[4-anilino-6-morpholino-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl] 3 amino-2,2′-stilbenedisulfonic acid, C40H40N12O8S2 (“Fluorescent Brightener 71”). This order covers the above-described compounds in any state (including but not limited to powder, slurry, or solution), of any concentrations of active stilbenic OBA ingredient, as well as any compositions regardless of additives (i.e., mixtures or blends, whether of stilbenic OBAs with each other, or of stilbenic OBAs with additives that are not stilbenic OBAs), and in any type of packaging.

    3Id.

    These stilbenic OBAs are classifiable under subheading 3204.20.8000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), but they may also enter under subheadings 2933.69.6050, 2921.59.4000 and 2921.59.8090. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise is dispositive.

    Final Results of the Administrative Review

    We determine that a weighted-average dumping margin of 0.00 percent exists for TFM for the period of August 1, 2015, through July 31, 2016.

    Assessment

    In accordance with section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act, 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1) and the Final Modification, 4 the Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to liquidate all appropriate entries for TFM without regard to antidumping duties.

    4See Antidumping Proceedings: Calculation of the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Duty Proceedings; Final Modification, 77 FR 8101, 8102 (February 14, 2012) (Final Modification).

    For entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by TFM for which it did not know its merchandise was destined for the United States, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the all-others rate if there is no rate for the intermediate company involved in the transaction. We intend to issue instructions to CBP 15 days after publication of the final results of this review.

    Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the notice of final results of administrative review for all shipments of stilbenic OBAs from Taiwan entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for TFM will be 0.00 percent, the weighted-average dumping margin established in the final results of this administrative review; (2) for merchandise exported by producers or exporters not covered in this administrative review but covered in a prior segment of the proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the original investigation, but the producer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding for the producer of the subject merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other producers or exporters will continue to be 6.19 percent, the all-others rate established in the investigation.5

    5See Certain Stilbenic Optical Brightening Agents From Taiwan: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 77 FR 17027 (March 23, 2012) (Investigation Final).

    These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

    Notification to Importers

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

    Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders

    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation subject to sanction.

    We are issuing and publishing these results of an administrative review in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5).

    Dated: Deptember 7, 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. 2017-19418 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (the Department) has received requests to conduct administrative reviews of various antidumping and countervailing duty orders and findings with July anniversary dates. In accordance with the Department's regulations, we are initiating those administrative reviews.

    DATES:

    Applicable September 13, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brenda E. Waters, Office of AD/CVD Operations, Customs Liaison Unit, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202) 482-4735.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    The Department has received timely requests, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b), for administrative reviews of various antidumping and countervailing duty orders and findings with July anniversary dates.

    All deadlines for the submission of various types of information, certifications, or comments or actions by the Department discussed below refer to the number of calendar days from the applicable starting time.

    Notice of No Sales

    If a producer or exporter named in this notice of initiation had no exports, sales, or entries during the period of review (POR), it must notify the Department within 30 days of publication of this notice in the Federal Register. All submissions must be filed electronically at http://access.trade.gov in accordance with 19 CFR 351.303.1 Such submissions are subject to verification in accordance with section 782(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Further, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.303(f)(1)(i), a copy must be served on every party on the Department's service list.

    1See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011).

    Respondent Selection

    In the event the Department limits the number of respondents for individual examination for administrative reviews initiated pursuant to requests made for the orders identified below, the Department intends to select respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports during the period of review. We intend to place the CBP data on the record within five days of publication of the initiation notice and to make our decision regarding respondent selection within 30 days of publication of the initiation Federal Register notice. Comments regarding the CBP data and respondent selection should be submitted seven days after the placement of the CBP data on the record of this review. Parties wishing to submit rebuttal comments should submit those comments five days after the deadline for the initial comments.

    In the event the Department decides it is necessary to limit individual examination of respondents and conduct respondent selection under section 777A(c)(2) of the Act:

    In general, the Department has found that determinations concerning whether particular companies should be “collapsed” (i.e., treated as a single entity for purposes of calculating antidumping duty rates) require a substantial amount of detailed information and analysis, which often require follow-up questions and analysis. Accordingly, the Department will not conduct collapsing analyses at the respondent selection phase of this review and will not collapse companies at the respondent selection phase unless there has been a determination to collapse certain companies in a previous segment of this antidumping proceeding (i.e., investigation, administrative review, new shipper review or changed circumstances review). For any company subject to this review, if the Department determined, or continued to treat, that company as collapsed with others, the Department will assume that such companies continue to operate in the same manner and will collapse them for respondent selection purposes. Otherwise, the Department will not collapse companies for purposes of respondent selection. Parties are requested to (a) identify which companies subject to review previously were collapsed, and (b) provide a citation to the proceeding in which they were collapsed. Further, if companies are requested to complete the Quantity and Value (Q&V) Questionnaire for purposes of respondent selection, in general each company must report volume and value data separately for itself. Parties should not include data for any other party, even if they believe they should be treated as a single entity with that other party. If a company was collapsed with another company or companies in the most recently completed segment of this proceeding where the Department considered collapsing that entity, complete Q&V data for that collapsed entity must be submitted.

    Deadline for Withdrawal of Request for Administrative Review

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), a party that has requested a review may withdraw that request within 90 days of the date of publication of the notice of initiation of the requested review. The regulation provides that the Department may extend this time if it is reasonable to do so. In order to provide parties additional certainty with respect to when the Department will exercise its discretion to extend this 90-day deadline, interested parties are advised that the Department does not intend to extend the 90-day deadline unless the requestor demonstrates that an extraordinary circumstance has prevented it from submitting a timely withdrawal request. Determinations by the Department to extend the 90-day deadline will be made on a case-by-case basis.

    Separate Rates

    In proceedings involving non-market economy (NME) countries, the Department begins with a rebuttable presumption that all companies within the country are subject to government control and, thus, should be assigned a single antidumping duty deposit rate. It is the Department's policy to assign all exporters of merchandise subject to an administrative review in an NME country this single rate unless an exporter can demonstrate that it is sufficiently independent so as to be entitled to a separate rate.

    To establish whether a firm is sufficiently independent from government control of its export activities to be entitled to a separate rate, the Department analyzes each entity exporting the subject merchandise. In accordance with the separate rates criteria, the Department assigns separate rates to companies in NME cases only if respondents can demonstrate the absence of both de jure and de facto government control over export activities.

    All firms listed below that wish to qualify for separate rate status in the administrative reviews involving NME countries must complete, as appropriate, either a separate rate application or certification, as described below. For these administrative reviews, in order to demonstrate separate rate eligibility, the Department requires entities for whom a review was requested, that were assigned a separate rate in the most recent segment of this proceeding in which they participated, to certify that they continue to meet the criteria for obtaining a separate rate. The Separate Rate Certification form will be available on the Department's Web site at http://enforcement.trade.gov/nme/nme-sep-rate.html on the date of publication of this Federal Register notice. In responding to the certification, please follow the “Instructions for Filing the Certification” in the Separate Rate Certification. Separate Rate Certifications are due to the Department no later than 30 calendar days after publication of this Federal Register notice. The deadline and requirement for submitting a Certification applies equally to NME-owned firms, wholly foreign-owned firms, and foreign sellers who purchase and export subject merchandise to the United States.

    Entities that currently do not have a separate rate from a completed segment of the proceeding 2 should timely file a Separate Rate Application to demonstrate eligibility for a separate rate in this proceeding. In addition, companies that received a separate rate in a completed segment of the proceeding that have subsequently made changes, including, but not limited to, changes to corporate structure, acquisitions of new companies or facilities, or changes to their official company name,3 should timely file a Separate Rate Application to demonstrate eligibility for a separate rate in this proceeding. The Separate Rate Status Application will be available on the Department's Web site at http://enforcement.trade.gov/nme/nme-sep-rate.html on the date of publication of this Federal Register notice. In responding to the Separate Rate Status Application, refer to the instructions contained in the application. Separate Rate Status Applications are due to the Department no later than 30 calendar days of publication of this Federal Register notice. The deadline and requirement for submitting a Separate Rate Status Application applies equally to NME-owned firms, wholly foreign-owned firms, and foreign sellers that purchase and export subject merchandise to the United States.

    2 Such entities include entities that have not participated in the proceeding, entities that were preliminarily granted a separate rate in any currently incomplete segment of the proceeding (e.g., an ongoing administrative review, new shipper review, etc.) and entities that lost their separate rate in the most recently completed segment of the proceeding in which they participated.

    For exporters and producers who submit a separate-rate status application or certification and subsequently are selected as mandatory respondents, these exporters and producers will no longer be eligible for separate rate status unless they respond to all parts of the questionnaire as mandatory respondents.

    Initiation of Reviews

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), we are initiating administrative reviews of the following antidumping and countervailing duty orders and findings. We intend to issue the final results of these reviews not later than July 31, 2018.

    Period to be reviewed Antidumping Duty Proceedings India: Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products A-533-863 1/4/16-6/30/17 Atlantis International Services Company Ltd JSW Coated Products Limited JSW Steel Ltd Netherland, B.V. Uttam Galva Steels Uttam Galva Steels (BVI) Limited Uttam Galva Steels Limited Uttam Value Steels Limited India: Polyethylene Terephthalate (Pet) Film A-533-824 7/1/16-6/30/17 Chiripal Poly Films Limited Ester Industries Limited Garware Polyester Ltd. Jindal Poly Films Ltd. (India) MTZ Polyesters Ltd. Polyplex Corporation Ltd. SRF Limited SRF Limited of India Uflex Ltd. Vacmet India Ltd. Italy: Certain Pasta A-475-818 7/1/16-6/30/17 Agritalia S.r.L. Alessio Panarese Soceieta Agricola Antico Pastificio Morelli 1860 S.r.l. Colussi SpA Francesco Tamma S.p.A. Ghigi 1870 S.p.A. Ghigi Industria Agroalimentare in San Clemente S.r.l. G.R.A.M.M. S.r.l. Industria Alimentare Colavita S.p.A. (Indalco) La Molisana S.p.A. Liguori Pastificio dal 1820 S.p.A. Pasta Zara S.p.A. Pastificio Andalini S.p.A. Pastificio Fratelli DeLuca S.r.l. Pastificio Menucci SpA Pastificio Zaffiri S.r.l. Tesa SrL Malaysia: Certain Steel Nails A-557-816 7/1/16-6/30/17 Airlift Trans Oceanic Pvt. Ltd. Astrotech Steels Private Limited Caribbean International Co. Ltd. Dahnay Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Flyjac Logistics Private Ltd. Full Well Freight (Thailand) Co. Hecny Transportation Inmax Industries Sdn. Bhd. Inmax Sdn. Bhd Jinhai Hardware Co. Ltd. Orient Containers Sdn. Bhd. Orient Express Container Co. Ltd. Region International Co., Ltd. Region System Sdn. Bhd. Scanwell Logistics (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd Shanghai Haoray International Trade Co. Ltd. Sino Connections Logistics Tag Fasteners Sdn. Bhd. Topocean Consolidation Services Oman: Certain Steel Nails A-523-808 7/1/16-6/30/17 Airlift Trans Oceanic Pvt. Ltd. Astrotech Steels Private Ltd. C.H. Robinson Consolidated Shippings Services LLC Dahnay Logistics Private Ltd. Flyjac Logistics Private Ltd. Intermarket (India) Private Ltd. Noble Shipping Private Ltd. Oman Fasteners LLC Overseas Distribution Services Inc. Overseas International Steel Industries LLC Panalpina World Transport (I) Pvt. Ltd. Swift Freight India Private Ltd. Republic of Korea: Certain Steel Nails A-580-874 7/1/16-6/30/17 Airlift Trans Oceanic Pvt. Ltd. Aironware Enterprise (China) Ltd. AM Global Shipping Lines Ansing Rich Tech & Trade Co. Ltd. Apex Maritime Co., Ltd. Apex Shipping Co. Ltd. Astrotech Steels Private Limited Baoding Jieboshun Trading Corp. Ltd. Beijing Jin Heung Co. Ltd. Beijing Kang Jie Kong Int'l Cargo Co. Ltd. Beijing Qin Li Jeff Trading Co., Ltd. Bestbond International Limited Bipex Co, Ltd. Bollore Logistics Co., Ltd. Bolung International Trading Co., Ltd. Bon Voyage Logistics Inc. Bonuts Hardware Logistics Co., Ltd. Brilliant Group Logistics Corp. C&D International Freight Forwarding C.H. Robinson Freight Services Ltd. Caesar Internarional Logistics Co. Ltd. Caribbean International Co. Ltd. Casia Global Logistics Co Ltd China Container Line Northern Ltd. China Dinghao Co., Ltd. China International Freight Co., Ltd. China Staple Enterprise Co. Ltd Chinatrans International Limited Chongqing Welluck Trading Co. Ltd. Chosun Shipping Co. Ltd. CJ Korea Express Corp. CKX Co. Ltd. Cohesion Freight (HK) Ltd. Consolidated Shipping Services L.L.C. Crelux International Co. Ltd. Daejin Steel Company Lrd. Dahnay Logistics Private Ltd. Dalian Sunny International Logistics DCS Dah Star Logistics Co., Ltd. De Well Container Shipping Inc. Dezhou Hualude Hardware Products Co., Ltd. Dong E. Fuqiang Metal Products Co., Ltd. DT Logistics Hong Kong Ltd. Duo-Fast Korea Co., Ltd. Dynamic Network Container Line Limted E&E Transport International Co., Ltd. ECI Taiwan Co., Ltd. Eco Steel Co., Ltd Ejen Brothers Limited Eumex Line Shenzhen Limited Eunsan Shippigs & Airecargo Co,, Ltd. Euroline Global Co., Ltd. Expeditors Korea Ltd. Faithful Engineering Products Co., Ltd. Fastgrow International Co. Fastic Transporation Co., Ltd. Flyjac Logistics Pvt. Ltd. G Link Express Logistics (Korea) Ltd GCL Logistics Co., Ltd. Global Container Line, Inc. Globelink Weststar Shipping Glovis America Grandee Logistics Ltd. Hanbit Logistics Co., Ltd. Hanjin Logistics India Private Ltd. Hanmi Staple Co., Ltd. Hanon Systems Hebei Minmetals Co., Ltd. Hebei Tuohun Metal Products Co., Ltd. Hecny Shipping Ltd. Hecny Transportation Ltd. Hengtuo Metal Products Co Ltd. High Link Line Inc. Hong Kong Hong Xing Da Trading Co. Ltd. Hongyi Hardware Products Co., Ltd. Honour Lane Logistics Company Honour Lane Shipping Limited Huanghua Yingjin Hardware Products Co., Ltd. Hyundia Logistics Co., Ltd. Inmax Industries Sdn. Bhd. Integral Building Products Inc. International Maritime and Aviation LLC JAS Forwarding Co. Ltd. Je-il Wire Production Co., Ltd. Jeil Tracker Co. Ltd. Jiangsu Soho Honry Import Export Co. Ltd. Jiaxing Slk Import & Export Co., Ltd. Jinhai Hardware Co., Ltd. Jinheung Steel Corporation Jinkaiyi International Industry Co. Jinsco International Corp. Joo Sung Sea Air Co., Ltd. K Logistics Corp. K Logistics Inc. Kasy Logistics (Tianjin) Co., Ltd. King Shipping Company Koram Inc. Koram Steel Co., Ltd. Korchina International Logistics Co. Ltd. Korea Total Logistics Co. Ltd. Korea Wire Co., Ltd. Kousa International Logistics Co. Ltd. Kuehne Nagel Ltd. LF Logistics Co. Ltd. Linyi Flying Arrow Imp. & Exp. Ltd. MR Forwarding China Ltd. Maxspeed International Transport Co. Ltd. Mingguang Ruifeng Hardware Products Co., Ltd. Nailtech Co. Ltd. Nanjing Caiqing Hardware Co., Ltd. Nauri Logistics Co. Ltd. NCL Container Lines Co. Ltd. Neo Gls Neptune Shipping Limited Nexen L&C Corp. OEC Freight Worldwide Korea Co. Ltd. OEC Logistics Co., Ltd. OEC World Wide Korea Co. Ltd. Oman Fasteners LLC Orient Express Container Co., Ltd. Oriental Power Logistics Co. Ltd. Overseas Distribution Services Inc. Overseas International Steel Industry Panalpina World Transport (PRC) Ltd. Paslode Fasteners (Shanghai) Co. Ltd. Promising Way (Hong Kong) Limited Pudong Prime International Logistics, Inc. Qingdao Chesire Trading Co. Ltd. Qingdao D&L Group Ltd. Qingdao Hongyuan Nail Industry Co. Ltd. Qingdao Master Metal Products Co. Ltd. Qingdao Meijialucky Industry and Commerce Co., Ltd. Qingdao Mst Industry and Commerce Co., Ltd. Qingdao Tiger Hardware Co., Ltd. Ramses Logistics Company Limited Regency Global Logistics Co., Ltd. Ricoh Logistics System Co., Ltd. Rise Time Industrial Co. Ltd. Sam Un Co. Ltd. Scanwell Container Line Ltd. Schenker Scheneker & CO AG SDC International Australia PTY Ltd. Seamaster Global Forwarding Seamaster Logistics Sdn Bhd Sejung (China) Sea & Air Co., Ltd. Shandong Dinglong Imp. & Exp. Co. Ltd. Shandong Liaocheng Minghua Metal PR Shandong Oriental Cherry Hardware Group Co. Ltd. Shanghai Haoray International Trade Co. Ltd. Shanghai Jade Shuttle Hardware Tools Co., Ltd. Shanghai Line Feng Int'l Transporation Co. Ltd. Shanghai Pinnacle International Trading Co., Ltd. Shanghai Pudong International Transporation Shanxi Pioneer Hardware Industry Co., Ltd. Shanxi Tianli Industries Co., Ltd. Shijiazhuang Shuangjian Tools Co. Ltd. Shipping Imperial Co., Ltd. Sino Connections Logistics Inc. S-Mart (Tianjin) Technology Development Co., Ltd. Sparx Logistics China Limited Speedmark International Ltd. Suntec Industries Co., Ltd. Swift Freight (India) Pvt Ltd. T.H.I. Group Ltd. The Stanley Works (Langfang) Fastening System Co., Ltd. Tianjin Bluekin Industries Limited Tianjin Coways Metal Products Co. Tianjin Free Trade Service Co. Ltd. Tianjin Fulida Supply Co. Ltd. Tianjin Huixinshangmao Co. Ltd. Tianjin Hweschun Fasteners Manufacturing Co. Ltd. Tianjin Jinchi Metal Products Co., Ltd. Tianjin Long Sheng Tai Tianjin M&C Electronics Co., Ltd. Tianjin Wonderful International Trading Tianjin Zehui Hardware Co. Ltd. Tianjin Zhonglian Metals Ware Co. Ltd. Tianjin Zhonglian Times Technology Toll Global Forwarding Ltd. Top Logistics Korea Ltd. Top Ocean Consolidated Service Ltd. Toyo Boeki Co. Ltd. Trans Knights, Inc. Translink Shipping, Inc. Transwell Logistics Co. Ltd. Transworld Transporation Co. Ltd. Trim International Inc. TTI Freight Forwarder Co. Ltd. Unicorn (Tianjin) Fasteners Co., Ltd. UPS SCS (China) Limited Vanguard Logistics Services W&K Corporation Limited Weida Freight System Co. Ltd. Woowon Sea & Air Co. Ltd. Xi'an Metals and Minerals Imp. Exp. Co. Xinjiayuan International Trade Co. Xinjiayuan Trading Co., Limited Youngwoo Fasteners Co., Ltd. You-One Fastening Systems Yumark Enterprises Corp. Zhaoqing Harvest Nails Co. Ltd. Republic of Korea: Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products A-580-878 1/4/16-6/30/17 Dongbu Steel, Co., Ltd. Dongkuk Steel Mill Co., Ltd. Hyundai Steel Company POSCO Union Steel Manufacturing Co., Ltd. Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Certain Steel Nails A-552-818 7/1/16-6/30/17 Apex Holding Group Limited B.A.T. Logistics BAC AU Logistics Service and Trading C.H. Robinson CS Song Thuy FGS Logistics Co. Ltd. Hecny Shipping Ltd. Honour Lane Shipping Ltd. M&T Export Trading Production Master International Logistics Orient Express Container Co., Ltd Rich State Inc. Sanco Freight Seahorse Shipping Corporation Thao Cuong Co., Ltd. Toan Nhat Viet Trading and Service Transworld Transportation Co., Ltd. Truong Vinh Ltd. United Nail Products Co. Ltd. Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe A-552-816 7/1/16-6/30/17 Mejonson Industrial Vietnam Co., Ltd. Taiwan: Certain Steel Nails A-583-854 7/1/16-6/30/17 Air Sea Transport, Inc. All Precision Co., Ltd. Apex Maritime Co., Ltd. Aplus Pneumatic Corp. Astrotech Steels Private Ltd. Basso Industry Corportation Bollore Logistics (Vietnam) Co. Ltd. Bonuts Hardware Logistics Co. C.H. Robinson Freight Services Challenge Industrial Co., Ltd. Cheng Ch International Co. Ltd. Chia Pao Metal Co. Ltd. China International Freight Co. Ltd. Chite Enterprises Co., Ltd. Crown Run Industrial Corp. Daejin Steel Company Ltd. E&E Transport International Co., Ltd. Easylink Industrial Co., Ltd. ECI Taiwan Co., Ltd. Everise Global Logistics Co., Ltd. Faithful Engineering Products Co. Ltd. Fastenal Asia Pacific Ltd. Four Winds Corporation Fuzhou Important Countries Import & Export Fuzhou Royal Floor Co., Ltd. Fuzhou Top Golden Import & Export Co. General Merchandise Consolidators Ginfa World Co. Ltd. Gloex Company H&W International Forwarders Co., Ltd. Hanbit Logistics Co., Ltd. Hecny Shipping Limited Hi-Sharp Industrial Corp. Ltd. Home Value Co., Ltd. Honour Lane Logistics Co., Ltd. Hor Liang Industrial Corp. Hyup Sung Indonesia Inmax Industries Sdn. Bhd. Jade Shuttle Enterprise Co., Ltd. Jia Jue Industry Co. Ltd. Jinhai Hardware Co., Ltd. Jinsco International Corp. Joo Sung Sea & Air Co., Ltd. K Win Fasteners Inc. King Freight International Corporation Korea Wire Co., Ltd. Liang Chyuan Industrial Co., Ltd. Locksure Inc. Lu Kang Hand Tools Industrial Co., Ltd. ML Global Ltd. Master United Corp. Nailermate Enterprise Corporation Newrex Screw Corporation NMC Logistics International Company Noble Shipping Pvt. Ltd. NS International Ltd. OOCL Logistics Ltd. Orient Express Container Co., Ltd. Oriental Power Logistics Co., Ltd. Oriental Vanguard Logistics Co. Ltd. Pacific Concord International Ltd. Pacific Star Express Corp. Panda Logistics Co., Ltd. Panther T&H Industry Co. Patek Tool Co., Ltd. Point Edge Corp. President Industrial Inc. Pro-Team Coil Nail Enterprise, Inc. PT Enterprise Inc. Romp Coil Nail Industries Inc. Scanwell Schenker Seamaster Logistics Sdn Bhd Star World Product and Trading Co., Ltd. Sun VN Transport Co. T.H.I. Logistics Co. Ltd. Taiwan Wakisangyo Co. Ltd. The Ultimate Freight Management Topps Wang International Ltd. Trans Wagon International Co. Ltd. Trans-Top Enterprise Co., Ltd. Transwell Logistics Co., Ltd. Transworld Transportation Co., Ltd. Trim International Inc. Tsi-Translink (Taiwan) Co. Ltd. UC Freight Forwarding Co. Ltd. U-Can-Do Hardware Corp. Unicatch Industrial Co. Ltd. Universal Power Shipping Ltd. UPS Supply Chain Solutions VIM International Enterprise Co., Ltd. Wictory Co. Ltd. Yeh Fong Hsin Yehdyi Enterprise Co., Ltd. Yu Tai World Co., Ltd. Yusen Logistics (Taiwan) Ltd Taiwan: Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products A-583-856 6/2/16-6/30/17 Chung Hung Steel Corporation Great Grandeul Steel Co., Ltd. Meng Sin Material Co., Ltd. Prosperity Tieh Enterprise Co., Ltd. Sheng Yu Steel Co., Ltd. Synn Industrial Co., Ltd. Xxentria Technology Materials Co., Ltd. Yieh Phui Enterprise Co., Ltd. Taiwan: Polyethylene Terephthalate (Pet) Film A-583-837 7/1/16-6/30/17 Nan Ya Plastics Corporation Shinkong Materials Technology Corporation The People's Republic of China: Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe A-570-910 7/1/16-6/30/17 Baoshan Iron & Steel Co., Ltd. Beijing Jia Mei Ao Trade Co., Ltd. Beijing Jinghua Global Trading Co. Benxi Northern Steel Pipes, Co. Ltd. CNOOC Kingland Pipeline Co., Ltd. ETCO (China) International Trading Co., Ltd. Guangzhou Juyi Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. Huludao City Steel Pipe Industrial Jiangsu Changbao Steel Tube Co., Ltd. Jiangsu Yulong Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. Liaoning Northern Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. Pangang Chengdu Group Iron & Steel Co., Ltd. Shanghai Zhongyou TIPO Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. Tianjin Baolai International Trade Co., Ltd. Tianjin Haoyou Industry Trade Co. Tianjin Longshenghua Import & Export Tianjin Shuangjie Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. Weifang East Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. WISCO & CRM Wuhan Materials & Trade Zhejiang Kingland Pipeline Industry Co., Ltd. The People's Republic of China: Tapered Roller Bearings 4 A-570-601 6/1/16-5/31/17 Honour Lane Shipping Ltd. The People's Republic of China: Xanthan Gum A-570-985 7/1/16-6/30/17 A.H.A. International Co., Ltd. CP Kelco (Shandong) Biological Company Limited Deosen Biochemical (Ordos), Ltd. Deosen Biochemical Ltd. Hebei Xinhe Biochemical Co. Ltd. Inner Mongolia Fufeng Biotechnologies Co., Ltd. Inner Mongolia Jianlong Biochemical Co., Ltd. Jianlong Biotechnology Co., Ltd. Langfang Meihua Bio-Technology Co., Ltd. Meihua Group International Trading (Hong Kong) Limited Neimenggu Fufeng Biotechnologies Co., Ltd. Shandong Fufeng Fermentation Co., Ltd. Shanghai Smart Chemicals Co. Ltd. Xinjiang Fufeng Biotechnologies Co., Ltd. Xinjiang Meihua Amino Acid Co., Ltd. Turkey: Certain Pasta A-489-805 7/1/16-6/30/17 Marsan Gida Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. Oba Makarnacilik Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. Countervailing Duty Proceedings India: Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products C-533-864 11/6/15-12/31/16 JSW Steel Limited Uttam Galva Steels Limited India: Polyethylene Terephthalate (Pet) Film C-533-825 1/1/16-12/31/16 Chiripal Poly Films Limited Ester Industries Limited Garware Polyester Ltd. Jindal Poly Films Ltd. (India) MTZ Polyesters Ltd. Polyplex Corporation Ltd. SRF Limited SRF Limited of India Uflex Ltd. Vacmet India Ltd. Italy: Certain Pasta C-475-819 1/1/16-12/31/16 Alessio Panarese Societa Agricola Antico Pastificio Morelli 1870 S.r.l. Colussi SpA G.R.A.M.M. S.r.l. Ghigi 1870 S.p.A. Industria Alimentare Colavita S.p.A. Pastificio Fratelli Deluca S.r.l. Pastificio Mennucci SpA Tesa SrL Republic of Korea: Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products C-580-879 11/6/15-12/31/16 Bukook Steel Co., Ltd. CJ Korea Express DK Dongshin co., Ltd. Dongbu Steel Co., Ltd. Dongbu Incheon Steel Co., Ltd. Dongbu Express Dongkuk Stee Mill Co., Ltd. Hongyi (HK) Hardware Products Co., Ltd. Hyundai Steel Company Jeli Sanup Co., Ltd. Mitsubishi International Corp. POSCO POSCO C&C POSCO Daewoo Corp. Sejung Shipping Co., Ltd. SeAH Steel Soon Hong Trading Co., Ltd. Taisan Construction Co., Ltd. TCC Steel Co., Ltd. Union Steel Co., Ltd. Young Sun Steel Co. Republic of Korea: Cut-To-Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate 5 C-580-837 1/1/16-12/31/16 Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Certain Steel Nails C-552-819 1/1/16-12/31/16 BAC AU Logistics Service and Trading Bollore Logistics FGS Logistics Co. Ltd. Honour Lane Shipping Ltd M&T Export Trading Production Master International Logistics Rich State Inc. Sanco Freight SDV Vietnam Co. Ltd. Thao Cuong Co. Ltd. Toan Nhat Viet Trading and Service Transworld Transportation Co., Ltd. Truong Vinh Ltd. United Nail Products Co. Ltd. The People's Republic of China: Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe C-570-911 1/1/16-12/31/16 Baoshan Iron & Steel Co., Ltd. Beijing Jia Mei Ao Trade Co., Ltd. Beijing Jinghua Global Trading Co. Benxi Northern Steel Pipes, Co. Ltd. CNOOC Kingland Pipeline Co., Ltd. ETCO (China) International Trading Co., Ltd. Guangzhou Juyi Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. Huludao City Steel Pipe Industrial Jiangsu Changbao Steel Tube Co., Ltd. Jiangsu Yulong Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. Liaoning Northern Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. Pangang Chengdu Group Iron & Steel Co., Ltd. Shanghai Zhongyou TIPO Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. Tianjin Baolai International Trade Co., Ltd. Tianjin Haoyou Industry Trade Co. Tianjin Longshenghua Import & Export Tianjin Shuangjie Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. Weifang East Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. WISCO & CRM Wuhan Materials & Trade Zhejiang Kingland Pipeline Industry Co., Ltd. Suspension Agreements

    None.

    4 The company listed above was inadvertently omitted from the initiation notice that published on August 1, 2017 (82 FR 35751). This notice serves as a correction to the Initiation Notice.

    5 In the initiation that published on April 10, 2017 (82 FR 17188), the period of review for the above referenced cases was incorrect. The period of reivew listed above is correct period of review for this case.

    Duty Absorption Reviews

    During any administrative review covering all or part of a period falling between the first and second or third and fourth anniversary of the publication of an antidumping duty order under 19 CFR 351.211 or a determination under 19 CFR 351.218(f)(4) to continue an order or suspended investigation (after sunset review), the Secretary, if requested by a domestic interested party within 30 days of the date of publication of the notice of initiation of the review, will determine whether antidumping duties have been absorbed by an exporter or producer subject to the review if the subject merchandise is sold in the United States through an importer that is affiliated with such exporter or producer. The request must include the name(s) of the exporter or producer for which the inquiry is requested.

    Gap Period Liquidation

    For the first administrative review of any order, there will be no assessment of antidumping or countervailing duties on entries of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the relevant provisional-measures “gap” period, of the order, if such a gap period is applicable to the POR.

    Administrative Protective Orders and Letters of Appearance

    Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under administrative protective orders in accordance with the procedures outlined in the Department's regulations at 19 CFR 351.305. Those procedures apply to administrative reviews included in this notice of initiation. Parties wishing to participate in any of these administrative reviews should ensure that they meet the requirements of these procedures (e.g., the filing of separate letters of appearance as discussed at 19 CFR 351.103(d)).

    Factual Information Requirements

    The Department's regulations identify five categories of factual information in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21), which are summarized as follows: (i) Evidence submitted in response to questionnaires; (ii) evidence submitted in support of allegations; (iii) publicly available information to value factors under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence placed on the record by the Department; and (v) evidence other than factual information described in (i)-(iv). These regulations require any party, when submitting factual information, to specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted and, if the information is submitted to rebut, clarify, or correct factual information already on the record, to provide an explanation identifying the information already on the record that the factual information seeks to rebut, clarify, or correct. The regulations, at 19 CFR 351.301, also provide specific time limits for such factual submissions based on the type of factual information being submitted. Please review the final rule, available at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/2013/1304frn/2013-08227.txt, prior to submitting factual information in this segment.

    Any party submitting factual information in an antidumping duty or countervailing duty proceeding must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.6 Parties are hereby reminded that revised certification requirements are in effect for company/government officials as well as their representatives. All segments of any antidumping duty or countervailing duty proceedings initiated on or after August 16, 2013, should use the formats for the revised certifications provided at the end of the Final Rule. 7 The Department intends to reject factual submissions in any proceeding segments if the submitting party does not comply with applicable revised certification requirements.

    6See section 782(b) of the Act.

    7See Certification of Factual Information To Import Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule); see also the frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule, available at http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.

    Extension of Time Limits Regulation

    Parties may request an extension of time limits before a time limit established under Part 351 expires, or as otherwise specified by the Secretary. See 19 CFR 351.302. In general, an extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after the time limit established under Part 351 expires. For submissions which are due from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. on the due date. Examples include, but are not limited to: (1) Case and rebuttal briefs, filed pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309; (2) factual information to value factors under 19 CFR 351.408(c), or to measure the adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2), filed pursuant to 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3) and rebuttal, clarification and correction filed pursuant to 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(iv); (3) comments concerning the selection of a surrogate country and surrogate values and rebuttal; (4) comments concerning U.S. Customs and Border Protection data; and (5) quantity and value questionnaires. Under certain circumstances, the Department may elect to specify a different time limit by which extension requests will be considered untimely for submissions which are due from multiple parties simultaneously. In such a case, the Department will inform parties in the letter or memorandum setting forth the deadline (including a specified time) by which extension requests must be filed to be considered timely. This modification also requires that an extension request must be made in a separate, stand-alone submission, and clarifies the circumstances under which the Department will grant untimely-filed requests for the extension of time limits. These modifications are effective for all segments initiated on or after October 21, 2013. Please review the final rule, available at http://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm, prior to submitting factual information in these segments.

    These initiations and this notice are in accordance with section 751(a) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)) and 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i).

    Dated: September 8, 2017. James Maeder, Senior Director performing the duties of Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19417 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XF674 Fisheries of the South Atlantic; South Atlantic Fishery Management Council; Public Meetings AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting of the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council's Citizen Science Advisory Panel Finance Action Team.

    SUMMARY:

    The South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) will hold a meeting of its Citizen Science Advisory Panel Finance Action Team via webinar.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held Thursday, October 5, 2017 at 12:30 p.m. The meeting is scheduled to last approximately 90 minutes. Additional Action Team webinar and plenary webinar dates and times will publish in a subsequent issue in the Federal Register.

    ADDRESSES:

    Meeting address: The meetings will be held via webinar and are open to members of the public. Webinar registration is required and registration links will be posted to the Citizen Science program page of the Council's Web site at www.safmc.net.

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Amber Von Harten, Citizen Science Program Manager, SAFMC; phone: (843) 302-8433 or toll free (866) SAFMC-10; fax: (843) 769-4520; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The South Atlantic Fishery Management Council created a Citizen Science Advisory Panel Pool in June 2017. The Council appointed members of the Citizen Science Advisory Panel Pool to five Action Teams in the areas of Volunteers, Data Management, Projects/Topics Management, Finance, and Communication/Outreach/Education to develop program policies and operations for the Council's Citizen Science Program.

    The Finance Action Team will meet to continue work on developing recommendations on program policies and operations to be reviewed by the Council's Citizen Science Committee. Public comment will be accepted at the beginning of the meeting.

    Items to be addressed during these meetings:

    1. Discuss work on tasks in the Terms of Reference 2. Other Business

    Although other non-emergency issues not on the agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Actions will be restricted to those issues specifically listed 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 Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency.

    Special Accommodations

    The meeting is 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: September 8, 2017. Jeffrey N. Lonergan, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19430 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XF619 Endangered Species; File No. 21169 AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; receipt of application.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that Inwater Research Group, Inc. [Responsible Party: Michael Bresette], 4160 NE Hyline Drive, Jensen Beach, FL 34957, has applied in due form for a permit to take green (Chelonia mydas), hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata), Kemp's ridley (Lepidochelys kempii), and loggerhead (Caretta caretta) sea turtles for purposes of scientific research.

    DATES:

    Written, telefaxed, or email comments must be received on or before October 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    The application and related documents are available for review by selecting “Records Open for Public Comment” from the “Features” box on the Applications and Permits for Protected Species (APPS) home page, https://apps.nmfs.noaa.gov, and then selecting File No. 21169 from the list of available applications.

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

    Written comments on this application should be submitted to the Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, at the address listed above. Comments may also be submitted by facsimile to (301) 713-0376, or by email to [email protected] Please include the File No. in the subject line of the email comment.

    Those individuals requesting a public hearing should submit a written request to the Chief, Permits and Conservation Division at the address listed above. The request should set forth the specific reasons why a hearing on this application would be appropriate.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Erin Markin or Amy Hapeman, (301) 427-8401.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The subject permit is requested under the authority of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and the regulations governing the taking, importing, and exporting of endangered and threatened species (50 CFR parts 222-226).

    Inwater Research Group, Inc., proposes to continue long-term monitoring on habitat preference, species abundance, size frequencies, and disease prevalence in sea turtles in the Key West National Wildlife Refuge, Big Bend region, and coastal and offshore waters of Monroe, Citrus, and Dixie Counties, Florida. Annually, up to 2,432 green, 749 hawksbill, 560 Kemp's ridley, and 500 loggerhead sea turtles would be pursued by vessel for the purpose of species identification and capture using hand capture or dip nets. Of the animals pursued by vessel, annually, up to 350 green, 105 hawksbill, 230 Kemp's ridley, and 225 loggerhead sea turtles would be captured for collection of morphometric data, biological samples, and tagging (flipper and passive integrated transponder). Of the animals pursued by vessel, up to 50 green, 25 hawksbill, 25 Kemp's ridley, and 50 loggerhead sea turtles would be captured for morphometric data, biological samples and instrument attachment (acoustic and/or satellite transmitters), annually. In addition, up to 50 green, 25 hawksbill, 50 Kemp's ridley, and 25 loggerhead neonate sea turtles would be captured, annually, for collection of morphometric data, biological samples, and tagging (flipper and passive integrated transponder). The permit would be valid for up to ten years from the date of issuance.

    Dated: September 8, 2017. Julia Harrison, Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19395 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XF645 Fisheries of the South Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico, and Caribbean; Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review (SEDAR); Amendment AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting location change and schedule modification of the SEDAR Steering Committee meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The SEDAR Steering Committee will meet to discuss the SEDAR process and assessment schedule.

    DATES:

    The SEDAR Steering Committee will meet Tuesday, September 26, 2017, from 1:30 p.m. until 4:30 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    Meeting address: The Steering Committee meeting will be held at the Town and Country Inn, 2008 Savannah Highway, Charleston, SC 29407; telephone: (843) 900-4120.

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    John Carmichael, Deputy Executive Director, 4055 Faber Place Drive, Suite 201, North Charleston, SC 29405; phone: (843) 571-4366 or toll free (866) SAFMC-10; fax: (843) 769-4520; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This meeting was previously published in the Federal Register (82 FR 42544). This is notification of a change in meeting location and duration. The meeting was originally scheduled to occur on Tuesday, September 26 and Wednesday, September 27, at the Crown Plaza Charleston Airport in North Charleston SC. This change is being made due to a change in scheduling of a meeting of the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council in response to hazardous weather. The meeting will be accessible via webinar. The items for discussion are unchanged, and are as follows:

    1. Research Track Process 2. SEDAR Current Projects Update 3. SEDAR Future Projects Schedule 4. Budget Report

    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 3 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: September 8, 2017. Jeffrey N. Lonergan, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19439 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XF687 Western 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 Western Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) will hold a meeting of its Social Science Planning Committee (SSPC) in Honolulu, HI.

    DATES:

    The SSPC meeting will be held on Tuesday and Wednesday, September 26 and 27, 2017, from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the Council Offices at 1164 Bishop Street, Suite 1400, Honolulu, HI 96813.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kitty M. Simonds, Executive Director; telephone: (808) 522-8220.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Public comment periods will be provided. The order in which agenda items are addressed may change. The Committee will meet as late as necessary to complete scheduled business.

    Agenda

    Tuesday, September 26, 2017, 9 a.m.

    1. Introductions 2. Approval of Agenda 3. Report on the 170th Council meeting recommendations 4. Report on Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center Human Dimensions Review 5. Social Science and Planning Committee Review and Revisions A. Report from the SSPC Working Group B. Review and revision of Draft Plan i. Drivers ii. Purpose and Need iii. Goals and Objectives iv. Tasks and Activities v. Other strategic plan items 6. Public Comment 7. Summary and tasking of SSPC committee members

    Wednesday, September 27, 2017, 9 a.m.

    8. Review of SSPC Strategic Planning from Prior Day 9. Report from Committee members on Revisions and Finalization of Strategic Plan 10. SSPC Research Priorities A. Report on Working Group Findings i. Pacific Islands Human Dimensions Research Priority Areas ii. Prioritization of Research by Priority Areas to meet Strategic Plan Goals and Objectives. iii. Other Issues. 11. Public Comment 12. Discussion and Recommendations 13. Other Business Special Accommodations

    These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Kitty M. Simonds, (808) 522-8220 (voice) or (808) 522-8226 (fax), at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: September 8, 2017. Jeffrey N. Lonergan, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19438 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XF460 Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to a Pile Driving Activities for Waterfront Repairs at the U.S. Coast Guard Station Monterey, Monterey, California AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; proposed incidental harassment authorization; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS has received a request from the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) for authorization to take marine mammals incidental to pile driving activities for waterfront repairs at the USCG Monterey Station in Monterey, California. Pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments on its proposal to issue an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to take marine mammals during the specified activities. NMFS will consider public comments prior to making any final decision on the issuance of the requested MMPA authorization and agency responses will be summarized in the final notice of our decision.

    DATES:

    Comments and information must be received no later than October 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments should be addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. Physical comments should be sent to 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910 and electronic comments should be sent to [email protected]

    Instructions: NMFS is not responsible for comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period. Comments received electronically, including all attachments, must not exceed a 25-megabyte file size. Attachments to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word or Excel or Adobe PDF file formats only. All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted online at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm without change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit confidential business information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Stephanie Egger, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the applications and supporting documents, as well as a list of the references cited in this document, may be obtained online at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm. In case of problems accessing these documents, please call the contact listed above.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce (as delegated to NMFS) to allow, upon request, the incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if certain findings are made and either regulations are issued or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed authorization is provided to the public for review.

    An authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such takings are set forth.

    NMFS has defined “negligible impact” in 50 CFR 216.103 as an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival.

    The MMPA states that the term “take” means to harass, hunt, capture, or kill, or attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill any marine mammal.

    Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the MMPA defines “harassment” as: Any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment); or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering (Level B harassment).

    National Environmental Policy Act

    To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 216-6A, NMFS must review our proposed action (i.e., the issuance of an incidental harassment authorization) with respect to potential impacts on the human environment. Accordingly, NMFS plans to adopt the USCG's Supplemental Environmental Assessment (SEA) entitled Supplemental Environmental Assessment for Waterfront Repairs at U.S. Coast Guard Station Monterey, Monterey, California, and provided our independent evaluation of the document finds that it includes adequate information analyzing the effects on the human environment of issuing the IHA. The USCG's SEA is available for public comment on our Web site at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm. We will review all comments submitted in response to this notice prior to concluding our NEPA process or making a final decision on the IHA request.

    Summary of Request

    On February 10, 2017, NMFS received a request from the USCG for an IHA to take marine mammals incidental to pile driving activities for waterfront restoration, at the USCG Station Monterey in Monterrey, California. USCG's request is for take of eight species of marine mammals, by Level B harassment. Neither USCG nor NMFS expect mortality to result from this activity and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate.

    NMFS previously issued an IHA to the USCG for similar work (79 FR 57052; September 24, 2014). However, no work was conducted under that IHA.

    Description of Proposed Activity Overview

    USCG Station Monterey occupies an upland site and adjacent waterside structures including a 1,700-foot breakwater, a wharf constructed over the breakwater, and floating docks to the east of the wharf in Monterey Harbor. The USCG intends to conduct maintenance on the existing wharf, which is used to berth vessels that are critical to support USCG Station Monterey's mission.

    The wharf is constructed of timber and steel material and is supported by 64 piles. In 1995, 47 of the original timber piles were replaced with 14-inch (in) steel pipe piles and the remaining 17 timber piles had polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pile wraps installed. The 17 remaining timber piles are bearing piles that have exceeded their service life partially due to marine bores and the harsh marine environment to which they are exposed, and they need to be replaced. The proposed project requires replacement of these 17 timber piles including removal of the existing timber deck, replacing stringers, steel pipe caps, steel support beams, and hardware in order to access the timber piles. The timber piles will be removed using vibratory pile driving and replaced with steel piles using vibratory pile driving and if needed an impact hammer.

    In-water noise from pile driving activities will result in the take, by Level B harassment only, of eight species of marine mammals.

    Dates and Duration

    In-water construction for this application is proposed to occur between October 16, 2017 and October 15, 2018. Pile-driving activities are expected to occur for an estimated minimum of three to a maximum of eight days of the total construction time. It is assumed that driving time would be approximately 20 minutes (min) per pile for vibratory or impact pile driving. It is assumed that vibratory extraction of the existing piles would take approximately 10 min per pile. Pile driving and extraction would therefore result in an estimated of 240 min per day (4 hours (hrs)); 510 min for the total project or approximately 8.5 hrs.

    Specified Geographic Region

    USCG Station Monterey is located at 100 Lighthouse Avenue at the southern end of Monterey Bay in Monterey Harbor, Monterey, California. The USCG Monterey Station's area of responsibility extends 50 miles offshore for approximately 120 nautical miles of coastline, from Point Año Nuevo south to the Monterey-San Luis Obispo County line, encompassing 5,000 square miles. Monterey Bay is one of the widest bays on the Pacific Coast of the U.S. and approximately 3.5 miles of coastline are within the city limits of Monterey; the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS) encompasses the entirety of the bay and further extends northward and southward along the Pacific Coast.

    Detailed Description of Specific Activities

    The 17 timber piles, approximately 16 to 18-in in diameter, will be removed using a vibratory extractor. Each timber pile will be replaced with a 14-in steel pipe pile installed using a vibratory hammer (the preferred method) and each pipe pile will be positioned and installed in the footprint of the extracted timber pile. Pile installation would be adjacent to a rock jetty that would provide substantial underwater shielding of sound transmission to areas north (or through the jetty) (see Figure 1-2 of the application).

    Pile proofing will be conducted via impact hammer. If, due to substrate or breakwater armor, a pipe pile is unable to be driven to 30 feet below the mud line using a vibratory hammer, then an impact hammer will be used; and if the pile cannot be driven with an impact hammer, the pipe pile would be posted onto the armor stone. The steel pipe piles would not be filled with concrete.

    Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities

    The marine mammal species under NMFS's jurisdiction that have the potential to occur in the proposed construction area include California sea lion (Zalophus californianus), Pacific harbor seal (Phoca vitulina), harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), Risso's dolphin (Grampus griseus), bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncates), killer whale (Orcinus orca), gray whale (Megaptera novaengliae), humpback whale (Eschrichtius robustus), and southern sea otters (Enhydra lutris nereis). The southern sea otter is managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and not discussed further in this proposed authorization. Humpback whales are protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Pertinent information for each of these species is presented in this document to provide the necessary background to understand their demographics and distribution in the area.

    Sections 2 and 3 of the USCG's application summarize available information regarding status and trends, distribution and habitat preferences, and behavior and life history, of the potentially affected species. Additional information regarding population trends and threats may be found in NMFS's Stock Assessment Reports (SAR; www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/) and more general information about these species (e.g., physical and behavioral descriptions) may be found on NMFS's Web site (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/mammals/).

    Table 1 lists all species with expected potential for occurrence in the Monterey Bay area and summarizes information related to the population or stock, including regulatory status under the MMPA and ESA and potential biological removal (PBR), where known. For taxonomy, we follow Committee on Taxonomy (2016). PBR is defined by the MMPA as the maximum number of animals, not including natural mortalities, that may be removed from a marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to reach or maintain its optimum sustainable population (as described in NMFS's SARs). While no mortality is anticipated or authorized here, PBR and annual serious injury and mortality from anthropogenic sources are included here as gross indicators of the status of the species and other threats.

    Marine mammal abundance estimates presented in this document represent the total number of individuals that make up a given stock or the total number estimated within a particular study or survey area. NMFS's stock abundance estimates for most species represent the total estimate of individuals within the geographic area, if known, that comprises that stock. For some species, this geographic area may extend beyond U.S. waters. All managed stocks in this region are assessed in NMFS's U.S. 2015 SARs (Carretta et al. 2016). All values presented in Table 1 are the most recent available at the time of publication and are available in the 2016 SARs (Carretta et al. 2016).

    Table 1—Marine Mammal Species Potentially Present in Region of Activity Common name Scientific name Stock ESA/MMPA status;
  • strategic
  • (Y/N) 1
  • Stock abundance (CV, Nmin, most recent
  • abundance survey) 2
  • PBR Annual M/SI 3
    Order Cetartiodactyla—Cetacea—Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales) Family Eschrichtiidae Gray whale Eschrichtius robustus Eastern North Pacific -; N 20,990 (0.05; 20,125; 2011) 624 132 Family Balaenidae Humpback whale Megaptera novaeangliae novaeangliae California/Oregon/Washington E; D 1,918 (0.03; 1,855; 2011) 11.0 ≥5.5 Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises) Family Delphinidae Killer whale Orcinus orca Eastern North Pacific Offshore -; N 240 (0.49, 162, 2008) 1.6 0 Risso's dolphin Grampus griseus California/Oregon/Washington -; N 6,336 (0.32; (4,817, 2014) 46 ≥3.7 Bottlenose dolphin Tursiops truncatus California Coastal -; N 453 (0.06, 346, 2011) 2.7 ≥2.0 Family Phocoenidae (porpoises) Harbor Porpoise Phocoena phocoena Monterey Bay -; N 3,715 (0.51; 2,480; 2011) 25 0 Order Carnivora—Superfamily Pinnipedia Family Otariidae (eared seals and sea lions) California sea lion Zalophus californianus U.S. -; N 296,750 (na, 153,337, 2011) 9,200 389 Family Phocidae (earless seals) Harbor seal Phoca vitulina California -; N 30,968 (na; 27,348 2012) 1,641 43 1—Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR or which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock. 2—NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable. 3—These values, found in NMFS's SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial fisheries, ship strike). Annual mortality/serious injury (M/SI) often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A CV associated with estimated mortality due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases.

    All species that could potentially occur in the proposed project area are included in Table 1. As described below, all eight species temporally and spatially co-occur with the activity to the degree that take is reasonably likely to occur, and we have proposed authorizing it. Some additional information about species being taken is provided below.

    California Sea Lion

    California sea lions breed during July on the Channel Islands off southern California which is approximately 100 mi (161 km) south of MBNMS, and off Baja and mainland Mexico (Odell 1981), although a few pups have been born on Año Nuevo Island (in San Mateo County) (Keith et al., 1984). Following the breeding season on the Channel Islands, most adult and sub-adult males migrate northward to central and northern California and to the Pacific Northwest, while most females and young animals either remain on or near the breeding grounds throughout the year or move southward or northward, as far as Monterey Bay.

    Stage structure of California sea lions within the MBNMS varies by location, but generally, the majority of animals are adult and subadult males, primarily using the central California area to feed during the non-breeding season and are most common in the MBNMS during fall and spring migrations between southern breeding areas and northern feeding areas. Though males are generally most common, females may comprise 34 to 37 percent of juvenile individuals on the Monterey breakwater during El Niño events (Nicholson 1986). California sea lions are the most abundant marine mammal in the project area and regularly use the Monterey Breakwater and portions of the pier as a haul-out site.

    Harbor Seal

    In California, there are approximately 400 to 600 haul-out sites located on a mixture of rock shores, intertidal sand bars, and beaches associated with the mainland and offshore islands (NOAA 2015c). Harbor seals are residents in the MBNMS throughout the year. They haul out at dozens of sites from Point Sur to Año Nuevo. Within MBNMS, tagged harbor seals have been documented to move substantial distances (10-20 km (3.9-7.8 mi)) to foraging areas each night (Oxman 1995; Trumble 1995). Overall, radio-tagged individuals have moved total distances of 480 km (Allen et al., 1987). Pupping within the MBNMS occurs primarily during March and April, followed by a molt during May and June. Peak abundance on land within the Sanctuary is reached in late spring and early summer when harbor seals haul out to breed, give birth to pups, and molt.

    Pacific harbor seals are not known to regularly use the Monterey Breakwater as a haul-out site, but may use beaches or other relatively low-gradient areas to haul-out in the project area, and in areas nearby such as beaches along Cannery Row in the City of Monterey.

    Harbor Porpoise

    The harbor porpoise is a resident species of Monterey Bay and could occur within the project area. The Monterey Bay stock of harbor porpoise occurs from Point Sur to near Pigeon Point (Forney et al. 2014).

    Risso's Dolphin and Bottlenose Dolphin

    Breeding and calving for Risso's dolphin may occur year-round with a gestation period of 13 to 14 months and most births occurring from fall to winter in California waters (NOAA 2012). The California coastal bottlenose dolphin has been consistently sighted in and around Monterey Bay and could occur within the project area (NOAA 2008).

    Killer Whales

    Killer whales (both West Coast transients and Eastern North Pacific offshore stocks) visit the MBNMS on an intermittent and unpredictable basis. Transient killer whales prey on gray whales and California sea lions within the MBNMS, and have the potential to occur in the project area (MBNMS 2016).

    Gray Whale

    From mid-February to May gray whales can be seen migrating northward with their calves along the West Coast (NOAA 2013a). The population migrates south along the West Coast in the fall to wintering grounds on the west coast of Baja California, Mexico, and the southeastern Gulf of California (NOAA 2014). Although gray whales are not resident species within the project area, during their annual migration they can occur within approximately two miles of the coast of Monterey Bay (MBNMS 2014).

    Humpback Whale

    Humpback whales are one of the more commonly observed large baleen whales in the MBNMS, mostly seen during summer and fall as they are feeding (NOAA 2014b). Both the Mexico Distinct Population Segment (DPS) and the Central America DPS can occur in the vicinity of the project area. Humpback whales are typically found further offshore than gray whales, but since 2014 higher numbers of humpback whales have been observed in and near Monterey Bay by whale-watching vessels.

    Marine Mammal Hearing

    Hearing is the most important sensory modality for marine mammals underwater, and exposure to anthropogenic sound can have deleterious effects. To appropriately assess the potential effects of exposure to sound, it is necessary to understand the frequency ranges marine mammals are able to hear. Current data indicate that not all marine mammal species have equal hearing capabilities (e.g., Richardson et al. 1995; Wartzok and Ketten 1999; Au and Hastings 2008). To reflect this, Southall et al. (2007) recommended that marine mammals be divided into functional hearing groups based on directly measured or estimated hearing ranges on the basis of available behavioral response data, audiograms derived using auditory evoked potential techniques, anatomical modeling, and other data. Note that no direct measurements of hearing ability have been successfully completed for mysticetes (i.e., low-frequency cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2016a) described generalized hearing ranges for these marine mammal hearing groups. Generalized hearing ranges were chosen based on the approximately 65 dB threshold from the normalized composite audiograms, with the exception for lower limits for low-frequency cetaceans where the lower bound was deemed to be biologically implausible and the lower bound from Southall et al. (2007) retained. The functional groups and the associated frequencies are indicated below (note that these frequency ranges correspond to the range for the composite group, with the entire range not necessarily reflecting the capabilities of every species within that group):

    Low-frequency cetaceans (mysticetes): Generalized hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 7 hertz (Hz) and 35 kilohertz (kHz), with best hearing estimated to be from 100 Hz to 8 kHz;

    Mid-frequency cetaceans (larger toothed whales, beaked whales, and most delphinids): Generalized hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 150 Hz and 160 kHz, with best hearing from 10 to less than 100 kHz;

    High-frequency cetaceans (porpoises, river dolphins, and members of the genera Kogia and Cephalorhynchus; including two members of the genus Lagenorhynchus, on the basis of recent echolocation data and genetic data): Generalized hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 275 Hz and 160 kHz.

    Pinnipeds in water; Phocidae (true seals): Generalized hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 50 Hz to 86 kHz, with best hearing between 1-50 kHz;

    Pinnipeds in water; Otariidae (eared seals and sea lions): Generalized hearing is estimated to occur between 60 Hz and 39 kHz, with best hearing between 2-48 kHz.

    The pinniped functional hearing group was modified from Southall et al. (2007) on the basis of data indicating that phocid species have consistently demonstrated an extended frequency range of hearing compared to otariids, especially in the higher frequency range (Hemilä et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., 2009; Reichmuth and Holt, 2013).

    For more detail concerning these groups and associated frequency ranges, please see NMFS (2016a) for a review of available information. Eight marine mammal species (6 cetacean and 2 pinniped (1 otariid and 1 phocid species) have the reasonable potential to co-occur with the proposed survey activities. Please refer to Table 1. Of the cetacean species that may be present, three are classified as low-frequency cetaceans (i.e., all mysticete species), two are classified as mid-frequency cetaceans (i.e., all delphinid and ziphiid species), and two are classified as high-frequency cetaceans (i.e., harbor porpoise).

    Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat

    This section includes a summary and discussion of the ways that components of the specified activity may impact marine mammals and their habitat. The “Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment” section later in this document will include a quantitative analysis of the number of individuals that are expected to be taken by this activity. The “Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination” section will consider the content of this section, the “Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment” section, and the “Proposed Mitigation” section, to draw conclusions regarding the likely impacts of these activities on the reproductive success or survivorship of individuals and how those impacts on individuals are likely to impact marine mammal species or stocks.

    The USCG Monterey Station Project involves in-water pile driving and pile removal that could adversely affect marine mammal species and stocks by exposing them to elevated underwater noise levels in the vicinity of the activity area. Although marine mammals (primarily pinnipeds hauled out on the adjacent jetty) could be exposed to airborne noise associated with pile replacement, airborne noise would likely cause behavioral responses similar to those discussed below in relation to underwater noise and is accounted for in the “Estimated Take” section and therefore is not discussed further.

    Exposure to high intensity sound for a sufficient duration may result in auditory effects such as a noise-induced threshold shift (TS)—an increase in the auditory threshold after exposure to noise (Finneran et al. 2005). Factors that influence the amount of threshold shift include the amplitude, duration, frequency content, temporal pattern, and energy distribution of noise exposure. The magnitude of hearing threshold shift normally decreases over time following cessation of the noise exposure. The amount of threshold shift just after exposure is the initial threshold shift. If the threshold shift eventually returns to zero (i.e., the threshold returns to the pre-exposure value), it is a temporary threshold shift (Southall et al. 2007).

    Threshold Shift (noise-induced loss of hearing)—When animals exhibit reduced hearing sensitivity (i.e., sounds must be louder for an animal to detect them) following exposure to an intense sound or sound for long duration, it is referred to as TS. An animal can experience temporary threshold shift (TTS) or permanent threshold shift (PTS). TTS can last from minutes or hours to days (i.e., there is complete recovery), can occur in specific frequency ranges (i.e., an animal might only have a temporary loss of hearing sensitivity between the frequencies of 1 and 10 kHz), and can be of varying amounts (for example, an animal's hearing sensitivity might be reduced initially by only 6 dB or reduced by 30 dB). PTS is permanent, but some recovery is possible. PTS can also occur in a specific frequency range and amount as mentioned above for TTS.

    For marine mammals, published data are limited to the captive bottlenose dolphin, beluga, harbor porpoise, and Yangtze finless porpoise (Finneran et al., 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2010a, 2010b; Finneran and Schlundt, 2010; Lucke et al., 2009; Mooney et al., 2009a, 2009b; Popov et al., 2011a, 2011b; Kastelein et al., 2012a; Schlundt et al., 2000; Nachtigall et al., 2003, 2004). For pinnipeds in water, data are limited to measurements of TTS in harbor seals, an elephant seal, and California sea lions (Kastak et al., 1999, 2005; Kastelein et al., 2012b).

    Marine mammal hearing plays a critical role in communication with conspecifics, and interpretation of environmental cues for purposes such as predator avoidance and prey capture. Depending on the degree (elevation of threshold in dB), duration (i.e., recovery time), and frequency range of TTS, and the context in which it is experienced, TTS can have effects on marine mammals ranging from discountable to serious (similar to those discussed in auditory masking, below). For example, a marine mammal may be able to readily compensate for a brief, relatively small amount of TTS in a non-critical frequency range that occurs during a time where ambient noise is lower and there are not as many competing sounds present. Alternatively, a larger amount and longer duration of TTS sustained during time when communication is critical for successful mother/calf interactions could have more serious impacts. Also, depending on the degree and frequency range, the effects of PTS on an animal could range in severity, although it is considered generally more serious because it is a permanent condition. Of note, reduced hearing sensitivity as a simple function of aging has been observed in marine mammals, as well as humans and other taxa (Southall et al. 2007), so one can infer that strategies exist for coping with this condition to some degree, though likely not without cost.

    Masking—In addition, chronic exposure to excessive, though not high-intensity, noise could cause masking at particular frequencies for marine mammals that utilize sound for vital biological functions (Clark et al. 2009). Acoustic masking is when other noises such as from human sources interfere with animal detection of acoustic signals such as communication calls, echolocation sounds, and environmental sounds important to marine mammals. Therefore, under certain circumstances, marine mammals whose acoustical sensors or environment are being severely masked could also be impaired from maximizing their performance fitness in survival and reproduction.

    Masking occurs at the frequency band that the animals utilize. Therefore, since noise generated from vibratory pile driving activity is mostly concentrated at low frequency ranges, it may have less effect on high frequency echolocation sounds by odontocetes (toothed whales). However, lower frequency man-made noises are more likely to affect detection of communication calls and other potentially important natural sounds such as surf and prey noise. It may also affect communication signals when they occur near the noise band and thus reduce the communication space of animals (e.g., Clark et al. 2009) and cause increased stress levels (e.g., Foote et al. 2004; Holt et al. 2009).

    Unlike TS, masking, which can occur over large temporal and spatial scales, can potentially affect the species at population, community, or even ecosystem levels, as well as individual levels. Masking affects both senders and receivers of the signals and could have long-term chronic effects on marine mammal species and populations. Recent science suggests that low frequency ambient sound levels have increased by as much as 20 dB (more than three times in terms of sound pressure level) in the world's ocean from pre-industrial periods, and most of these increases are from distant shipping (Hildebrand 2009).

    Behavioral disturbance—Finally, marine mammals' exposure to certain sounds could lead to behavioral disturbance (Richardson et al., 1995), such as: Changing durations of surfacing and dives, number of blows per surfacing, or moving direction and/or speed; reduced/increased vocal activities; changing/cessation of certain behavioral activities (such as socializing or feeding); visible startle response or aggressive behavior (such as tail/fluke slapping or jaw clapping); avoidance of areas where noise sources are located; and/or flight responses (e.g., pinnipeds flushing into water from haulouts or rookeries).

    The onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic noise depends on both external factors (characteristics of noise sources and their paths) and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation, experience, demography) and is also difficult to predict (Southall et al., 2007). Currently NMFS uses a received level of 160 dB re 1 μPa root mean square (rms) to predict the onset of behavioral harassment from impulse noises (such as impact pile driving), and 120 dB re 1 μPa (rms) for continuous noises (such as vibratory pile driving). For the proposed USCG Monterey Station Project, both of these noise levels are considered for effects analysis because the USCG plans to use both impact and vibratory pile driving, as well as vibratory pile removal.

    The biological significance of many of these behavioral disturbances is difficult to predict, especially if the detected disturbances appear minor. However, the consequences of behavioral modification could be biologically significant if the change affects growth, survival, and/or reproduction, which depends on the severity, duration, and context of the effects.

    Habitat—The primary potential impacts to marine mammal habitat are associated with elevated sound levels produced by pile driving and removal associated with marine mammal prey species. However, other potential impacts to the surrounding habitat and prey species from physical disturbance are also possible.

    No permanent impacts to habitat are proposed to or would occur as a result of the proposed project. The USCG's proposed Station Monterey waterfront repair activity would not increase the pier's existing footprint, and no new structures would be installed that would result in the loss of additional habitat. A temporary, small-scale loss of foraging habitat may occur for marine mammals if marine mammals leave the area during pile extraction and driving activities.

    Short-term turbidity is a water quality effect of most in-water work, including pile driving. Cetaceans are not expected to be close enough to the Monterey Station Project to experience turbidity, and any pinnipeds will be transiting the terminal area and could avoid localized areas of turbidity. Therefore, the impact from increased turbidity levels is expected to be discountable to marine mammals.

    Acoustic energy created during pile replacement work would have the potential to disturb fish within the vicinity of the pile replacement work. As a result, the affected area could temporarily lose foraging value to marine mammals. During pile driving, high noise levels may exclude fish from the vicinity of pile driving. Hastings and Popper (2005) identified several studies that suggest fish will relocate to avoid areas of damaging noise energy. Therefore, if fish leave the area of disturbance, pinniped foraging habitat may have temporarily decreased foraging value when piles are driven using impact hammering. The duration of fish avoidance of this area after pile driving stops is unknown. However, the affected area represents an extremely small portion of the total area within foraging range of marine mammals that may be present in the project area.

    Monterey Bay is classified as Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act, as amended by the Sustainable Fisheries Act. The EFH provisions of the Sustainable Fisheries Act are designed to protect fisheries habitat from being lost due to disturbance and degradation. The act requires implementation of measures to conserve and enhance EFH. The Monterey Bay is classified as an EFH for 118 species of commercially important fish, 30 of which have potential to occur within the project area. Some of these species are likely prey to pinnipeds. In addition to EFH designations, portions of the Monterey Bay are designated as a Habitat Area of Particular Concern (HAPC) for various fish species within the Pacific Groundfish, Pacific Coast Salmon, Highly Migratory Species, and Coastal Pelagic Fisheries management plans. A concurrence letter was issued by NMFS (2013) (and still applies) concluding that the proposed action would adversely affect EFH for various federally managed fish species, including a temporary increase in suspended sediments in the water column from pile driving and removal, conversion of soft bottom habitat to artificial substrate, and an increase in underwater sound levels in the water column associated with pile driving. However, the project includes measures to avoid, minimize, or otherwise offset adverse effects, such that NMFS has no further EFH conservation recommendations to provide (NOAA 2013).

    During construction activity of the proposed USCG Monterey Station Project, only a small fraction of the available habitat of the Monterey Harbor would be ensonified within Monterey Bay at any given time. Disturbance to fish species would be short-term and fish would be expected to return to their pre-disturbance behavior once the pile driving activity ceases (refer to the USCG's SEA). The impacts to marine mammals and the food sources that they utilize are not expected to cause significant or long-term consequences for individual marine mammals or their populations. For all the discussed above reasons, any adverse effects to marine mammal habitat in the area from the USCG's proposed Monterey Station project would not be significant.

    Estimated Take

    This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes proposed for authorization through this IHA, which will inform both NMFS's consideration of whether the number of takes is “small” and the negligible impact determination.

    Harassment is the only type of take expected to result from these activities. Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines “harassment” as: Any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment); or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering (Level B harassment).

    Authorized takes would be by Level B harassment only, in the form of disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals resulting from exposure to noise from pile driving and removal activities. Based on the nature of the activity and the anticipated effectiveness of the mitigation measures (i.e., shutdown measures—discussed in detail below in Proposed Mitigation section), Level A harassment is neither anticipated nor proposed to be authorized.

    As described previously, no mortality is anticipated or proposed to be authorized for this activity. Below we describe how the take is estimated.

    Described in the most basic way, we estimate take by considering: (1) Acoustic thresholds above which NMFS believes the best available science indicates marine mammals will be behaviorally harassed or incur some degree of hearing impairment; (2) the area or volume of water that will be ensonified above these levels in a day; (3) the density or occurrence of marine mammals within these ensonified areas; and, (4) and the number of days of activities. Below, we describe these components in more detail and present the proposed take estimate.

    Acoustic Thresholds

    Using the best available science, NMFS has developed acoustic thresholds that identify the received level of underwater sound above which exposed marine mammals would be reasonably expected to be behaviorally harassed (equated to Level B harassment) or to incur PTS of some degree (equated to Level A harassment).

    Level B Harassment for non-explosive sources—Though significantly driven by received level, the onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic noise exposure is also informed to varying degrees by other factors related to the source (e.g., frequency, predictability, duty cycle), the environment (e.g., bathymetry), and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation, experience, demography, behavioral context) and can be difficult to predict (Southall et al. 2007, Ellison et al. 2011). Based on what the available science indicates and the practical need to use a threshold based on a factor that is both predictable and measurable for most activities, NMFS uses a generalized acoustic threshold based on received level to estimate the onset of behavioral harassment. NMFS predicts that marine mammals are likely to be behaviorally harassed in a manner we consider Level B harassment when exposed to underwater anthropogenic noise above received levels of 120 dB re 1 μPa (rms) for continuous (e.g., vibratory pile-driving, drilling) sources and above 160 dB re 1 μPa (rms) for non-explosive impulsive (e.g., seismic airguns) or intermittent (e.g., scientific sonar) sources. USCG's proposed activity includes the use of continuous (vibratory pile driving and removal) and impulsive (impact pile driving) sources, and therefore the 120 and 160 dB re 1 μPa (rms) are applicable.

    Level A harassment for non-explosive sources—NMFS's Technical Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing (NMFS, 2016a) identifies dual criteria to assess auditory injury (Level A harassment) to five different marine mammal groups (based on hearing sensitivity) as a result of exposure to noise from two different types of sources (impulsive or non-impulsive). USCG's proposed activity includes the use of non-impulsive (vibratory pile driving and removal) and impulsive (impact pile driving) sources.

    These thresholds were developed by compiling and synthesizing the best available science and soliciting input multiple times from both the public and peer reviewers to inform the final product, and are provided in Table 2 below. The references, analysis, and methodology used in the development of the thresholds are described in NMFS 2016 Technical Guidance, which may be accessed at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/acoustics/guidelines.htm.

    Table 2—Thresholds Identifying the Onset of Permanent Threshold Shift Hearing group PTS onset thresholds Impulsive Non-impulsive Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans L pk,flat: 219 dB; L E,LF,24h: 183 dB L E,LF,24h: 199 dB. Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans L pk,flat: 230 dB; L E,MF,24h: 185 dB L E,MF,24h: 198 dB. High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans L pk,flat: 202 dB; L E,HF,24h: 155 dB L E,HF,24h: 173 dB. Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) (Underwater) L pk,flat: 218 dB; L E,PW,24h: 185 dB L E,PW,24h: 201 dB. Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) (Underwater) L pk,flat: 232 dB; L E,OW,24h: 203 dB L E,OW,24h: 219 dB. * Dual metric acoustic thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for calculating PTS onset. If a non-impulsive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds should also be considered. Note: Peak sound pressure (Lpk) has a reference value of 1 μPa, and cumulative sound exposure level (LE) has a reference value of 1μPa2s. In this Table, thresholds are abbreviated to reflect American National Standards Institute standards (ANSI 2013). However, peak sound pressure is defined by ANSI as incorporating frequency weighting, which is not the intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence, the subscript “flat” is being included to indicate peak sound pressure should be flat weighted or unweighted within the generalized hearing range. The subscript associated with cumulative sound exposure level thresholds indicates the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds) and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The cumulative sound exposure level thresholds could be exceeded in a multitude of ways (i.e., varying exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible, it is valuable for action proponents to indicate the conditions under which these acoustic thresholds will be exceeded. Ensonified Area

    Here, we describe operational and environmental parameters of the activity that will feed into identifying the area ensonified above the acoustic thresholds.

    Background noise is the sound level that would exist without the proposed activity (pile driving and removal, in this case), while ambient sound levels are those without human activity (NOAA 2009). Natural actions that contribute to ambient noise include waves, wind, rainfall, current fluctuations, chemical composition, and biological sound sources (e.g., marine mammals, fish, and shrimp, Carr et al. 2006). Background noise levels will be compared to the NOAA/NMFS threshold levels designed to protect marine mammals to determine the Level B Harassment Zones for noise sources. The background noise at Monterey Harbor is relatively high due to boat traffic, foot traffic, and noise from the USCG Monterey Station.

    Pile installation would be adjacent to a rock jetty that would provide substantial underwater shielding of sound transmission to areas north (or through the jetty) (see Figure 1-2 of the Application).

    To more accurately estimate the extent of underwater noise, the software package SoundPlan was used to simulate the effect of the Monterey Breakwater in reducing underwater sound transmission from the proposed project (Illingworth and Rodkin, Inc. 2012). A conservative source level of 168 dB rms at 33 feet (ft) (10 meters (m)) level was used to characterize the sound that would be produced from vibratory pile installation (from data produced by the Navy for their Test Pile Program in Bangor, Washington and then also compared to CALTRANS data (see Appendix A of the application)). For the Navy's Test Pile Program, there was a considerable range in the rms levels measured across vibratory pile driving event, where the highest average rms level was 169 dB rms at 33 ft (10 m) for 36-inch piles. In comparison, the range of vibratory sound levels at 33 ft or 10 m reported by CALTRANS is 155 dB rms for 12-in diameter piles to 175 dB rms for 36-in piles (based on maximum 1-second rms levels). All of these piles were driven in relatively shallow water similar to Monterey Harbor. Because the USCG proposes to use 14-in steel piles, and to be conservative, the USCG input into Sound Plan an rms level greater than those for 12-in piles from CATLRANS data and closer to the rms level for 36-in piles from the CALTRANS and the Navy's Test Pile Program data.

    Table 3 shows the results of the modeled underwater noise analysis for vibratory pile driving where 120 dB RMS (Level B threshold) levels would end, and Figure 5-1 from the application shows the pattern of sound expected from vibratory pile extraction and pile installation, taking into account shielding from the Monterey Breakwater. From these data, a Level B zone of influence (ZOI) was calculated at approximately 7.3 square kilometers (km2). The modeled distances shown in the table below are likely an overestimate of the extent of underwater noise, because practical spreading loss (15 log10) sound propagation were assumed, and the Monterey Breakwater would likely reduce noise considerably faster than assumed. Per the sound assessment completed for the project (included in Appendix A of the application) the following assumptions and parameters were used for the analysis: For vibratory pile installation, it is estimated that it would take approximately 20 minutes (1200 seconds) to vibrate in each pile.

    Table 3—Modeled Extent of Level B Zones From Vibratory Pile Extraction and Driving Modeling scenario Level B Zone
  • (Distance to 120 dB rms)
  • Modeled north 2,000 m. Modeled northeast shoreline 2,400 m. Modeled east to shoreline 1,800 m. Modeled south to shoreline 550 m. Area of Influence 7.3 km2. Notes: dB = decibel, RMS = root mean square.

    The extent of underwater noise from impact pile driving was also predicted using the SoundPlan software package as described above for vibratory pile driving. Per the sound assessment completed for the project and included in Appendix A the following assumptions and parameters were used for the analysis: The assumption that a hammer is used that moves the pile at about 30 to 40 blows per minute, up to 20 minutes of impact pile driving would be required for each pile. Measurements conducted for the USCG Tongue Point Pier Repairs in the Columbia River were found to be most representative for this project. The Tongue Point Pier included installation of 24-in steel pipe piles. Average sound levels measured at Tongue Point include peak pressures of 189 to 207 dB, rms sound pressure levels of 178 to 189 dB, and SEL levels of 160 to 175 dB per strike at 33 ft (10 m). Due to the difference in pile sizes, use of the Tongue Point data would likely overestimate sound levels expected at the proposed USCG Station Monterey project. Based on the Tongue Point sound measurements, unattenuated near-source impact pile driving levels of 208 dB peak, 195 rms and 174 dB SEL were applied to this project. Table 4 shows the extent of noise levels for NMFS' acoustic criteria, assuming the use of noise attenuation (bubble curtain). Figure 5-3 of the application shows the extent of attenuated noise levels for impact pile driving out to the NMFS behavioral criterion of 160 dB rms. The area encompassed by the 160 dB criterion is approximately 0.27 km2.

    Table 4—Modeled Extent of Level B Zones From Impact Pile Driving Modeling scenario Distance to marine
  • mammal criteria
  • rms
  • (dB re: 1µPa)
  • 160 dB
  • (Level B Threshold)
  • Modeled attenuated noise transmission north and northeast (through breakwater) 76 m. Modeled attenuated noise transmission in all other directions 465 m. Area of Influence 0.27 km2. Notes: Assumes 10 dB of underwater noise attenuation by using a bubble curtain during pile driving Distances and method of calculation are presented in Appendix A of the application. dB = decibel. rms = root mean square (dB re: 1µPa).

    The incidental take requested is Level B harassment of any marine mammal occurring within the 160 dB rms disturbance threshold during impact pile driving of 14-in steel pipe piles; the 120 dB rms disturbance threshold for vibratory pile driving of 14-in steel pipe piles; and the 120 dB rms disturbance threshold for vibratory removal of 16-in to 18-in timber piles. Level B harassment zones have been established as described in Tables 3 and 4 that will be in place during active pile removal or installation.

    When NMFS Technical Guidance (NMFS 2016) was published, in recognition of the fact that ensonified area/volume could be more technically challenging to predict because of the duration component in the new thresholds, we developed a User Spreadsheet that includes tools to help predict a simple isopleth that can be used in conjunction with marine mammal density or occurrence to help predict takes. We note that because of some of the assumptions included in the methods used for these tools, we anticipate that isopleths produced are typically going to be overestimates of some degree, which will result in some degree of overestimate of Level A take. However, these tools offer the best way to predict appropriate isopleths when more sophisticated 3D modeling methods are not available, and NMFS continues to develop ways to quantitatively refine these tools, and will qualitatively address the output where appropriate. For stationary sources such as vibratory and impact pile driving, NMFS's User Spreadsheet predicts the closest distance at which, if a marine mammal remained at that distance the whole duration of the activity, it would not incur PTS. Inputs used in the User Spreadsheet, and the resulting isopleths are reported below (Tables 5 and 6).

    The PTS isopleths were identified for each hearing group for impact and vibratory installation and removal methods that will be used in the proposed Monterey Station Project. The PTS isopleth distances were calculated using the NMFS acoustic threshold calculator (NMFS 2016), with inputs based on measured and surrogate noise measurements. Data from the U.S Navy for their Test Pile Program at Bangor, Washington with a source level of 168 dB rms (at 10 m) was used to characterize the sound that would be produced from vibratory pile driving and removal. For impact pile driving, referenced data provided for similar piles and substrate identified in the California Department of Transportation Compendium of Pile Driving Sound Data Report (Caltrans 2007) with a source level (in SEL) of 174 dB at a distance of 10 m with an average of 30 strikes per pile.

    Table 5—NMFS Technical Acoustic Guidance User Spreadsheet Input To Predict PTS Isopleths User spreadsheet input Spreadsheet tab used Sound source 1 (A) Vibratory pile driving
  • (removal and installation)
  • Sound source 2 (E.1) Impact pile driving
  • (installation)
  • Source Level (rms SPL) 168 dB Source Level (Single Strike/shot SEL) 174 dB Weighting Factor Adjustment (kHz) 2.5 2 (a) Number of strikes in 1 h 30 (a) Activity Duration (h) within 24-h period 4 5 Propagation (xLogR) 15 15 Distance of source level measurement (meters) + 10 14
    Table 6—NMFS Technical Acoustic Guidance User Spreadsheet Output for Predicted PTS Isopleths and Level A Daily Ensonified Areas User spreadsheet output Sound source type Low-frequency cetaceans Mid-frequency cetaceans High-frequency cetaceans Phocid pinnipeds Otariid pinnipeds PTS Isopleth (meters) Vibratory (removal and installation) 50.4 4.5 74.5 30.6 2.2 Impact (installation) 70.8 2.5 84.4 37.9 2.8 Daily Ensonified Area (km2) Vibratory (pile removal and installation) 0.00798 0.00006 0.01744 0.00294 0.00002 Impact (installation) 0.01575 0.00002 0.02238 0.00451 0.00002 Marine Mammal Occurrence and Take Calculation and Estimation

    In this section we provide the information about the presence, density, or group dynamics of marine mammals that will inform the take calculation and we describe how the marine mammal occurrence information is brought together to produce a quantitative take estimate.

    Take estimates are based on the number of animals per unit area in the project area multiplied by the area size of ensonified zones within which received noise levels exceed certain thresholds (i.e., Level B harassment) from specific activities, then multiplied by the total number of days such activities would occur. Local abundance data are used for take calculations for the proposed authorized take where density is not available or applicable to the project area.

    Unless otherwise described, incidental take is estimated by the following equation:

    Incidental take estimate = species density * zone of influence (7.3 km2) * days of pile-related activity (8 days) Harbor Seals

    Pacific harbor seals are much less abundant in the project area than California sea lions, and only two annual surveys conducted since 1998 identified any individuals. The 2004 annual pinniped survey conducted by NMFS counted 28 Pacific harbor seals in Monterey Harbor in 2004, and 1 in 2005 (Lowry 2012). Pacific harbor seals hauled-out along Cannery Row, north of the Monterey Breakwater, ranged from 1 to 24 in 2002, 2004, and 2009. During repairs on the Pier in 2009, Pacific harbor seals were occasionally observed in the nearby waters, but were never observed to haul-out on the breakwater (Harvey and Hoover 2009). The density for harbor seals was determined by drawing a 5 km radius in ArcGIS with the jetty haul-out site at the center. The area within this circle was calculated, excluding the land, resulting in a 29 km2 foraging area. The calculation for take of Harbor seals estimate assumes 28 individuals (the most observed during any single survey) to be in the water at any given time within 5 km of the breakwater (area 29 km2); therefore, the calculated density is 0.97 seals/km2. The estimated Level B take is 0.97 seals multiplied by 7.3 km2 and 8 days of activity for a total of 57 harbor seals (see Table 7). Since the calculated Level A zones of phocids are small and mitigation is in place to avoid Level A take (Table 6), we do not consider it likely that any harbor seals would be taken by Level A harassment.

    California Sea Lions

    The calculation for Level B take of California sea lions in the water assumes an average density of 8.62 individuals/km2. This density was determined by drawing a 5 km radius in ArcGIS with the jetty haul-out site at the center. The area within this circle was calculated, excluding the land, resulting in a 29 km2 foraging area. An average of 250 sea lions were assumed in the water at any given time. Therefore, 250 sea lions divided by 29 km2 equals 8.62 sea lions/km2. Estimated take is then calculated using 8.62 sea lions multiplied by 7.3 km2 and 8 days of activity for a total of 504 California sea lions (see Table 7). For the additional California sea lions that are present on the breakwater (which we would also expect to enter the water during the project): The overall average number of sea lions for all of the surveys of the Monterey Breakwater combined was 250 individuals. Therefore, 250 animals was multiplied by 8 days of activity for a total of 2,000 California sea lions (see Table 7). Since the calculated Level A zones of otariids are all very small and mitigation is in place to avoid Level A take (Table 6), we do not consider it likely that any sea lions would be taken by Level A harassment.

    Killer Whale

    Due to the low frequency and unpredictability of killer whales entering the project area, the application of a density equation is not reasonable for predicting take. When killer whales enter Monterey Bay, they typically are in groups of 3 to 8 at a time (Guzman 2016). To be conservative, the proposed take estimate for Level B harassment is based on a larger group of eight animals that may enter the area (Table 7). Since the Level A zones of mid-frequency cetaceans are small and mitigation is in place to avoid Level A take (Table 6), we do not consider it likely that any killer whales would be taken by Level A harassment.

    Bottlenose Dolphin

    Abundance and densities of cetaceans in the California Current ecosystem were conducted from 1991 to 2005 (Barlow, Forney 2007). The results of the surveys indicate that bottlenose dolphin population density throughout the entire west coast shoreline is 1.78 individuals/100 km2. During the same survey, the mean group size for bottlenose dolphins observed in Central California was four individuals. Other, more recent data suggest that densities may be up to 0.04/km2 (Weller 2016). Even when using the higher density, estimated take results in very low numbers (<1 over the entire period of construction). Rather than using density calculations to estimate take, to be conservative, the proposed Level B take is a small pod of 10 bottlenose dolphins (Table 7). Since the Level A zones of mid-frequency cetaceans are small and mitigation is in place to avoid Level A take (Table 6), we do not consider it likely that any bottlenose dolphins would be taken by Level A harassment.

    Risso's Dolphin

    Because there is not reliable local data for Monterey Bay, the proposed Level B take estimate for Risso's dolphins is a single occurrence of a small pod of 10 animals (see Table 7) as groups of Risso's dolphins average between 10-30 animals. Since the Level A zones of mid-frequency cetaceans are small and mitigation is in place to avoid Level A take (Table 6), we do not consider it likely that any Risso's dolphin would be taken by Level A harassment.

    Harbor Porpoise

    An estimate of the density of harbor porpoise in the southern portion of Monterey Bay nearshore is approximately 2.321 per km2 (Forney et al. 2014). Therefore, the estimated take for Level B harassment is 2.231 porpoise multiplied by 7.3 km2 and 8 days of activity for a total of 136 harbor porpoise (see Table 7). Since the calculated Level A zones of high frequency cetaceans are small and mitigation is in place to avoid Level A take (Table 6), we do not consider it likely that any harbor porpoise would be taken by Level A harassment.

    Humpback Whale

    Humpback whales are typically found further offshore than gray whales and occurrence is rare; however, since 2014 greater numbers of humpback whales have been observed in and near Monterey Bay by whale-watching vessels. Because USCG will shutdown for all observed humpbacks (in Level A and B zones), no takes of humpback whales are proposed.

    Gray Whale

    The occurrence of gray whales is extremely rare near shore in the project area. If gray whales would approach the project area they would be more likely to occur during the spring migration north, when they tend to stay closer to shore than during the winter southern migration. The NOAA National Center for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS) reported densities of gray whales at 0.1 to 0.5 per km2 (NCCOS 2007); however, it is unclear how applicable these data are for the very near-shore environment of the project area. Therefore, instead of using density, the proposed Level B take of four gray whales is proposed for the project. Since the Level A zones of low-frequency cetaceans are small and mitigation is in place to avoid Level A take (see Table 6) we do not consider it likely that any gray whales would be taken by Level A harassment during removal or impact installation.

    Table 7—Summary of Requested Incidental Take by Level A and Level B Harassment Species Stock size Proposed
  • authorized
  • Level B take
  • Proposed
  • authorized total take
  • % of
  • Population
  • Pacific harbor seal (Phoca vitulina) 30,968 57 57 Less than 1. California sea lion (Zalophus californianus) 296,750 504 (Animals already in the water) 2,504 Less than 1. California sea lion (Zalophus californianus) 296,750 2,000 (Animals that enter the water from the breakwater) Transient killer whale (Orcinus orca) 240 8 8 3.33. Bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) 453 10 (single occurrence of a small pod) 10 4.19. Risso's dolphin (Grampus griseus) 6,336 10 (single occurrence of a small pod) 10 Less than 1. Harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) 3,715 136 136 3.66. Humpback whale (Megaptera novaengliae) 1,918 0* 0 0. Gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus) 20,990 4 4 Less than 1. * USCG will implement shutdown measures for any humpback observed; therefore, the take is considered to be zero.
    Proposed Mitigation

    In order to issue an IHA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to such activity, “and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on such species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on the availability of such species or stock for taking” for certain subsistence uses (latter not applicable for this action). NMFS regulations require applicants for incidental take authorizations to include information about the availability and feasibility (economic and technological) of equipment, methods, and manner of conducting such activity or other means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact upon the affected species or stocks and their habitat (50 CFR 216.104(a)(11)).

    In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and their habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, we carefully consider two primary factors:

    (1) The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful implementation of the measure(s) is expected to reduce impacts to marine mammals, marine mammal species or stocks, and their habitat. This considers the nature of the potential adverse impact being mitigated (likelihood, scope, range). It further considers the likelihood that the measure will be effective if implemented (probability of accomplishing the mitigating result if implemented as planned) the likelihood of effective implementation (probability implemented as planned), and;

    (2) the practicability of the measures for applicant implementation, which may consider such things as cost, impact on operations, and, in the case of a military readiness activity, personnel safety, practicality of implementation, and impact on the effectiveness of the military readiness activity.

    Several measures are proposed for mitigating effects on marine mammals from the pile installation and removal activities at for the USCG Monterey Station and are described below.

    Timing Restrictions

    All work would be conducted during daylight hours.

    Noise Attenuation

    A bubble curtain and cushion pads will be used during pile driving activities with an impact hammer to reduce sound levels. In addition, the USCG has proposed performing “pre-drilling.” Pre-drilling would be performed and would be discontinued when the pile tip is approximately five feet (ft) above the required pile tip elevation. Pre-drilling is a method that starts the “hole” for the new pile; the pile is inserted after the hole has been pre-drilled which creates less friction and overall noise and turbidity during installation.

    Exclusion Zones

    Exclusion Zones calculated from the PTS isopleths will be implemented to protect marine mammals from Level A harassment (refer to Table 6). If a marine mammal is observed at or within the Exclusion Zone, work will shut down (stop work) until the individual has been observed outside of the zone, or has not been observed for at least 15 minutes for pinnipeds and small cetaceans and 30 minutes for large whales.

    Additional Shutdown Measures

    If a humpback whale is observed within the Level A or Level B zones, the USCG will implement shutdown measures. Work would not commence until 30-minutes after the last sighting of a humpback within these zones.

    During impact pile driving because the Level B Zone is smaller (76 m) compared to the Level A Zone (84.4 m) for high frequency cetaceans for noise transmission north and northeast (through breakwater), the USCG will consider both the Level A and B zones to be at 84.4 m and will implement shutdown measures.

    USCG will implement shutdown measures if the number of authorized takes for any particular species reaches the limit under the IHA and if such marine mammals are sighted within the vicinity of the project area and are approaching the Level B harassment zone during in-water construction activities.

    If a marine mammal species under NMFS' jurisdiction is observed within the Level A or B zones that has not been authorized for take, the USCG will implement shutdown measures.

    Level B Harassment Zones

    USCG will monitor the Level B harassment ZOIs as described in Tables 3 and 4.

    Soft-Start for Impact Pile Driving

    For impact pile installation, contractors will provide an initial set of three strikes from the impact hammer at 40 percent energy, followed by a one-minute waiting period, then two subsequent three-strike sets. Each day, USCG will use the soft-start technique at the beginning of impact pile driving, or if impact pile driving has ceased for more than 30 minutes.

    Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, as well as other measures considered by NMFS, NMFS has preliminarily determined that the proposed mitigation measures provide the means of effecting the least practicable impact on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance.

    Proposed Monitoring and Reporting

    In order to issue an IHA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth, “requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of such taking.” The MMPA implementing regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for authorizations must include the suggested means of accomplishing the necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present in the proposed action area. Effective reporting is critical both to compliance as well as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the required monitoring.

    Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following:

    • Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area in which take is anticipated (e.g., presence, abundance, distribution, density).

    • Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or chronic), through better understanding of: (1) Action or environment (e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2) affected species (e.g., life history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence of marine mammal species with the action; or (4) biological or behavioral context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or feeding areas).

    • Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative), other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors.

    • How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1) Long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2) populations, species, or stocks.

    • Effects on marine mammal habitat (e.g., marine mammal prey species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of marine mammal habitat).

    • Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.

    Marine mammal monitoring will be conducted in strategic locations around the area of potential effects at all times during in-water pile driving and removal as described below:

    • During pile removal or installation the observer will monitor from the most practicable vantage point possible (i.e., the pier itself, the breakwater, adjacent boat docks in the harbor, or a boat) to determine whether marine mammals enter the exclusion zone and to record take when marine mammals enter the relevant Level B Harassment Zones based on type of construction activity.

    • If a marine mammal approaches an Exclusion Zone, the observation will be reported to the Construction Manager and the individual will be watched closely. If the marine mammal crosses into an Exclusion Zone, a stop-work order will be issued. In the event that a stop-work order is triggered, the observed marine mammal(s) will be closely monitored while it remains in or near the Exclusion Zone, and only when it moves well outside of the Exclusion Zone or has not been observed for at least 15 minutes for pinnipeds and 30 minutes for whales will the lead monitor allow work to recommence.

    Protected Species Observers

    USCG shall employ NMFS-approved protected species observers (PSOs) to conduct marine mammal monitoring for its Monterey Station Project. The PSOs will observe and collect data on marine mammals in and around the project area for 30 minutes before, during, and for 30 minutes after all pile removal and pile installation work. NMFS-approved PSOs shall meet the following requirements:

    1. Visual acuity in both eyes (correction is permissible) sufficient for discernment of moving targets at the water's surface with ability to estimate target size and distance. Use of binoculars may be necessary to correctly identify the target.

    2. Advanced education in biological science, wildlife management, mammalogy or related fields (Bachelors degree or higher is preferred), but not required.

    3. Experience or training in the field identification of marine mammals (cetaceans and pinnipeds).

    4. Sufficient training, orientation or experience with the construction operation to provide for personal safety during observations.

    5. Ability to communicate orally, by radio or in person, with project personnel to provide real time information on marine mammals observed in the area as necessary.

    6. Experience and ability to conduct field observations and collect data according to assigned protocols (this may include academic experience).

    7. Writing skills sufficient to prepare a report of observations that would include such information as the number and type of marine mammals observed; the behavior of marine mammals in the project area during construction, dates and times when observations were conducted; dates and times when in-water construction activities were conducted; and dates and times when marine mammals were present at or within the defined ZOI.

    8. If a team of three or more observers are required, one observer should be designated as lead observer or monitoring coordinator. The lead observer must have prior experience working as an observer.

    9. NMFS will require submission and approval of observer CVs.

    10. PSOs will monitor marine mammals around the construction site using high-quality binoculars (e.g., Zeiss, 10 x 42 power) and/or spotting scopes.

    11. If marine mammals are observed, the following information will be documented:

    (A) Date and time that monitored activity begins or ends;

    (B) Construction activities occurring during each observation period;

    (C) Weather parameters (e.g., percent cover, visibility);

    (D) Water conditions (e.g., sea state, tide state);

    (E) Species, numbers, and, if possible, sex and age class of marine mammals;

    (F) Description of any observable marine mammal behavior patterns, including bearing and direction of travel and distance from pile driving activity;

    (G) Distance from pile driving activities to marine mammals and distance from the marine mammals to the observation point;

    (H) Locations of all marine mammal observations; and

    (I) Other human activity in the area.

    Proposed Reporting Measures Marine Mammal Monitoring Report

    USCG would be required to submit a draft marine mammal monitoring report within 90 days after completion of the in-water construction work or the expiration of the IHA (if issued), whichever comes earlier. The report would include data from marine mammal sightings as described: Date, time, location, species, group size, and behavior, any observed reactions to construction, distance to operating pile hammer, and construction activities occurring at time of sighting and environmental data for the period (i.e., wind speed and direction, sea state, tidal state, cloud cover, and visibility). The marine mammal monitoring report will also include total takes, takes by day, and stop-work orders for each species. NMFS would have an opportunity to provide comments on the report, and if NMFS has comments, USCG would address the comments and submit a final report to NMFS within 30 days.

    In the unanticipated event that the specified activity clearly causes the take of a marine mammal in a manner prohibited by the IHA (if issued), such as an injury (Level A harassment), serious injury, or mortality, USCG would immediately cease the specified activities and immediately report the incident to the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS and the NMFS' West Coast Stranding Coordinator. The report must include the following information:

    • Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the incident;

    • Description of the incident;

    • Status of all sound source use in the 24 hrs preceding the incident;

    • Water depth;

    • Environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction, sea state, cloud cover, and visibility);

    • Description of all marine mammal observations in the 24 hrs preceding the incident;

    • Species identification or description of the animal(s) involved;

    • Fate of the animal(s); and

    • Photographs or video footage of the animal(s) (if equipment is available).

    Activities would not resume until NMFS is able to review the circumstances of the prohibited take. NMFS would work with USCG to determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of further prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. USCG may not resume their activities until notified by NMFS via letter, email, or telephone.

    Reporting of Injured or Dead Marine Mammals

    In the event that the USCG discovers an injured or dead marine mammal, and the lead PSO determines that the cause of the injury or death is unknown and the death is relatively recent (i.e., in less than a moderate state of decomposition as described in the next paragraph), USCG would immediately report the incident to the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS and the NMFS' West Coast Stranding Coordinator. The report must include the same information identified in the paragraph above. Activities may continue while NMFS reviews the circumstances of the incident. NMFS would work with USCG to determine whether modifications in the activities are appropriate.

    In the event that USCG discovers an injured or dead marine mammal, and the lead PSO determines that the injury or death is not associated with or related to the activities authorized in the IHA (e.g., previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced decomposition, or scavenger damage), USCG would report the incident to the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS and the NMFS Stranding Hotline and/or by email to the NMFS' West Coast Stranding Coordinator within 24 hrs of the discovery. USCG would provide photographs or video footage (if available) or other documentation of the stranded animal sighting to NMFS. Activities may continue while NMFS reviews the circumstances of the incident.

    Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination

    NMFS has defined negligible impact as “an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival” (50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-level effects). An estimate of the number of takes alone is not enough information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be “taken” through harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the likely nature of any responses (e.g., intensity, duration), the context of any responses (e.g., critical reproductive time or location, migration), as well as effects on habitat, and the likely effectiveness of the mitigation. We also assess the number, intensity, and context of estimated takes by evaluating this information relative to population status. Consistent with the 1989 preamble for NMFS's implementing regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, 1989), the impacts from other past and ongoing anthropogenic activities are incorporated into this analysis via their impacts on the environmental baseline (e.g., as reflected in the regulatory status of the species, population size and growth rate where known, ongoing sources of human-caused mortality, or ambient noise levels).

    No serious injury or mortality is anticipated or proposed to be authorized for the Monterey Station Project. Takes that are anticipated and proposed to be authorized are expected to be limited to short-term Level B harassment (behavioral) only. Marine mammals present in the vicinity of the action area and taken by Level B harassment would most likely show overt brief disturbance (startle reaction) and avoidance of the area from elevated noise levels during pile driving and pile removal and the implosion noise.

    There is one endangered species that may occur in the project area, humpback whales. However, if any humpbacks are detected within the Level B harassment zone of the project area, the USCG will shut down.

    The Monterey Breakwater is a haulout location for approximately 250 California sea lions. There no other know critical habitat areas, haulouts or import feeding areas in close proximately to the project area.

    The project also is not expected to have significant adverse effects on affected marine mammals' habitat, as analyzed in detail in the “Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and their Habitat” section. Project activities would not permanently modify existing marine mammal habitat. The activities may kill some fish and cause other fish to leave the area temporarily, thus impacting marine mammals' foraging opportunities in a limited portion of the foraging range; but, because of the short duration of the activities and the relatively small area of the habitat that may be affected, the impacts to marine mammal habitat are not expected to cause significant or long-term negative consequences. Therefore, given the consideration of potential impacts to marine mammal prey species and their physical environment, USCG's proposed Monterey Station would not adversely affect marine mammal habitat.

    In summary and as described above, the following factors primarily support our preliminary determination that the impacts resulting from this activity are not expected to adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:

    • No serious injury or mortality is anticipated or authorized.

    • Takes that are anticipated and proposed to be authorized are expected to be limited to short-term Level B harassment (behavioral).

    • The project also is not expected to have significant adverse effects on affected marine mammals' habitat.

    • There are no known important feeding or pupping areas. There is one haulout (the breakwater) within the project area. There are no other known important areas for marine mammals with the footprint of the project area.

    • For five out of eight species, take is less than one percent of the stock abundance. Instances of take for the other three species (killer whale, bottlenose dolphin, and harbor porpoise) range from 3-4 percent of the stock abundance.

    Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into consideration the implementation of the proposed monitoring and mitigation measures, NMFS preliminarily finds that the total marine mammal take from the proposed activity will have a negligible impact on all affected marine mammal species or stocks.

    Small Numbers

    As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be authorized under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA for specified activities other than military readiness activities. The MMPA does not define small numbers and so, in practice, where estimated numbers are available, NMFS compares the number of individuals taken to the most appropriate estimation of abundance of the relevant species or stock in our determination of whether an authorization is limited to small numbers of marine mammals. Additionally, other factors may be considered in the analysis, such as the temporal or spatial scale of the activities.

    For five out of eight species, take is less than one percent of the stock abundance. Instances of take for the other three species (killer whale, bottlenose dolphin, and harbor porpoise) range from 3-4 percent of the stock abundance. Based on the analysis contained herein of the proposed activity (including the proposed mitigation and monitoring measures) and the anticipated take of marine mammals, NMFS preliminarily finds that small numbers of marine mammals will be taken relative to the population sizes of the affected species or stocks.

    Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis and Determination

    There are no relevant subsistence uses of the affected marine mammal stocks or species implicated by this action. Therefore, NMFS has determined that the total taking of affected species or stocks would not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such species or stocks for taking for subsistence purposes.

    Endangered Species Act (ESA)

    Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal agency insure that any action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat. To ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of IHAs, NMFS consults internally, in this case with the West Coast Regional Office, whenever we propose to authorize take for endangered or threatened species.

    NMFS is proposing to not authorize take of humpback whales, which are listed under the ESA, as the applicant will implement shutdown measures whenever humpbacks are observed (Level A or B). Therefore, consultation under section 7 of the ESA is not required.

    The Permit and Conservation Division has requested initiation of section 7 consultation with the West Coast Regional Office for the issuance of this IHA. NMFS will conclude the ESA consultation prior to reaching a determination regarding the proposed issuance of the authorization.

    Proposed Authorization

    As a result of these preliminary determinations, NMFS proposes to issue an IHA to the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) for conducting pile driving and removal activities at the USCG Monterey Station, Monterey, California from October 2017 to October 2018, provided the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated. This section contains a draft of the IHA itself. The wording contained in this section is proposed for inclusion in the IHA (if issued).

    The proposed IHA language is provided next.

    1. This Authorization is valid from October 16, 2017, through October 15, 2018.

    2. This Authorization is valid only for activities associated with in-water construction work at the USCG Monterey Station Project, Monterey, California.

    3. General Condition.

    (a) The species authorized for taking, by Level B harassment only, and in the numbers shown in Table 7 are: California sea lion (Zalophus californianus), Pacific harbor seal (Phoca vitulina), harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), Risso's dolphin (Grampus griseus), bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncates), killer whale (Orcinus orca), and gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus).

    (b) The authorization for taking by harassment is limited to the following acoustic sources and from the following activities:

    Impact pile driving;

    Vibratory pile driving; and

    Vibratory pile removal

    4. Prohibitions.

    (a) The taking, by incidental harassment only, is limited to the species listed under condition 3(a) above and by the numbers listed in Table 7 of this notice. The taking by serious injury or death of these species or the taking by harassment, injury or death of any other species of marine mammal is prohibited unless separately authorized or exempted under the MMPA and may result in the modification, suspension, or revocation of this Authorization.

    (b) The taking of any marine mammal is prohibited whenever the required protected species observers (PSOs), required by condition 6(b), are not present in conformance with condition 6(b) of this Authorization.

    5. Mitigation.

    (a) Time Restriction.

    In-water construction work shall occur only during daylight hours.

    (b) Noise Attenuation.

    A bubble curtain and cushion pads shall be used during pile driving activities with an impact hammer to reduce sound levels. In addition, the USCG has proposed performing “pre-drilling.” Pre-drilling shall be performed and would be discontinued when the pile tip is approximately five ft above the required pile tip elevation. Pre-drilling is a method that starts the “hole” for the new pile; the pile is inserted after the hole has been pre-drilled which creates less friction and overall noise and turbidity during installation.

    (c) Level B Harassment Zones.

    USCG shall monitor the Level B harassment ZOIs as described in Table 3 and 4 of this notice.

    (d) Exclusion Zones.

    USCG shall shut down (stop work) in the Exclusion Zones using the PTS isopleths as described in Table 6 of this notice to protect marine mammals from Level A harassment.

    (i) USCG shall implement a minimum shutdown zone of 10 m radius around each pile for all construction methods other than pile driving for all marine mammals.

    (ii) If a marine mammal is observed at or within the Exclusion Zone, work shall stop until the individual has been observed outside of the zone, or has not been observed for at least 15 minutes for pinnipeds and small cetaceans and 30 minutes for large whales.

    (e) Additional Shutdown Measures.

    (i) If a humpback whale is observed within the Level A or Level B zones, the USCG shall implement shutdown measures. Work would not commence until 30-minutes after the last sighting of a humpback within these zones.

    (ii) USCG shall implement shutdown measures if the number of authorized takes for any particular species reaches the limit under the IHA and if such marine mammals are sighted within the vicinity of the project area and are approaching the Level B harassment zone during in-water construction activities.

    (iii) During impact pile driving because the Level B Zone is smaller (76 m) compared to the Level A Zone (84.4 m) for high frequency cetaceans for noise transmission north and northeast (through breakwater), the USCG shall consider both the Level A and B zones to be at 84.4 m and will implement shutdown measures.

    (iv) If a species is observed within the Level A or B zones that has not been authorized for take, the USCG shall implement shutdown measures.

    (f) Soft-Start for Impact Pile Driving.

    For impact pile installation, contractors will provide an initial set of three strikes from the impact hammer at 40 percent energy, followed by a one-minute waiting period, then two subsequent three-strike sets.

    6. Monitoring.

    (a) Protected Species Observers.

    USCG shall employ NMFS-approved PSOs to conduct marine mammal monitoring for its construction project. NMFS-approved PSOs will meet the following qualifications.

    (i) Visual acuity in both eyes (correction is permissible) sufficient for discernment of moving targets at the water's surface with ability to estimate target size and distance. Use of binoculars may be necessary to correctly identify the target.

    (ii) Advanced education in biological science, wildlife management, mammalogy or related fields (Bachelors degree or higher is preferred), but not required.

    (iii) Experience or training in the field identification of marine mammals (cetaceans and pinnipeds).

    (iv) Sufficient training, orientation or experience with the construction operation to provide for personal safety during observations.

    (v) Ability to communicate orally, by radio or in person, with project personnel to provide real time information on marine mammals observed in the area as necessary.

    (vi) Experience and ability to conduct field observations and collect data according to assigned protocols (this may include academic experience).

    (vii) Writing skills sufficient to prepare a report of observations that would include such information as the number and type of marine mammals observed; the behavior of marine mammals in the project area during construction, dates and times when observations were conducted; dates and times when in-water construction activities were conducted; and dates and times when marine mammals were present at or within the defined ZOI.

    (viii) If a team of three or more observers are required, one observer should be designated as lead observer or monitoring coordinator. The lead observer must have prior experience working as an observer.

    (ix) NMFS shall require submission and approval of observer CVs.

    (b) Monitoring Protocols: PSOs shall be present on site at all times during pile removal and driving.

    (i) A 30-minute pre-construction marine mammal monitoring shall be required before the first pile driving or pile removal of the day. A 30-minute post-construction marine mammal monitoring shall be required after the last pile driving or pile removal of the day. If the constructors take a break between subsequent pile driving or pile removal for more than 30 minutes, then additional 30-minute pre-construction marine mammal monitoring shall be required before the next start-up of pile driving or pile removal.

    (ii) During pile removal or installation, the monitors shall be positioned such that each monitor has a most practicable vantage point possible (i.e., the pier itself, the breakwater, adjacent boat docks in the harbor, or a boat) and distinct view-shed and the monitors collectively have overlapping view-sheds.

    (iii) Monitors shall record take when marine mammals enter their relevant Level B Harassment Zones based on type of construction activity.

    (iv) If a marine mammal approaches an Exclusion Zone, the observation shall be reported to the Construction Manager and the individual shall be watched closely. If the marine mammal crosses into an Exclusion Zone, a stop-work order shall be issued. In the event that a stop-work order is triggered, the observed marine mammal(s) shall be closely monitored while it remains in or near the Exclusion Zone, and only when it moves well outside of the Exclusion Zone or has not been observed for at least 15 minutes for pinnipeds and small cetaceans and 30 minutes for large whales shall the lead monitor allow work to recommence.

    (v) PSOs shall monitor marine mammals around the construction site using high-quality binoculars (e.g., Zeiss, 10 x 42 power) and/or spotting scopes.

    (vi) If marine mammals are observed, the following information shall be documented:

    (A) Date and time that monitored activity begins or ends;

    (B) Construction activities occurring during each observation period;

    (C) Weather parameters (e.g., percent cover, visibility);

    (D) Water conditions (e.g., sea state, tide state);

    (E) Species, numbers, and, if possible, sex and age class of marine mammals;

    (F) Description of any observable marine mammal behavior patterns, including bearing and direction of travel and distance from pile driving activity;

    (G) Distance from pile driving activities to marine mammals and distance from the marine mammals to the observation point;

    (H) Locations of all marine mammal observations; and

    (I) Other human activity in the area.

    (viii) Acoustic Monitoring—USCG shall conduct acoustic monitoring and background noise recordings (in the absence of pile-related work) following the NMFS's 2012 Guidance Documents: Sound Propagation Modeling to Characterize Pile Driving Sounds Relevant to Marine Mammals and Data Collection Methods to Characterize Underwater Background Sound Relevant to Marine Mammals in Coastal Nearshore Waters and Rivers of Washington and Oregon.

    7. Reporting.

    (a) Marine Mammal Monitoring.

    (i) USCG shall submit a draft marine mammal monitoring report within 90 days after completion of the in-water construction work or the expiration of the IHA (if issued), whichever comes earlier. The report shall include data from marine mammal sightings as described: date, time, location, species, group size, and behavior, any observed reactions to construction, distance to operating pile hammer, and construction activities occurring at time of sighting and environmental data for the period (i.e., wind speed and direction, sea state, tidal state, cloud cover, and visibility). The marine mammal monitoring report shall also include total takes, takes by day, and stop-work orders for each species.

    (ii) If comments are received from NMFS Office of Protected Resources on the draft report, a final report shall be submitted to NMFS within 30 days thereafter. If no comments are received from NMFS, the draft report shall be considered to be the final report.

    (iii) In the unanticipated event that the specified activity clearly causes the take of a marine mammal in a manner prohibited by the IHA (if issued), such as an injury (Level A harassment), serious injury, or mortality, USCG shall immediately cease the specified activities and immediately report the incident to the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS and the NMFS' West Coast Stranding Coordinator. The report must include the following information:

    • Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the incident;

    • Name and type of vessel involved;

    • Vessel's speed during and leading up to the incident;

    • Description of the incident;

    • Status of all sound source use in the 24 hrs preceding the incident;

    • Water depth;

    • Environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction, sea state, cloud cover, and visibility);

    • Description of all marine mammal observations in the 24 hrs preceding the incident;

    • Species identification or description of the animal(s) involved;

    • Fate of the animal(s); and

    • Photographs or video footage of the animal(s) (if equipment is available).

    Activities would not resume until NMFS is able to review the circumstances of the prohibited take. NMFS shall work with USCG to determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of further prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. USCG shall not resume their activities until notified by NMFS via letter, email, or telephone.

    (b) Reporting of Injured or Dead Marine Mammals.

    (i) In the event that USCG discovers an injured or dead marine mammal, and the lead PSO determines that the cause of the injury or death is unknown and the death is relatively recent (i.e., in less than a moderate state of decomposition as described in the next paragraph), USCG shall immediately report the incident to the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS and the NMFS' West Coast Stranding Coordinator. The report must include the same information identified in 7(a)(iii). Activities may continue while NMFS reviews the circumstances of the incident. NMFS shall work with USCG to determine whether modifications in the activities are appropriate.

    (ii) In the event that USCG discovers an injured or dead marine mammal, and the lead PSO determines that the injury or death is not associated with or related to the activities authorized in the IHA (e.g., previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced decomposition, or scavenger damage), USCG shall report the incident to the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS and the NMFS Stranding Hotline and/or by email to the NMFS' West Coast Stranding Coordinator within 24 hrs of the discovery. USCG shall provide photographs or video footage (if available) or other documentation of the stranded animal sighting to NMFS. Activities may continue while NMFS reviews the circumstances of the incident.

    (c) Acoustic Monitoring Report—USCG shall submit an Acoustic Monitoring Report that will provide details on the monitored piles, method of installation, monitoring equipment, and sound levels documented during monitoring. NMFS shall review the acoustic monitoring report and suggest any changes in monitoring as needed.

    8. This Authorization may be modified, suspended or withdrawn if the holder fails to abide by the conditions prescribed herein or if NMFS determines the authorized taking is having more than a negligible impact on the species or stock of affected marine mammals.

    9. A copy of this Authorization must be in the possession of each contractor who performs the construction work at the Monterey Station Project.

    Request for Public Comments

    We request comment on our analyses, the draft authorization, and any other aspect of this Notice of Proposed IHA for the proposed pile driving activities for the USCG Monterey Station Project. Please include with your comments any supporting data or literature citations to help inform our final decision on the request for MMPA authorization.

    Dated: September 6, 2017. Donna S. Wieting, Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19352 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Annual Northern Seal Subsistence Harvest Reporting and St. George Harvest Management Plan AGENCY:

    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be submitted on or before November 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to Michael Williams, (907) 271-5117, or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Abstract

    The subsistence harvest of northern fur seals is cooperatively managed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the Tribal Governments of St. Paul and St. George Islands (Pribilof Islands) under section 119 of the Marine Mammal Protection Act, 16 U.S.C. 1388 (MMPA) and governed by regulations under section 102 of the Fur Seal Act, 16 U.S.C. 1152 (FSA) found in 50 CFR part 216 subpart F, Taking for Subsistence Purposes. The regulations, laws, and cooperative agreement are focused on conserving northern fur seals through cooperative effort and consultation regarding effective management of human activities related to the subsistence harvests of northern fur seals and Steller sea lions.

    This request is for extension of the information collection for the annual subsistence harvests of northern fur seals by Alaska Natives who reside on the Pribilof Islands (Pribilovians) under 50 CFR 216 subpart F.

    The estimates of the number of fur seals necessary to satisfy the subsistence requirements of the Pribilovians to comply with 50 CFR 216.672(b) are derived from historic harvest levels reported by, and in direct consultation with, the Tribal Governments of St. Paul and St. George Islands in Alaska and their respective local Native corporations (Tanadgusix and Tanaq).

    II. Method of Collection

    Reports may be submitted via mail or email.

    III. Data

    OMB Control Number: 0648-0699.

    Form Number(s): None.

    Type of Review: Regular submission (extension of a currently approved information collection).

    Affected Public: Individuals or households; state, local or tribal government.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 2.

    Estimated Time per Response: 20 hours.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 40.

    Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $8 in recordkeeping/reporting costs.

    IV. Request for Comments

    Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

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

    Dated: September 8, 2017. Sarah Brabson, NOAA PRA Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19394 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XF664 Marine Mammals; File No. 21422 AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; receipt of application.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that James Lloyd-Smith, Ph.D., Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology University of California, Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA 90095, has applied in due form for a permit to conduct research on marine mammals.

    DATES:

    Written, telefaxed, or email comments must be received on or before October 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    The application and related documents are available for review by selecting “Records Open for Public Comment” from the “Features” box on the Applications and Permits for Protected Species (APPS) home page, https://apps.nmfs.noaa.gov, and then selecting File No. 21422 from the list of available applications.

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

    Written comments on this application should be submitted to the Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, at the address listed above. Comments may also be submitted by facsimile to (301) 713-0376, or by email to [email protected] Please include the File No. in the subject line of the email comment.

    Those individuals requesting a public hearing should submit a written request to the Chief, Permits and Conservation Division at the address listed above. The request should set forth the specific reasons why a hearing on this application would be appropriate.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Shasta McClenahan or Sara Young, (301) 427-8401.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The subject permit is requested under the authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), the regulations governing the taking and importing of marine mammals (50 CFR part 216) and the Fur Seal Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1151 et seq.).

    The applicant requests a five year research permit to take California sea lions (CSL; Zalophus californianus) to study the disease ecology of Leptospira in the pinniped populations along the west coast of the United States. Up to 460 non-pup CSL may be captured and sampled annually at several sites in California, Oregon, and Washington. During capture animals may be restrained and receive anesthesia, biological sampling (blood, urine, feces, vibrissae, hair and nail clip, and mucus membrane swabs), length and weight measurements, and external tags. An additional 60 non-target CSL, including large pups, may be incidentally captured and restrained to determine age and sex, but would be released without sampling. If opportunistically encountered during sampling, up to 30 entangled CSL may be captured for disentanglement, and up 100 dead stranded CSL may be necropsied, annually. Up to 8 CSL may be taken by unintentional mortality during the requested five year permit. An additional 20,000 CSL, 5,000 Northern elephant seals (Mirounga angustirostris), 500 Northern fur seals (Callorhinus ursinus), 100 harbor seals (Phoca vitulina), and 50 non-listed Steller sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus) may be disturbed incidentally to capture activities.

    In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), an initial determination has been made that the activity proposed is categorically excluded from the requirement to prepare an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement.

    Concurrent with the publication of this notice in the Federal Register, NMFS is forwarding copies of the application to the Marine Mammal Commission and its Committee of Scientific Advisors.

    Dated: September 7, 2017. Julia Harrison, Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19393 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION Sunshine Act Meeting Notice TIME AND DATE:

    Monday, September 18, 2017, 1:00 p.m.-3:00 p.m.

    PLACE:

    Hearing Room 420, Bethesda Towers, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD.

    STATUS:

    Commission Meeting—Open to the Public.

    Matter To Be Considered:

    Briefing Matter: Fiscal Year 2018 Operating Plan. A live webcast of the Meeting can be viewed at https://www.cpsc.gov/live.

    CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

    Rockelle Hammond, Office of the Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, (301) 504-7923.

    Dated: September 11, 2017. Alberta E. Mills, Acting Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19548 Filed 9-11-17; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY [OE Docket No. EA-439] Application To Export Electric Energy; J. Aron & Company LLC AGENCY:

    Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, DOE.

    ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    SUMMARY:

    J. Aron & Company LLC (Applicant) has applied for authority to transmit electric energy from the United States to Mexico pursuant to the Federal Power Act.

    DATES:

    Comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be submitted on or before October 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments, protests, motions to intervene, or requests for more information should be addressed to: Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, Mail Code: OE-20, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0350. Because of delays in handling conventional mail, it is recommended that documents be transmitted by overnight mail, by electronic mail to [email protected], or by facsimile to 202-586-8008.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Exports of electricity from the United States to a foreign country are regulated by the Department of Energy (DOE) pursuant to sections 301(b) and 402(f) of the Department of Energy Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7151(b), 7172(f)) and require authorization under section 202(e) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 824a(e)).

    On August 17, 2017, DOE received an application from the Applicant for authority to transmit electric energy from the United States to Mexico as a power marketer for a five-year term using existing international transmission facilities.

    In its application, the Applicant states that it does not own or control any electric generation or transmission facilities, and it does not have a franchised service area. The electric energy that the Applicant proposes to export to Mexico would be surplus energy purchased from third parties such as electric utilities and Federal power marketing agencies pursuant to voluntary agreements. The existing international transmission facilities to be utilized by the Applicant have previously been authorized by Presidential Permits issued pursuant to Executive Order 10485, as amended, and are appropriate for open access transmission by third parties.

    PROCEDURAL MATTERS:

    Any person desiring to be heard in this proceeding should file a comment or protest to the application at the address provided above. Protests should be filed in accordance with Rule 211 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (FERC) Rules of Practice and Procedures (18 CFR 385.211). Any person desiring to become a party to these proceedings should file a motion to intervene at the above address in accordance with FERC Rule 214 (18 CFR 385.214). Five copies of such comments, protests, or motions to intervene should be sent to the address provided above on or before the date listed above.

    Comments and other filings concerning the Applicant's application to export electric energy to Mexico should be clearly marked with OE Docket No. EA-439. An additional copy is to be provided to both Kelly Brooks, J. Aron & Company LLC, 200 West Street, 6th Floor, New York, NY 10282 and Ricardo Alicea, J. Aron & Company LLC, 200 West Street, 15th Floor, New York, NY 10282.

    A final decision will be made on this application after the environmental impacts have been evaluated pursuant to DOE's National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Procedures (10 CFR part 1021) and after a determination is made by DOE that the proposed action will not have an adverse impact on the sufficiency of supply or reliability of the U.S. electric power supply system.

    Copies of this application will be made available, upon request, for public inspection and copying at the address provided above, by accessing the program Web site at http://energy.gov/node/11845, or by emailing Angela Troy at [email protected]

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 5, 2017. Christopher Lawrence, Electricity Policy Analyst, Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19407 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY [OE Docket No. EA-440] Application To Export Electric Energy; Plant-E Corp. AGENCY:

    Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, DOE.

    ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    SUMMARY:

    Plant-E Corp (Applicant) has applied for authority to transmit electric energy from the United States to Canada pursuant to the Federal Power Act.

    DATES:

    Comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be submitted on or before October 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments, protests, motions to intervene, or requests for more information should be addressed to: Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, Mail Code: OE-20, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0350. Because of delays in handling conventional mail, it is recommended that documents be transmitted by overnight mail, by electronic mail to [email protected], or by facsimile to 202-586-8008.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Exports of electricity from the United States to a foreign country are regulated by the Department of Energy (DOE) pursuant to sections 301(b) and 402(f) of the Department of Energy Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7151(b), 7172(f)) and require authorization under section 202(e) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 824a(e)).

    On August 18, 2017, DOE received an application from the Applicant for authority to transmit electric energy from the United States to Canada as a power marketer for a five-year term using existing international transmission facilities.

    In its application, the Applicant states that it does not own or control any electric generation or transmission facilities, and it does not have a franchised service area. The electric energy that the Applicant proposes to export to Canada would be surplus energy purchased from third parties such as electric utilities and Federal power marketing agencies pursuant to voluntary agreements. The existing international transmission facilities to be utilized by the Applicant have previously been authorized by Presidential Permits issued pursuant to Executive Order 10485, as amended, and are appropriate for open access transmission by third parties.

    Procedural Matters: Any person desiring to be heard in this proceeding should file a comment or protest to the application at the address provided above. Protests should be filed in accordance with Rule 211 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (FERC) Rules of Practice and Procedures (18 CFR 385.211). Any person desiring to become a party to these proceedings should file a motion to intervene at the above address in accordance with FERC Rule 214 (18 CFR 385.214). Five copies of such comments, protests, or motions to intervene should be sent to the address provided above on or before the date listed above.

    Comments and other filings concerning the Applicant's application to export electric energy to Canada should be clearly marked with OE Docket No. EA-440. An additional copy is to be provided to Pierre Plante, Plant-E Corp., 740 St Maurice, Suite 209, Montreal, Quebec H3C 1L5.

    A final decision will be made on this application after the environmental impacts have been evaluated pursuant to DOE's National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Procedures (10 CFR part 1021) and after a determination is made by DOE that the proposed action will not have an adverse impact on the sufficiency of supply or reliability of the U.S. electric power supply system.

    Copies of this application will be made available, upon request, for public inspection and copying at the address provided above, by accessing the program Web site at http://energy.gov/node/11845, or by emailing Angela Troy at [email protected]

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 5, 2017. Christopher Lawrence, Electricity Policy Analyst, Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19424 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC17-173-000.

    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.

    Description: Application for Authorization under Section 203 of the FPA to Merge Jurisdictional Facilities of Southern California Edison Company.

    Filed Date: 9/6/17.

    Accession Number: 20170906-5181.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/27/17.

    Docket Numbers: EC17-174-000.

    Applicants: Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.

    Description: Application of Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. under New Docket for an order pursuant to Section 203 of the Federal Power Act.

    Filed Date: 9/6/17.

    Accession Number: 20170906-5183.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/27/17.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG17-149-000.

    Applicants: CA Flats Solar 150, LLC.

    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator (EWG) of CA Flats Solar 150, LLC.

    Filed Date: 9/6/17.

    Accession Number: 20170906-5178.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/27/17.

    Docket Numbers: EG17-150-000.

    Applicants: Florey Knob Energy LLC.

    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status of Florey Knob Energy LLC.

    Filed Date: 9/7/17.

    Accession Number: 20170907-5054.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/28/17.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3069-007; ER10-3070-007.

    Applicants: Alcoa Power Generating Inc., Alcoa Power Marketing LLC.

    Description: Supplement to June 27, 2017 Southeast Regional Triennial Submission and Notice of Change in Status of the Alcoa Subsidiaries.

    Filed Date: 9/6/17.

    Accession Number: 20170906-5192.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/27/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-1795-001.

    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Deficiency Response in ER17-1795—Classify Service Upgrade as Base Plan Upgrade to be effective 8/8/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/7/17.

    Accession Number: 20170907-5166.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/28/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2185-001.

    Applicants: Great Valley Solar 1, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Great Valley Solar 1, LLC Amendment to SFA Filing and Request to be effective 10/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/7/17.

    Accession Number: 20170907-5115.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/28/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2193-001.

    Applicants: Great Valley Solar 1, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Great Valley Solar 1, LLC Amendment to LGIA CTA Filing and Request to be effective 10/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/7/17.

    Accession Number: 20170907-5117.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/28/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2434-001.

    Applicants: Duke Energy Progress, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to Filing in ER17-2434 to be effective 7/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/7/17.

    Accession Number: 20170907-5138.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/28/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2441-000.

    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 3356 Milligan 1 Wind LLC Generator Interconnection Agreement to be effective 8/24/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/7/17.

    Accession Number: 20170907-5000.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/28/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2442-000.

    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 3357 Monument Road Wind LLC Generator Interconnection Agreement to be effective 8/24/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/7/17.

    Accession Number: 20170907-5001.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/28/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2443-000.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2017-09-07_SA 3046 Upland Prairie-MEC GIA (J455) to be effective 8/23/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/7/17.

    Accession Number: 20170907-5021.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/28/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2444-000.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2017-09-07_SA 3045 Ida Grove-MEC GIA (J412) to be effective 8/23/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/7/17.

    Accession Number: 20170907-5065.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/28/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2445-000.

    Applicants: MET New York Trading LLC.

    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Cancellation of Market Based Rate Tariff to be effective 9/8/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/7/17.

    Accession Number: 20170907-5107.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/28/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2446-000.

    Applicants: Avista Corporation.

    Description: Avista Corporation submits Average System Cost Filing for Sales of Electric Power to the Bonneville Power Administration, FY 2018-2019.

    Filed Date: 9/7/17.

    Accession Number: 20170907-5118.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/28/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2447-000.

    Applicants: Public Service Company of Colorado.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: OATT Att O-PSCo AGIS Update to be effective 1/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/7/17.

    Accession Number: 20170907-5128.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/28/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2448-000.

    Applicants: Public Service Company of Colorado.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 20170907_AGIS Filing to be effective 1/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/7/17.

    Accession Number: 20170907-5147.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/28/17.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following foreign utility company status filings:

    Docket Numbers: FC17-6-000.

    Applicants: I Squared Capital.

    Description: Notification of Self Certification of Foreign Utility Company Status of I Squared Capital.

    Filed Date: 9/7/17.

    Accession Number: 20170907-5023.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/28/17.

    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: September 7, 2017. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19408 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER17-2426-000] PSEG Keys Energy Center LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding, of PSEG Keys Energy Center LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant.

    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability, is September 27, 2017.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected] or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: September 7, 2017. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19409 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0014; FRL-9966-12] Product Cancellation Order for Certain Pesticide Registrations; Correction AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    EPA issued notices in the Federal Register of June 8, 2016, and July 5, 2017, concerning receipt of requests to voluntarily cancel certain pesticide registrations and its follow-up product cancellation order. In the notice of July 5, 2017, EPA inadvertently listed the pesticide products Dithiopyr 0.13% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-207), Dithiopyr 0.25% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-208), Dithiopyr 0.172% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-209), Dithiopyr 0.107% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-210), Dithiopyr 0.06% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-211), Dithiopyr 0.086% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-212), Dithiopyr 0.1% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-213), Dithiopyr Concentrate for Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-268) and Quali-Pro Dithiopyr 2L (EPA Reg. No. 53883-311). The registrant had responded with a letter to the Office of Pesticide Programs dated June 10, 2016 requesting that the nine products not be cancelled. The letter was never forwarded to be included in the public docket for this Federal Register notice so the products were listed in the notice of July 5, 2017, in error. Therefore, EPA is not cancelling the pesticide products Dithiopyr 0.13% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-207), Dithiopyr 0.25% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-208), Dithiopyr 0.172% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-209), Dithiopyr 0.107% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-210), Dithiopyr 0.06% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-211), Dithiopyr 0.086% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-212), Dithiopyr 0.1% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-213), Dithiopyr Concentrate for Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-268) and Quali-Pro Dithiopyr 2L (EPA Reg. No. 53883-311). This document removes the cancellation order for EPA Reg. Numbers 53883-207, 53883-208, 53883-209, 53883-210, 53883-211, 53883-212, 53883-213, EPA Reg. No. 53883-268 and 53883-311 listed in the July 5, 2017, Federal Register notice.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Michael Yanchulis, Information Technology and Resources Management Division (7502P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (703) 347-0237; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. General Information A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human health, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution, or use of pesticides. Since others also may be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action.

    B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0014, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    II. What does this correction do?

    EPA issued notices in the Federal Register of June 8, 2016 (FRL-9943-68), and July 5, 2017 (9962-88), concerning receipt of requests to voluntarily cancel certain pesticide registrations and its follow-up product cancellation order, respectively. In the notice of July 5, 2017, EPA inadvertently listed the pesticide products Dithiopyr 0.13% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-207), Dithiopyr 0.25% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-208), Dithiopyr 0.172% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-209), Dithiopyr 0.107% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-210), Dithiopyr 0.06% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-211), Dithiopyr 0.086% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-212), Dithiopyr 0.1% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-213), Dithiopyr Concentrate for Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-268) and Quali-Pro Dithiopyr 2L (EPA Reg. No. 53883-311). The registrant had responded with a letter to the Office of Pesticide Programs dated June 10, 2016 requesting that the nine products not be cancelled. The letter was never forwarded to be included in the public docket for this Federal Register notice so the products were listed in the notice of July 5, 2017, in error. Therefore, EPA is not cancelling the pesticide products Dithiopyr 0.13% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-207), Dithiopyr 0.25% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-208), Dithiopyr 0.172% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-209), Dithiopyr 0.107% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-210), Dithiopyr 0.06% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-211), Dithiopyr 0.086% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-212), Dithiopyr 0.1% Plus Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-213), Dithiopyr Concentrate for Fertilizer (EPA Reg. No. 53883-268) and Quali-Pro Dithiopyr 2L (EPA Reg. No. 53883-311). Herein this document is removing the cancellation order for EPA Reg. Numbers 53883-207, 53883-208, 53883-209, 53883-210, 53883-211, 53883-212, 53883-213, 53883-268 and 53883-311 listed in the July 5, 2017, Federal Register notice.

    Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.

    Dated: August 21, 2017. Hamaad Syed, Acting Director, Information Technology and Resources Management Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19459 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0794, 9966-49] Registration Review; Draft Human Health and/or Ecological Risk Assessments for Several Pesticides; Notice of Availability AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces the availability of EPA's draft human health and/or ecological risk assessments for the registration review of asulam, chloroxylenol, dichlobenil, EPTC, etofenprox, gamma- and lambda-cyhalothrin, imidacloprid, indoxacarb, metribuzin, nitrapyrin, oxamyl, pendimethalin, permethrin, prometryn, pyrethrins, tau-fluvalinate, and trifloxystrobin. Registration review is EPA's periodic review of pesticide registrations to ensure that each pesticide continues to satisfy the statutory standard for registration, that is, the pesticide can perform its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on human health or the environment. As part of the registration review process, the Agency has completed comprehensive draft human health and/or ecological risk assessments for all pesticides listed in the Table in Unit III. After reviewing comments received during the public comment period, EPA may issue a revised risk assessment, explain any changes to the draft risk assessment, and respond to comments and may request public input on risk mitigation before completing a proposed registration review decision for the pesticides listed in the Table in Unit III. Through this program, EPA is ensuring that each pesticide's registration is based on current scientific and other knowledge, including its effects on human health and the environment.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before November 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, to the docket identification (ID) number for the specific pesticide of interest provided in the Table in Unit III, by one of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.

    Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.

    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For pesticide specific information contact: The Chemical Review Manager for the pesticide of interest identified in the Table in Unit III.

    For general questions on the registration review program, contact: Dana Friedman, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (703) 308-8015; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. General Information A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human health, farm worker, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution, or use of pesticides. Since others also may be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the Chemical Review Manager identified in the Table in Unit III.

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

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

    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting your comments, see the commenting tips at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.

    3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group, including minority and/or low income populations, in the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, the Agency seeks information on any groups or segments of the population who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other factors, may have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the pesticides discussed in this document, compared to the general population.

    II. Authority

    EPA is conducting its registration review of the chemicals listed in the Table in Unit III pursuant to section 3(g) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Procedural Regulations for Registration Review at 40 CFR part 155, subpart C. Section 3(g) of FIFRA provides, among other things, that the registrations of pesticides are to be reviewed every 15 years. Under FIFRA, a pesticide product may be registered or remain registered only if it meets the statutory standard for registration given in FIFRA section 3(c)(5) (7 U.S.C. 136a(c)(5)). When used in accordance with widespread and commonly recognized practice, the pesticide product must perform its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on the environment; that is, without any unreasonable risk to man or the environment, or a human dietary risk from residues that result from the use of a pesticide in or on food.

    III. Registration Reviews

    As directed by FIFRA section 3(g), EPA is reviewing the pesticide registration for the pesticides listed in the Table to ensure that it continues to satisfy the FIFRA standard for registration—that is, that these chemicals can still be used without unreasonable adverse effects on human health or the environment.

    Draft Risk Assessments Being Made Available for Public Comment Registration review case name and number Docket ID No. Chemical review manager and contact information Asulam, Case Number 0265 EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0783 Caitlin Newcamp, [email protected] (703) 347-0325. Chloroxylenol, Case Number 3045 EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0010 Rachel Ricciardi, [email protected] (703) 347-0465. Dichlobenil, Case Number 0263 EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0395 Nathan Sell, [email protected] (703) 347-8020. EPTC, Case Number 0064 EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0720 Patricia Biggio, [email protected] (703) 347-0547. Etofenprox, Case Number 7407 EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0804 Wilhelmena Livingston, [email protected] (703) 308-8025. Gamma-cyhalothrin, Case Number 7437 EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0479 Wilhelmena Livingston, [email protected] (703) 308-8025. Imidacloprid, Case Number 7605 EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0844 Nicole Zinn, [email protected] (703) 308-7076. Indoxacarb, Case Number 7613 EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0367 Moana Appleyard, [email protected] (703) 308-8175. Lambda-cyhalothrin, Case Number 7408 EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0480 Wilhelmena Livingston, [email protected] (703) 308-8025. Metribuzin, Case Number 0181 EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0487 Matthew Manupella, [email protected] (703) 347-0411. Nitrapyrin, Case Number 0213 EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0170 Thomas Harty, [email protected] (703) 347-0338. Oxamyl, Case Number 0253 EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0028 Maria Piansay, [email protected] (703) 308-8063. Pendimethalin, Case Number 0187 EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0219 Nicole Zinn, [email protected] (703) 308-7076. Permethrin, Case Number 2510 EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0039 Linsey Walsh, [email protected] (703) 347-8030. Prometryn, Case Number 0467 EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0032 Christina Scheltema, [email protected] (703) 308-2201. Pyrethrins, Case Number 2580 EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0885 Mark Baldwin, [email protected] (703) 308-0504. Tau-Fluvalinate, Case Number 2295 EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0915 Miguel Zavala, [email protected] (703) 347-0504. Trifloxystrobin, Case Number 7028 EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0074 Moana Appleyard, [email protected] (703) 308-8175.

    Pursuant to 40 CFR 155.53(c), EPA is providing an opportunity, through this notice of availability, for interested parties to provide comments and input concerning the Agency's draft human health and/or ecological risk assessments for the pesticides listed in the Table in Unit III. Since an ecological risk assessment for the pyrethroids, including etofenprox, gamma-cyhalothrin, lambda-cyhalothrin, permethrin, pyrethrins, and tau-fluvalinate, was previously published for comment in the Federal Register in November 2016, this Notice is announcing the availability of the human health risk assessments for these chemicals. For imidacloprid, a preliminary pollinator only risk assessment was completed in January 2016 and an aquatic species only ecological risk assessment was completed in January 2017. Both of these were previously published for comment in the Federal Register and thus this Notice is announcing the availability of the human health assessment for imidacloprid. The Agency will consider all comments received during the public comment period and make changes, as appropriate, to a draft human health and/or ecological risk assessment. EPA may then issue a revised risk assessment, explain any changes to the draft risk assessment, and respond to comments. In the Federal Register notice announcing the availability of the revised risk assessment, if the revised risk assessment indicates risks of concern, the Agency may provide a comment period for the public to submit suggestions for mitigating the risk identified in the revised risk assessment before developing a proposed registration review decision for the pesticides identified above.

    1. Information submission requirements. Anyone may submit data or information in response to this document. To be considered during a pesticide's registration review, the submitted data or information must meet the following requirements:

    • To ensure that EPA will consider data or information submitted, interested persons must submit the data or information during the comment period. The Agency may, at its discretion, consider data or information submitted at a later date.

    • The data or information submitted must be presented in a legible and useable form. For example, an English translation must accompany any material that is not in English and a written transcript must accompany any information submitted as an audiographic or videographic record. Written material may be submitted in paper or electronic form.

    • Submitters must clearly identify the source of any submitted data or information.

    • Submitters may request the Agency to reconsider data or information that the Agency rejected in a previous review. However, submitters must explain why they believe the Agency should reconsider the data or information in the pesticide's registration review.

    As provided in 40 CFR 155.58, the registration review docket for each pesticide case will remain publicly accessible through the duration of the registration review process; that is, until all actions required in the final decision on the registration review case have been completed.

    Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.

    Dated: August 24, 2017. Charles Smith, Acting Director, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19463 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0440; FRL-9966-08] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Renewal of an Existing Collection; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), this document announces that EPA is planning to submit an Information Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The ICR, entitled: “Plant-Incorporated Protectants; CBI Substantiation and Adverse Effects Reporting,” and identified by EPA ICR No. 1693.09 and OMB Control No. 2070-0142, represents the renewal of an existing ICR that is scheduled to expire on May 31, 2018. Before submitting the ICR to OMB for review and approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collection that is summarized in this document. The ICR and accompanying material are available in the docket for public review and comment.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before November 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0440, by one of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.

    Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.

    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ryne Yarger, Field and External Affairs Division (7506P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (703) 605-1193; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. What information is EPA particularly interested in?

    Pursuant to PRA section 3506(c)(2)(A) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), EPA specifically solicits comments and information to enable it to:

    1. Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility.

    2. Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimates of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used.

    3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected.

    4. Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from very small businesses (those that employ less than 25) on examples of specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce the paperwork burden for very small businesses affected by this collection.

    II. What information collection activity or ICR does this action apply to?

    Title: Plant-Incorporated Protectants; CBI Substantiation and Adverse Effects Reporting.

    ICR number: EPA ICR No. 1693.09.

    OMB control number: OMB Control No. 2070-0142.

    ICR status: This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on May 31, 2018. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), after appearing in the Federal Register when approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers for certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.

    Abstract: This ICR addresses the two information collection requirements described in regulations pertaining to pesticidal substances that are produced by plants (plant-incorporated protectants) and which are codified in 40 CFR part 174. A plant-incorporated protectant (PIP) is defined as “the pesticidal substance that is intended to be produced and used in a living plant and the genetic material necessary for the production of such a substance.” Many, but not all, PIPs are exempt from registration requirements under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). Registrants sometimes include in a submission to EPA for registration of PIPs information that they claim to be CBI. CBI is protected by FIFRA and generally cannot be released to the public. For most pesticide registration applications, the current CBI regulations at 40 CFR part 2 require that claimants substantiate their CBI claims for their own records when the claim is made, and subsequently provide the substantiation to EPA only if requested. However, under 40 CFR part 174, whenever a registrant claims that information submitted to EPA in support of a PIP registration application contains CBI, the registrant must substantiate such claims to EPA when they are made. In addition, 40 CFR part 174 also requires manufacturers of PIPs that are otherwise exempted from registration requirements to report any adverse effects of the PIP to the Agency within 30 days of when the information is first obtained. Such reporting will allow the Agency to determine whether further action is needed to prevent unreasonable adverse effects to human health or the environment.

    Burden statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 21.5 hours per CBI substantiation and 7 hours per adverse effects reporting response. Burden is defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

    The ICR, which is available in the docket along with other related materials, provides a detailed explanation of the collection activities and the burden estimate that is only briefly summarized here:

    Respondents/Affected Entities: Entities potentially affected by this ICR include producers and importers of PIPs. The NAICS codes for respondents under this ICR include: 325320 (Pesticide and other Agricultural Chemical Manufacturing), 325414 (Biological Products (except Diagnostic) Manufacturing), 422910 (Farm Supplies Wholesalers), 422930 (Flower, Nursery Stock, and Florist's Suppliers), 541710 (Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences), and 611310 (Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools).

    Estimated total number of potential respondents: 24.

    Frequency of response: On occasion.

    Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent: 1.

    Estimated total annual burden hours: 518 hours.

    Estimated total annual costs: $41,892. There are no non-burden hour paperwork costs, e.g., investment or maintenance and operational costs, included in this information collection.

    III. Are there changes in the estimates from the last approval?

    There is an increase of 86 hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with that identified in the ICR currently approved by OMB. This increase reflects EPA's updating of burden estimates for this collection based upon historical information on the number of CBI substantiations per year. Based upon revised estimates, the number of CBI substantiations per year has increased from 20 to 24, with a corresponding increase in the associated burden. This change is an adjustment.

    IV. What is the next step in the process for this ICR?

    EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. EPA will issue another Federal Register document pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Authority:

    44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

    Dated: August 17, 2017. Louise P. Wise, Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19461 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [OMB 3060-0755] Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission Under Delegated Authority AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or the Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number.

    DATES:

    Written PRA comments should be submitted on or before November 13, 2017. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all PRA comments to Nicole Ongele, FCC, via email [email protected] and to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For additional information about the information collection, contact Nicole Ongele at (202) 418-2991.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.

    OMB Control Number: 3060-0755.

    Title: Sections 59.1 through 59.4, Infrastructure Sharing.

    Form Number: N/A.

    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities.

    Number of Respondents and Responses: 75 respondents; 1,125 responses.

    Estimated Time per Response: 1-2 hours.

    Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement and third party disclosure requirement.

    Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. Statutory authority for this information collection is contained in 47 U.S.C. 259 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.

    Total Annual Burden: 2,025 hours.

    Total Annual Cost: No cost.

    Privacy Impact Assessment: No impact(s).

    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: The Commission is not requesting respondents to submit confidential information to the Commission. If the Commission requests respondents to submit information which respondents believe is confidential, respondents may request confidential treatment of such data under 47 CFR 0.459 of the Commission's rules.

    Needs and Uses: There are three reporting and third party disclosure requirements under section 259 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended. They are (1) filing of tariffs, contracts or arrangements; (2) providing information concerning deployment of new services and equipment; and (3) notice upon termination of section 259 agreements. The information collections by the Commission under the requirement are (1) incumbent local exchange carriers (incumbent LECs) will file for public inspection any tariffs, contracts and agreements for infrastructure sharing with third parties (qualifying carriers); (2) incumbent LECs will provide timely information on planned deployments of new services and equipment to third parties (qualifying carriers); and incumbent LECs will furnish third parties (qualifying carriers) with 60 day notice prior to termination of a section 259 sharing agreement to protect customers from sudden changes in service.

    Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19388 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [DA 17-849] Incentive Auction Task Force and Media Bureau Extend the Filing Deadline for the First Priority Filing Window for Eligible Full Power and Class A Television Stations—Revised Filing Deadline: September 15, 2017 AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This document extends the filing deadline for the first priority filing window for eligible full power and Class A television stations to file applications for alternate channels or expanded facilities to September 15, 2017.

    DATES:

    September 13, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Erin Griffith, 202-418-2957, [email protected], or Kevin Harding, 202-418-7077, [email protected], Video Division, Media Bureau, Federal Communications Commission.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Technical issues briefly interrupted access to the Media Bureau's Licensing and Management System (LMS), which stations use to file construction permit applications and reimbursement cost estimate information. Recognizing the importance of first priority filing window, the filing window will now close at 11:59 p.m. EDT on Friday, September 15, 2017.

    Federal Communications Commission. Thomas Horan, Chief of Staff, Media Bureau.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19419 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [OMB 3060-0430] Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or the Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number.

    DATES:

    Written PRA comments should be submitted on or before November 13, 2017. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all PRA comments to Nicole Ongele, FCC, via email [email protected] and to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For additional information about the information collection, contact Nicole Ongele at (202) 418-2991.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.

    OMB Control Number: 3060-0430.

    Title: Section 1.1206, Permit-but-Disclose Proceedings.

    Form Number: N/A.

    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents: Individuals or households; Business or other for-profit; Not-for-profit institutions; Federal Government; and State, local, or tribal governments.

    Number of Respondent and Responses: 11,500 respondents; 34,500 responses.

    Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement.

    Obligation To Respond: Required to obtain benefits. Statutory authority for this collection of information is contained in sections 4(i) and (j), 303(r), and 409 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i) and (j), 303(r), and 409.

    Estimated Time per Response: 45 minutes (0.75 hours).

    Total Annual Burden: 25,875 hours.

    Total Annual Cost: No cost.

    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: Consistent with the Commission's rules on confidential treatment of submissions, under 47 CFR 0.459, a presenter may request confidential treatment of ex parte presentations. In addition, the Commission will permit parties to remove metadata containing confidential or privileged information, and the Commission will also not require parties to file electronically ex parte notices that contain confidential information. The Commission will, however, require a redacted version to be filed electronically at the same time the paper filing is submitted, and that the redacted version must be machine-readable whenever technically possible.

    Privacy Impact Assessment: No impact(s).

    Needs and Uses: The Commission's rules, under 47 CFR 1.1206, require that a public record be made of ex parte presentations (i.e., written presentations not served on all parties to the proceeding or oral presentations as to which all parties have not been given notice and an opportunity to be present) to decision-making personnel in “permit-but-disclose” proceedings, such as notice-and-comment rulemakings and declaratory ruling proceedings.

    On February 2, 2011, the FCC released a Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, GC Docket Number 10-43, FCC 11-11, which amended and reformed the Commission's rules on ex parte presentations (47 CFR 1.1206(b)(2)) made in the course of Commission rulemakings and other permit-but-disclose proceedings. The modifications to the existing rules adopted in this Report and Order require that parties file more descriptive summaries of their ex parte contacts, by ensuring that other parties and the public have an adequate opportunity to review and respond to information submitted ex parte, and by improving the FCC's oversight and enforcement of the ex parte rules. The modified ex parte rules which contain information collection requirements which OMB approved on December 6, 2011, are as follows: (1) Ex parte notices will be required for all oral ex parte presentations in permit-but-disclose proceedings, not just for those presentations that involve new information or arguments not already in the record; (2) If an oral ex parte presentation is limited to material already in the written record, the notice must contain either a succinct summary of the matters discussed or a citation to the page or paragraph number in the party's written submission(s) where the matters discussed can be found; (3) Notices for all ex parte presentations must include the name of the person(s) who made the ex parte presentation as well as a list of all persons attending or otherwise participating in the meeting at which the presentation was made; (4) Notices of ex parte presentations made outside the Sunshine period must be filed within two business days of the presentation; (5) The Sunshine period will begin on the day (including business days, weekends, and holidays) after issuance of the Sunshine notice, rather than when the Sunshine Agenda is issued (as the current rules provide); (6) If an ex parte presentation is made on the day the Sunshine notice is released, an ex parte notice must be submitted by the next business day, and any reply would be due by the following business day. If a permissible ex parte presentation is made during the Sunshine period (under an exception to the Sunshine period prohibition), the ex parte notice is due by the end of the same day on which the presentation was made, and any reply would need to be filed by the next business day. Any reply must be in writing and limited to the issues raised in the ex parte notice to which the reply is directed; (7) Commissioners and agency staff may continue to request ex parte presentations during the Sunshine period, but these presentations should be limited to the specific information required by the Commission; (8) Ex parte notices must be submitted electronically in machine-readable format. PDF images created by scanning a paper document may not be submitted, except in cases in which a word-processing version of the document is not available.

    Confidential information may continue to be submitted by paper filing, but a redacted version must be filed electronically at the same time the paper filing is submitted. An exception to the electronic filing requirement will be made in cases in which the filing party claims hardship. The basis for the hardship claim must be substantiated in the ex parte filing; (9) To facilitate stricter enforcement of the ex parte rules, the Enforcement Bureau is authorized to levy forfeitures for ex parte rule violations; (10) Copies of electronically filed ex parte notices must also be sent electronically to all staff and Commissioners present at the ex parte meeting so as to enable them to review the notices for accuracy and completeness. Filers may be asked to submit corrections or further information as necessary for compliance with the rules; and (11) Parties making permissible ex parte presentations in restricted proceedings must conform and clarify rule changes when filing an ex parte notice with the Commission.

    The information is used by parties to permit-but-disclose proceedings, including interested members of the public, to respond to the arguments made and data offered in the presentations. The responses may then be used by the Commission in its decision-making.

    The availability of the ex parte materials ensures that the Commission's decisional processes are fair, impartial, and comport with the concept of due process in that all interested parties can know of and respond to the arguments made to the decision-making officials.

    Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19416 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [OMB 3060-1095] Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission Under Delegated Authority AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.

    The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Written comments should be submitted on or before November 13, 2017. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contacts below as soon as possible.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all PRA comments to Cathy Williams, FCC, via email [email protected] and to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For additional information about the information collection, contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the PRA of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the FCC invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.

    OMB Control No.: 3060-1095.

    Title: Surrenders of Authorizations for International Carrier, Space Station and Earth Station Licensees.

    Form No.: N/A.

    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities.

    Number of Respondents: 8 respondents; 8 responses.

    Estimated Time per Response: 1 hour.

    Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement.

    Obligation to Respond: Voluntary. The statutory authority for this information collection is contained in Sections 4(i), 7(a), 11, 303(c), 303(f), 303(g), and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 157(a), 161, 303(c), 303(f), 303(g), and 303(r).

    Total Annual Burden: 8 hours.

    Annual Cost Burden: None.

    Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No impact(s).

    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: In general, there is no need for confidentiality with is collection of information.

    Needs and Uses: This collection will be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) as an extension after this 60-day comment period has ended in order to obtain the full three-year clearance from OMB. There are no changes in the number of respondents, responses, annual burden hours and total annual costs.

    Licensees file surrenders of authorizations with the Commission on a voluntary basis. This information is used by Commission staff to issue Public Notices to announce the surrenders of authorization to the general public. The Commission's release of Public Notices is critical to keeping the general public abreast of the licensees' discontinuance of telecommunications services.

    Without this collection of information, licensees would be required to submit surrenders of authorizations to the Commission by letter which is more time consuming than submitting such requests to the Commission electronically. In addition, Commission staff would spend an extensive amount of time processing surrenders of authorizations received by letter. The collection of information saves time for both licensees and Commission staff since they are received in IBFS electronically and include only the information that is essential to process the requests in a timely manner. Furthermore, the E-filing module expedites the Commission staff's announcement of surrenders of authorizations via Public Notice.

    Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19387 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-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 October 10, 2017.

    A. 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. Banc Investors, L.L.C., Town and Country, Missouri; to acquire up to 49.74 percent of the voting shares of 1st Advantage Bancshares, Inc., St. Peters, Missouri, and thereby indirectly acquire shares of 1st Advantage Bank, St. Peters, Missouri.

    B. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (Dennis Denney, Assistant Vice President) 1 Memorial Drive, Kansas City, Missouri 64198-0001:

    1. HYS Investments, LLC, to acquire additional voting shares for a total of 26.48 percent of BOTS, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire shares of VisionBank, all of Topeka, Kansas.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 8, 2017. Yao-Chin Chao, Assistant Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19420 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-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 October 10, 2017.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (Dennis Denney, Assistant Vice President) 1 Memorial Drive, Kansas City, Missouri 64198-0001:

    1. TIG Bancorp, Inc., and its newly formed merger subsidiary, TIG Merger Sub, Inc., both of Durango, Colorado; to become bank holding companies by acquiring Custer Bancorp, Denver, Colorado, and thereby indirectly acquire First State Bank of Colorado, Hotchkiss, Colorado.

    B. Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia (William Spaniel, Senior Vice President) 100 North 6th Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19105-1521. Comments can also be sent electronically to [email protected]:

    1. OceanFirst Financial Corp., Toms River, New Jersey; to become a bank holding company, in connection with the conversion of OceanFirst Bank, Toms River, New Jersey, from a federal savings bank, to a national bank named OceanFirst National Bank.

    2. OceanFirst Financial Corp., Toms River, New Jersey; to merge with Sun Bancorp, Mt. Laurel, New Jersey and thereby indirectly acquire Sun National Bank, Mt. Laurel, New Jersey.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 7, 2017. Yao-Chin Chao, Assistant Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19358 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION [File No. 152 3134] Lenovo (United States) Inc.; Analysis To Aid Public Comment AGENCY:

    Federal Trade Commission.

    ACTION:

    Proposed consent agreement.

    SUMMARY:

    The consent agreement in this matter settles alleged violations of federal law prohibiting unfair or deceptive acts or practices. The attached Analysis to Aid Public Comment describes both the allegations in the complaint and the terms of the consent order—embodied in the consent agreement—that would settle these allegations.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before October 5, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested parties may file a comment online or on paper, by following the instructions in the Request for Comment part of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below. Write: “Lenovo (United States) Inc., Matter No. 152 3134” on your comment, and file your comment online at https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/lenovoconsent by following the instructions on the Web-based form. If you prefer to file your comment on paper, write “Lenovo (United States) Inc., Matter No. 152 3134” on your comment and on the envelope, and mail your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Suite CC-5610 (Annex D), Washington, DC 20580, or deliver your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW., 5th Floor, Suite 5610 (Annex D), Washington, DC 20024.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Linda Holleran Kopp, (202-326-2267) and Tiffany George (202-326-3040), Bureau of Consumer Protection, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Pursuant to Section 6(f) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and FTC Rule 2.34, 16 CFR 2.34, notice is hereby given that the above-captioned consent agreement containing a consent order to cease and desist, having been filed with and accepted, subject to final approval, by the Commission, has been placed on the public record for a period of thirty (30) days. The following Analysis to Aid Public Comment describes the terms of the consent agreement, and the allegations in the complaint. An electronic copy of the full text of the consent agreement package can be obtained from the FTC Home Page (for September 5, 2017), on the World Wide Web, at https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/commission-actions.

    You can file a comment online or on paper. For the Commission to consider your comment, we must receive it on or before October 5, 2017. Write “Lenovo (United States) Inc., Matter No. 152 3134” on your comment. Your comment—including your name and your state—will be placed on the public record of this proceeding, including, to the extent practicable, on the public Commission Web site, at https://www.ftc.gov/policy/public-comments.

    Postal mail addressed to the Commission is subject to delay due to heightened security screening. As a result, we encourage you to submit your comments online. To make sure that the Commission considers your online comment, you must file it at https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/lenovoconsent by following the instructions on the web-based form. If this Notice appears at http://www.regulations.gov/#!home, you also may file a comment through that Web site.

    If you prefer to file your comment on paper, write “Lenovo (United States) Inc., Matter No. 152 3134” on your comment and on the envelope, and mail your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Suite CC-5610 (Annex D), Washington, DC 20580, or deliver your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW., 5th Floor, Suite 5610 (Annex D), Washington, DC 20024. If possible, submit your paper comment to the Commission by courier or overnight service.

    Because your comment will be placed on the publicly accessible FTC Web site at https://www.ftc.gov, you are solely responsible for making sure that your comment does not include any sensitive or confidential information. In particular, your comment should not include any sensitive personal information, such as your or anyone else's Social Security number; date of birth; driver's license number or other state identification number, or foreign country equivalent; passport number; financial account number; or credit or debit card number. You are also solely responsible for making sure that your comment does not include any sensitive health information, such as medical records or other individually identifiable health information. In addition, your comment should not include any “trade secret or any commercial or financial information which . . . is privileged or confidential”—as provided by Section 6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 4.10(a)(2)—including in particular competitively sensitive information such as costs, sales statistics, inventories, formulas, patterns, devices, manufacturing processes, or customer names.

    Comments containing material for which confidential treatment is requested must be filed in paper form, must be clearly labeled “Confidential,” and must comply with FTC Rule 4.9(c). In particular, the written request for confidential treatment that accompanies the comment must include the factual and legal basis for the request, and must identify the specific portions of the comment to be withheld from the public record. See FTC Rule 4.9(c). Your comment will be kept confidential only if the General Counsel grants your request in accordance with the law and the public interest. Once your comment has been posted on the public FTC Web site—as legally required by FTC Rule 4.9(b)—we cannot redact or remove your comment from the FTC Web site, unless you submit a confidentiality request that meets the requirements for such treatment under FTC Rule 4.9(c), and the General Counsel grants that request.

    Visit the FTC Web site at http://www.ftc.gov to read this Notice and the news release describing it. The FTC Act and other laws that the Commission administers permit the collection of public comments to consider and use in this proceeding, as appropriate. The Commission will consider all timely and responsive public comments that it receives on or before October 5, 2017. For information on the Commission's privacy policy, including routine uses permitted by the Privacy Act, see https://www.ftc.gov/site-information/privacy-policy.

    Analysis of Agreement Containing Consent Order To Aid Public Comment

    The Federal Trade Commission has accepted, subject to final approval, an agreement containing a consent order from Lenovo (United States), Inc. (“Lenovo”).

    The proposed consent order has been placed on the public record for thirty (30) days for receipt of comments by interested persons. Comments received during this period will become part of the public record. After thirty (30) days, the Commission again will review the agreement and the comments received and will decide whether it should withdraw from the agreement or make final the agreement's proposed order.

    This matter involves Lenovo, one of the world's largest personal computer manufacturers, and its preinstallation on certain consumer laptops of VisualDiscovery, an ad-injecting software developed by Superfish, Inc. and customized for Lenovo. VisualDiscovery injected pop-up ads of similar-looking products sold by Superfish's retail partners whenever a consumer's cursor hovered over a product image while browsing on a shopping Web site. For example, when a consumer's cursor hovered over an image of owl-shaped pendants on a shopping Web site like amazon.com, VisualDiscovery would show the user pop-up ads of similar-looking owl pendants. To do so, VisualDiscovery acted as a “man-in-the-middle” between consumers' browsers and the Web sites they visited, including encrypted https://websites. This man-in-the-middle technique allowed VisualDiscovery to see all of a consumer's sensitive personal information that was transmitted on the Internet, such as login credentials, Social Security numbers, financial account information, medical information, and email communications. VisualDiscovery then collected, transmitted to Superfish servers, and stored a more limited subset of user information, including the Web site addresses visited by consumers, consumers' IP addresses, and a unique identifier assigned by Superfish to each user's laptop. Superfish had the ability to collect additional information from Lenovo users through VisualDiscovery at any time.

    To facilitate its injection of pop-up ads into encrypted https://websites, VisualDiscovery installed a self-signed root certificate in the laptop's operating system. This allowed VisualDiscovery to replace the digital certificates for https://websites with VisualDiscovery's own certificates for those Web sites and caused consumers' browsers to automatically trust the VisualDiscovery-signed certificates. Digital certificates are part of the Transport Layer Security (TLS) protocol that, when properly validated, serve as proof that consumers are communicating with the authentic https://website and not an imposter.

    As alleged in the complaint, VisualDiscovery's substitution of digital certificates for https://websites with its own certificates for those Web sites created two significant security vulnerabilities. First, VisualDiscovery did not adequately verify that Web sites' digital certificates were valid before replacing them with its own certificates, which were automatically trusted by consumers' browsers. This rendered a critical browser security function useless because browsers would no longer warn consumers that their connections were untrusted when they visited potentially spoofed or malicious Web sites with invalid digital certificates.

    The complaint also alleges that VisualDiscovery created a second security vulnerability by using a self-signed root certificate with the same private encryption key and the same easy-to-crack password on every laptop rather than employing private keys unique to each laptop. This violated basic encryption key management principles because attackers who cracked the simple password on one consumer's laptop could then target every affected Lenovo user with man-in-the-middle attacks that could intercept consumers' electronic communications with any Web site, including those for financial institutions and medical providers. Such attacks would provide attackers with unauthorized access to consumers' sensitive personal information, such as Social Security numbers, financial account numbers, login credentials, medical information, and email communications. This vulnerability also made it easier for attackers to deceive consumers into downloading malware onto any affected Lenovo laptop. The risk that this vulnerability would be exploited increased after February 19, 2015, when news of these vulnerabilities became public and bloggers posted instructions on how the vulnerabilities could be exploited.

    The complaint alleges that Lenovo failed to discover these significant security vulnerabilities because it failed to take reasonable measures to assess and address security risks created by third-party software it preinstalled on its laptops. Specifically, Lenovo allegedly:

    • Failed to adopt and implement written data security policies applicable to third-party preinstalled software;

    • failed to adequately assess the data security risks of third-party software prior to preinstallation;

    • failed to request or review any information prior to preinstallation about Superfish's data security policies, procedures or practices;

    • failed to require Superfish by contract to adopt and implement reasonable data security measures;

    • failed to assess VisualDiscovery's compliance with reasonable data security standards; and

    • failed to provide adequate data security training for employees responsible for testing third-party software.

    The complaint alleges that Lenovo's failure was an unfair act that caused or was likely to cause substantial consumer injury that consumers could not reasonably avoid, and that there were no countervailing benefits to consumers or competition.

    The Commission's complaint also alleges that Lenovo failed to make adequate disclosures about VisualDiscovery to consumers. Lenovo did not disclose to consumers that it had preinstalled VisualDiscovery prior to purchase, and the software had limited visibility on the consumer's laptop. Lenovo only disclosed VisualDiscovery through a one-time pop-up window the first time consumers visited a shopping Web site that stated,

    Explore shopping with VisualDiscovery: Your browser is enabled with VisualDiscovery which lets you discover visually similar products and best prices while you shop.

    The pop-up window contained a small opt-out link at the bottom of the pop-up that was easy for consumers to miss. If a consumer clicked on the pop-up's `x' close button, or anywhere else on the screen, the consumer was opted in to the software.

    The complaint alleges that this pop-up window's disclosures were inadequate and violated Section 5 of the FTC Act by failing to disclose, or failing to disclose adequately, that VisualDiscovery would act as a man-in-the-middle between consumers and all the Web sites they visited, including encrypted https://websites, and collect and transmit certain consumer Internet browsing data to Superfish. These facts would be material to consumers' decisions whether or not to use VisualDiscovery.

    The complaint also alleges that Lenovo's preinstallation of the ad-injecting software that, without adequate notice or informed consent, acted as a man-in-the-middle between consumers and all the Web sites they visited, including encrypted https://websites, and collected and transmitted certain consumer Internet browsing data to Superfish was an unfair act that caused or was likely to cause substantial injury to consumers, and that was not offset by countervailing benefits to consumers or competition and was not reasonably avoidable by consumers.

    The proposed consent order contains provisions designed to prevent Lenovo from engaging in similar acts and practices in the future.

    Part I of the proposed order prohibits Lenovo from making any misrepresentations about certain preinstalled software on its personal computers.

    Part II of the proposed order requires Lenovo to obtain a consumer's affirmative express consent, with certain limited exceptions, prior to any preinstalled software a) injecting advertisements into a consumer's Internet browsing session, or b) transmitting, or causing to transmit, the consumer's personal information to any person or entity other than the consumer. Lenovo must also provide instructions for how consumers can revoke their consent to the software's operation by providing a reasonable and effective means for consumers to opt out, disable or remove the software.

    Parts III and IV of the proposed order require Lenovo to implement a mandated software security program that is reasonably designed to address security risks in software preinstalled on its personal computers, and undergo biennial software security assessments of its mandated software security program by a third party.

    Parts V through IX of the proposed order are standard reporting and compliance provisions. Part V requires dissemination of the order now and in the future to all current and future principals, officers, directors, and managers, and to persons with managerial or supervisory responsibilities relating to Parts I-IV of the order. Part VI mandates that Lenovo submit a compliance report to the FTC one year after issuance, and then notices, as the order specifies, thereafter. Parts VII and VIII requires Lenovo to retain documents relating to its compliance with the order for a five-year period, and to provide such additional information or documents necessary for the Commission to monitor compliance. Part IX states that the Order will remain in effect for 20 years.

    The purpose of this analysis is to aid public comment on the proposed order. It is not intended to constitute an official interpretation of the complaint or proposed order, or to modify in any way the proposed order's terms.

    By direction of the Commission.

    Donald S. Clark, Secretary.
    Statement of Acting Chairman Maureen K. Ohlhausen in the Matter of Lenovo, Inc.

    I support this important case and the strong settlement. I write separately to caution against an over broad application of our failure to disclose (sometimes called “deceptive omission”) authority. We should hew to longstanding case law and avoid circumventing congressionally-established limits on our authority. I therefore respectfully disagree with my colleague's position that we should expand Count I to allege additional failures to disclose.

    Most FTC deception cases involve an express misrepresentation (“This sugar pill cures cancer”) or an express statement that gives rise to an implied claim that is false or misleading (“Many people who take this sugar pill don't die of cancer”).

    Although the FTC and the courts have also recognized that a failure to disclose can be deceptive, this has limits.1 For every product there is a potentially enormous amount of information that at least some consumers might wish to know when deciding whether to purchase or use it.2 Copious disclosures would be both impractical and unhelpful, and the law sensibly does not require sellers to disclose all information that a consumer might find important.

    1International Harvester Co., 104 FTC 949 (1984), represents the Commission's most comprehensive effort to define deceptive omissions, and that framework remains in place today. See also, Cliffdale Associates, Inc., 103 FTC 110, App. A at 2 (1984) (“Deception Statement”).

    2International Harvester, 104 FTC at 1059 (explaining why the FTC does not treat pure omissions as deceptive).

    Thus, the FTC has generally found a failure to disclose to be deceptive in two categories of cases. First, the FTC has found “half-truths” to be deceptive, where a seller makes a truthful statement that creates a material misleading impression that the seller does not correct.3 Most of the FTC's failure to disclose cases are half-truth cases, and many could be restyled as cases of implied false or misleading claims. For example, a complaint addressing the claim that “Many people who take this sugar pill don't die of cancer” could allege an implied false claim that the pill cures cancer, or could allege a deceptive failure to disclose that the pill does not reduce the chances of dying from cancer.

    3Id. at 1057-58.

    Second, and less frequently, the FTC has found a seller's silence to be deceptive “under circumstances that constitute an implied but false representation.” 4 Such implied false representations can arise from “ordinary consumer expectations as to the irreducible minimum performance standards of a particular class of good.” 5 Stated differently, offering a product for sale implies that the product is “reasonably fit for [its] intended uses,” and that it is “free of gross safety hazards.” 6 If the product does not meet ordinary consumer expectations of minimum performance, or if the product is not reasonably fit for its intended uses, the seller must disclose that. For example, it would be deceptive for an auto dealer to sell, without a disclosure, a normal-looking car with a maximum speed of 35 miles per hour.7 Consumers expect cars to be able to reach highway speeds, and thus the dealer must disclose to the buyer that the car does not meet that ordinary expectation.

    4Id. at 1058.

    5Id.

    6Id. at 1058-59.

    7Id. at n.29.

    In such cases, an omission is misleading under the FTC Act if the consumers' ordinary fundamental expectations about the product were violated. Mere annoyances that leave the product reasonably fit for its intended use do not meet this threshold.8 Thus, a dealer's failure to disclose that some might find a car's seatbelt warning to be annoyingly loud would not be a deceptive omission because consumers have no ordinary expectations about car seatbelt warnings that would mislead them absent a disclosure.

    8Id. at 1058; Deception Statement at n.4 (“Not all omissions are deceptive, even if providing the information would benefit consumers . . . Failure to disclose that the product is not fit constitutes a deceptive omission.”)

    As International Harvester sets out at length, a deceptive omission is distinct from an unfair failure to warn or other forms of unfair omissions.9 The FTC has brought such cases under its unfairness authority where it has met the statutorily mandated higher burden of showing that the conduct causes or is likely to cause substantial consumer injury that is not reasonably avoidable by the consumer and is not outweighed by benefits to consumers or competition.10

    9Id. at 1051 (“It is important to distinguish between the circumstances under which omissions are deceptive . . . and the circumstances under which they amount to an unfair practice.”).

    10 15 U.S.C. 45(n).

    Turning to the case at hand, the complaint alleges that VisualDiscovery advertising software on Lenovo laptops acted as a man-in-the-middle between consumers and the Web sites they visited. As such, the software had access to all secure and unsecure consumer-Web site communications and rendered useless a critical security feature of the laptops' web browsers. Such practices introduced gross hazards inconsistent with ordinary consumer expectations about the minimum performance standards of software. As a result, the man-in-the-middle functionality and the problems it generated made VisualDiscovery unfit for its intended use as software. Thus, Count I properly alleges that Lenovo failed to disclose, or disclose adequately, that VisualDiscovery acted as a man-in-the-middle.11

    11 Count I of the complaint is pled in the form of a half-truth, but could also be pled as a failure to correct a false representation implied from circumstances, and so I address Commissioner McSweeny's argument as framed.

    Although Commissioner McSweeny and I both support Count I, she would add allegations that Lenovo failed to disclose that VisualDiscovery injected ads into shopping Web sites and slowed web browsing. She argues that the injected ads and slowed web browsing altered the internet experience of consumers, and thus VisualDiscovery failed to meet “ordinary consumer expectations as to the irreducible minimum performance standards of [that] particular class of good.” 12

    12 Statement of Commissioner Terrell McSweeny at 1 (citing International Harvester, 104 FTC at 1058).

    I respectfully disagree. Lenovo failed to disclose that VisualDiscovery would act as a man-in-the-middle. However, Lenovo did disclose that the software would introduce advertising into consumers' web browsing, although its disclosure could have been better. Furthermore, to the extent ordinary consumers expect anything from advertising software, they likely expect it to affect their web browsing and to be intrusive, as the popularity of ad blocking technology shows. In addition, unlike the man-in-the-middle technique, VisualDiscovery's ad placement and web browsing effects did not introduce gross hazards obviously outside of consumers' ordinary expectations for advertising software. In short, although VisualDiscovery's ad placement and effect on web browsing may have been irritating to many, those features did not make VisualDiscovery unfit for its intended use. Therefore, I do not find Lenovo's silence about those features to be a deceptive omission.

    Fortunately, the outcome in this case does not depend on resolving our disagreement on the application of deceptive omission to advertising software. My goal in writing separately is to maintain the clear distinction set forth in International Harvester between deceptive failures to disclose and unfair omissions.13 When evaluating the legality of a party's silence, we must be careful not to circumvent unfairness's higher evidentiary burden by simply restyling an unfair omission as a deceptive omission.

    13International Harvester, 104 FTC at 1051.

    Statement of Commissioner Terrell McSweeny in the Matter of Lenovo, Inc.

    I support the Commission's complaint against Lenovo, but I am troubled by conduct in this case that the Commission fails to challenge. According to the complaint, Lenovo, Inc. preinstalled software on computers that was designed to serve advertisements to consumers while they were browsing Web sites. The software, called VisualDiscovery, acted as a “man-in-the-middle” between the consumers and all of the Web sites with which they communicated. It allegedly actively contravened the security posture of consumers' computers, leaving them vulnerable both to attack from cyber-criminals and to transmitting personal information across the web to Superfish, Inc. servers. These unfair practices violate the Federal Trade Commission Act and are appropriately challenged by the FTC in Counts II and III of the complaint.

    But Lenovo's unlawful conduct went beyond the data security failings alleged in the complaint. The complaint also describes how the software it preinstalled on computers would: (1) Inject pop-up ads every time consumers visited a shopping Web site; and (2) disrupt web browsing by reducing download speeds by almost 25 percent and upload speeds by 125 percent. These facts were not disclosed to consumers and these omissions were deceptive.

    Moreover, the FTC alleges that the VisualDiscovery software was designed to be difficult to discover. Consumers were initially made aware of the existence of the VisualDiscovery software via a pop-up window the first time they visited an ecommerce site. But clicking to close that window opted consumers into the program. The initial pop-up window failed to disclose that VisualDiscovery would follow the consumers from shopping site to shopping site; slow the performance and functionality of the Web sites they visited; and compromise their security and privacy throughout each online browsing session.

    Under Section 5 of the FTC Act, the failure to disclose information necessary to prevent the creation of a false impression is a deceptive practice.1 A seller's silence may make an implied representation “based on ordinary consumer expectations as to the irreducible minimum performance standards of a particular class of good.” 2 In this case, Lenovo deceptively omitted that VisualDiscovery would alter the very internet experience for which most consumers buy a computer. I believe that if consumers were fully aware of what VisualDiscovery was, how it compromised their system, and how they could have opted out, most would have decided to keep VisualDiscovery inactive.

    1FTC Policy Statement on Deception, 103 F.T.C. 174, 175 (1984) (appended to Cliffdale Assocs., Inc., 103 F.T.C. 110 (1984)).

    2Int'l. Harvester Co., 104 F.T.C. 949, 1058 (1984).

    This is an exceptionally strong case and clearly articulates how the Commission uses its unfairness tools to protect the data security and privacy of consumers. I support Count I, but believe the FTC should have included additional deceptive conduct alleged in the complaint within the count. The FTC should not turn a blind eye to deceptive disclosures and opt-ins, particularly when consumers' privacy and security are at stake.

    [FR Doc. 2017-19385 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6750-01-P
    FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION Granting of Requests for Early Termination of the Waiting Period Under the Premerger Notification Rules

    Section 7A of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. 18a, as added by Title II of the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976, requires persons contemplating certain mergers or acquisitions to give the Federal Trade Commission and the Assistant Attorney General advance notice and to wait designated periods before consummation of such plans. Section 7A(b)(2) of the Act permits the agencies, in individual cases, to terminate this waiting period prior to its expiration and requires that notice of this action be published in the Federal Register.

    The following transactions were granted early termination—on the dates indicated—of the waiting period provided by law and the premerger notification rules. The listing for each transaction includes the transaction number and the parties to the transaction. The grants were made by the Federal Trade Commission and the Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice. Neither agency intends to take any action with respect to these proposed acquisitions during the applicable waiting period.

    Early Terminations Granted July 1, 2017 Through July 31, 2017 07/03/2017 20171409 G Quest Diagnostics Incorporated; Med Fusion, LLC; Quest Diagnostics Incorporated. 20171459 G Synnex Corporation; Datatec Limited; Synnex Corporation. 20171460 G Datatec Limited; Synnex Corporation; Datatec Limited. 20171483 G Warburg Pincus Private Equity XII, L.P.; Odyssey Investment Partners Fund IV, L.P.; Warburg Pincus Private Equity XII, L.P. 07/05/2017 20171470 G Caerus Operating, LLC; Encana Corporation; Caerus Operating, LLC. 20171480 G Enerflex Ltd.; Mesa Compression, LLC; Enerflex Ltd. 07/06/2017 20171464 G Donuts Inc.; Rightside Group Ltd.; Donuts Inc. 07/10/2017 20171506 G Vista Foundation Fund III, L.P.; Francisco Partners III (Domestic AIV), L.P.; Vista Foundation Fund III, L.P. 20171508 G Gryphon Partners IV, L.P.; ACOF IV CWC AIV Blocked Feeder, L.P.; Gryphon Partners IV, L.P. 20171516 G Softbank Group Corp.; Alphabet Inc.; Softbank Group Corp. 20171524 G Vista Foundation Fund III, L.P.; Upserve, Inc.; Vista Foundation Fund III, L.P. 20171533 G 2297984 Ontario Limited; TEGNA Inc.; 2297984 Ontario Limited. 20171538 G Marquee Brands Partners, LP; BCBG Max Azria Global Holdings, LLC; Marquee Brands Partners, LP. 07/11/2017 20171468 G John C. Malone; Liberty Interactive Corporation; John C. Malone. 20171504 G Sonoco Products Company; Sanfilippo Family SD Trust; Sonoco Products Company. 20171531 G Tallgrass Equity, LLC; Kinder Morgan, Inc.; Tallgrass Equity, LLC. 07/12/2017 20171462 G JANA Nirvana Offshore Fund, Ltd.; Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc.; JANA Nirvana Offshore Fund, Ltd. 20171474 G William P. Foley, II; Black Knight Holdco Corp.; William P. Foley, II. 20171475 G Thomas H. Lee Parallel Fund VI, L.P.; Black Knight Holdco Corp.; Thomas H. Lee Parallel Fund VI, L.P. 20171476 G Thomas H. Lee Equity Fund VI, L.P.; Black Knight Holdco Corp.; Thomas H. Lee Equity Fund VI, L.P. 20171477 G THL Equity Fund VI Investors (BKFS), L.P.; Black Knight Holdco Corp.; THL Equity Fund VI Investors (BKFS), L.P. 20171478 G THL Equity Fund VI Investors (BKFS) II, L.P.; Black Knight Holdco Corp.; THL Equity Fund VI Investors (BKFS) II, L.P. 20171497 G Desmarais Family Residuary Trust; Personal Capital Corporation; Desmarais Family Residuary Trust. 20171505 G Asia-Germany Industry 4.0 Promotion Cross-Border Fund I L.P.; Olympus Growth Fund V, L.P.; Asia-Germany Industry 4.0 Promotion Cross-Border Fund I L.P. 20171518 G AECOM; Shimmick Construction Company, Inc.; AECOM. 20171532 G Xinghai Zhang; Ronald Perelman; Xinghai Zhang. 20171535 G Legrand S.A.; PGPC-Milestone LLC; Legrand S.A. 07/13/2017 20171195 G IAC/InterActiveCorp; Angie's List, Inc.; IAC/InterActiveCorp. 20171443 G Astra-LOGIX Holdings, LLC; Gores Capital Partners III, L.P.; Astra-LOGIX Holdings, LLC. 20171444 G WAFRA Real Assets & Infrastructure Fund I, L.P.; Gores Capital Partners III, L.P.; WAFRA Real Assets & Infrastructure Fund I, L.P. 20171503 G Occidental Petroleum Corporation; Hess Corporation; Occidental Petroleum Corporation. 20171529 G Centerbridge Capital Partners III, L.P.; Clearlake Capital Partners IV, L.P.; Centerbridge Capital Partners III, L.P. 07/14/2017 20171224 G Cisco Systems, Inc.; Viptela, Inc.; Cisco Systems, Inc. 20171525 G Unilever N.V.; Carisa Janes Levitt; Unilever N.V. 20171534 G True Wind Capital, L.P.; ARI Network Services, Inc.; True Wind Capital, L.P. 20171539 G AK Steel Holding Corporation; PPHC Holdings, LLC; AK Steel Holding Corporation. 20171542 G Massimo Scagliarini; Industrial Opportunity Partners, L.P.; Massimo Scagliarini. 20171548 G Arsenal Capital Partners IV, LP; PolyOne Corporation; Arsenal Capital Partners IV, LP. 20171550 G Enel S.p.A.; EnerNOC, Inc.; Enel S.p.A. 20171554 G The Home Depot, Inc.; Compact Power Equipment, Inc.; The Home Depot, Inc. 20171558 G SoftBank Vision Fund L.P.; Michael G. Rubin; SoftBank Vision Fund L.P. 20171560 G Mason Wells Buyout Fund IV, LP; King Juice Company, Inc.; Mason Wells Buyout Fund IV, LP. 07/17/2017 20171487 G Glenview Capital Partners (Cayman), Ltd.; The Dow Chemical Company; Glenview Capital Partners (Cayman), Ltd. 20171488 G Larry Robbins; The Dow Chemical Company; Larry Robbins. 20171490 G Glenview Institutional Partners, L.P.; The Dow Chemical Company; Glenview Institutional Partners, L.P. 20171491 G Glenview Offshore Opportunity Fund, Ltd.; The Dow Chemical Company; Glenview Offshore Opportunity Fund, Ltd. 20171492 G GCM Equity Partners LP; The Dow Chemical Company; GCM Equity Partners LP. 20171553 G Warburg Pincus Private Equity XII, L.P.; Sterling Investment Partners II, L.P.; Warburg Pincus Private Equity XII, L.P. 07/18/2017 20171498 G Fairholme Funds, Inc.; The St. Joe Company; Fairholme Funds, Inc. 20171527 G Letterone Investment Holdings S.A.; Parexel International Corporation; Letterone Investment Holdings S.A. 20171536 G EQT Corporation; Rice Energy Inc.; EQT Corporation. 20171540 G Macquarie Group Limited; Cargill Incorporated; Macquarie Group Limited. 20171563 G Odyssey Investment Partners Fund V, L.P.; CPI International Holding LLC; Odyssey Investment Partners Fund V, L.P. 07/19/2017 20171522 G Third Point Partners Qualified L.P.; Nestle S.A.; Third Point Partners Qualified L.P. 20171566 G Olympus Growth Fund V, L.P.; Southern Imperial, Inc., Employee Stock Ownership Trust; Olympus Growth Fund V, L.P. 07/20/2017 20170539 S Baxter International Inc.; Mr. Arjun Handa; Baxter International Inc. 20171541 G ScanSource, Inc.; Kent B. Stryker; ScanSource, Inc. 20171551 G Teekay Corporation; Tanker Investments Ltd.; Teekay Corporation. 20171561 G TPG Growth III DE AIV II, L.P.; Old Ironside Energy Fund II-A, LP; TPG Growth III DE AIV II, L.P. 20171562 G Littlejohn Fund V, L.P.; H.I.G. BBC Holdings, LLC; Littlejohn Fund V, L.P. 07/21/2017 20170913 S Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated; Concert Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated. 20171559 G CP VI Raptor Holdings, L.P.; Snow Phipps II AIV, L.P.; CP VI Raptor Holdings, L.P. 20171569 G Trilantic Capital Partners V (N.A.) L.P.; BP Ortholite LLC; Trilantic Capital Partners V (N.A.) L.P. 20171570 G Logitech International S.A.; Mill Road Capital II, L.P.; Logitech International S.A. 20171573 G Kyocera Corporation; Wynnchurch Capital Partners II, L.P.; Kyocera Corporation. 20171574 G WPH Holdings II, LLC ; Olympus Growth Fund V, L.P. ; WPH Holdings II, LLC 20171575 G Snow Phipps III, L.P.; Industrial Growth Partners IV, L.P.; Snow Phipps III, L.P. 20171576 G DS Smith plc; Merpas Co. S.a.r.l.; DS Smith plc. 20171583 G Letterone Investment Holdings S.A.; Mill Luxembourg I S.a.r.l.; Letterone Investment Holdings S.A. 20171589 G 3i Group plc; Century Park Capital Partners II, L.P.; 3i Group plc. 07/24/2017 20171404 G CoreLogic, Inc.; Serent Capital II, L.P.; CoreLogic, Inc. 20171544 G JANA Nirvana Offshore Fund, Ltd.; EQT Corporation; JANA Nirvana Offshore Fund, Ltd. 20171545 G JANA Partners Qualified, L.P.; EQT Corporation; JANA Partners Qualified, L.P. 20171596 G Solar Capital Ltd.; NEF Holdings, LLC; Solar Capital Ltd. 07/25/2017 20171519 G GTT Communications, Inc.; F. Francis Najafi; GTT Communications, Inc. 20171547 G Vistra Energy Corp.; Koch Industries, Inc.; Vistra Energy Corp. 20171585 G USI Advantage Corp.; Wells Fargo & Company; USI Advantage Corp. 20171586 G Monomoy Capital Partners III, L.P.; West Marine, Inc.; Monomoy Capital Partners III, L.P. 20171590 G CK William UK Holdings Ltd; Granger Energy Holdings, LLC; CK William UK Holdings Ltd. 20171597 G Verisk Analytics, Inc.; Primus Capital Fund VI, LP; Verisk Analytics, Inc. 07/26/2017 20171287 G Motorola Solutions, Inc.; Kodiak Networks, Inc.; Motorola Solutions, Inc. 20171523 G Cedars-Sinai Health System; Torrance Health Association; Cedars-Sinai Health System. 20171579 G Sycamore Partners II, L.P.; Staples, Inc.; Sycamore Partners II, L.P. 20171581 G ACOF V DP-A AIV LP; DMG Practice Management Solutions LLC; ACOF V DP-A AIV LP. 07/27/2017 20171593 G H.I.G. Middle Market LBO Fund II, L.P.; Charles K. Narang; H.I.G. Middle Market LBO Fund II, L.P. 20171595 G EQT VII (No. 1) Limited Partnership; Arsenal MBDD Holding, LP; EQT VII (No. 1) Limited Partnership. 07/28/2017 20171599 G WCF APF Ventures LLC; Trident V, L.P.; WCF APF Ventures LLC. 20171600 G MasterCard Incorporated; Akli Adjaoute; MasterCard Incorporated. 20171614 G TowerBrook Investors IV (Onshore), L.P.; Aernnova Aerospace Corporation, S.A.; TowerBrook Investors IV (Onshore), L.P. 20171620 G AP VIII Constellation Holdings, L.P.; ClubCorp Holdings, Inc.; AP VIII Constellation Holdings, L.P. 20171623 G MTS Health Investors IV, L.P.; Private Equity Holdings Fund LP; MTS Health Investors IV, L.P. 20171624 G Larry Robbins; DowDuPont Inc.; Larry Robbins. 20171625 G Glenview Offshore Opportunity Fund, Ltd.; DowDuPont Inc.; Glenview Offshore Opportunity Fund, Ltd. 20171627 G Glenview Institutional Partners, L.P.; DowDuPont Inc.; Glenview Institutional Partners, L.P. 20171628 G Glenview Capital Partners (Cayman), Ltd.; DowDuPont Inc.; Glenview Capital Partners (Cayman), Ltd. 20171629 G GCM Equity Partners LP; DowDuPont Inc.; GCM Equity Partners LP. 20171637 G Church & Dwight Co., Inc.; Pik Holdings, Inc.; Church & Dwight Co., Inc. 07/31/2017 20171349 G Rayonier Advanced Materials Inc.; Tembec Inc.; Rayonier Advanced Materials Inc. 20171571 G Brynwood Partners VII L.P.; Dorothy M. Lenore; Brynwood Partners VII L.P. 20171578 G Reyes Holdings, L.L.C.; The Coca-Cola Company; Reyes Holdings, L.L.C. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Theresa Kingsberry, Program Support Specialist, Federal Trade Commission Premerger Notification Office, Bureau of Competition, Room CC-5301, Washington, DC 20024, (202) 326-3100.

    By direction of the Commission.

    Donald S. Clark, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19426 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6750-01-P
    FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION [File No. 1623184] CSGOLotto, Inc.; Analysis To Aid Public Comment AGENCY:

    Federal Trade Commission.

    ACTION:

    Proposed consent agreement.

    SUMMARY:

    The consent agreement in this matter settles alleged violations of federal law prohibiting unfair or deceptive acts or practices. The attached Analysis to Aid Public Comment describes both the allegations in the complaint and the terms of the consent order—embodied in the consent agreement—that would settle these allegations.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before October 10, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested parties may file a comment online or on paper, by following the instructions in the Request for Comment part of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below. Write: “In the Matter of CSGO Lotto, Inc., File No. 1623184” on your comment, and file your comment online at https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/csgolottoconsent by following the instructions on the web-based form. If you prefer to file your comment on paper, write “In the Matter of CSGO Lotto, Inc., File No. 1623184” on your comment and on the envelope, and mail your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Suite CC-5610 (Annex D), Washington, DC 20580, or deliver your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW., 5th Floor, Suite 5610 (Annex D), Washington, DC 20024.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Michael Ostheimer (202-326-2699), Bureau of Consumer Protection, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Pursuant to section 6(f) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and FTC Rule 2.34, 16 CFR 2.34, notice is hereby given that the above-captioned consent agreement containing a consent order to cease and desist, having been filed with and accepted, subject to final approval, by the Commission, has been placed on the public record for a period of thirty (30) days. The following Analysis to Aid Public Comment describes the terms of the consent agreement, and the allegations in the complaint. An electronic copy of the full text of the consent agreement package can be obtained from the FTC Home Page (for September 7, 2017), on the World Wide Web, at https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/commission-actions.

    You can file a comment online or on paper. For the Commission to consider your comment, we must receive it on or before October 10, 2017. Write “In the Matter of CSGO Lotto, Inc., File No. 1623184” on your comment. Your comment—including your name and your state—will be placed on the public record of this proceeding, including, to the extent practicable, on the public Commission Web site, at https://www.ftc.gov/policy/public-comments.

    Postal mail addressed to the Commission is subject to delay due to heightened security screening. As a result, we encourage you to submit your comments online. To make sure that the Commission considers your online comment, you must file it at https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/csgolottoconsent by following the instructions on the web-based form. If this Notice appears at http://www.regulations.gov/#!home, you also may file a comment through that Web site.

    If you prefer to file your comment on paper, write “In the Matter of CSGO Lotto, Inc., File No. 1623184” on your comment and on the envelope, and mail your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Suite CC-5610 (Annex D), Washington, DC 20580, or deliver your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW., 5th Floor, Suite 5610 (Annex D), Washington, DC 20024. If possible, submit your paper comment to the Commission by courier or overnight service.

    Because your comment will be placed on the publicly accessible FTC Web site at https://www.ftc.gov, you are solely responsible for making sure that your comment does not include any sensitive or confidential information. In particular, your comment should not include any sensitive personal information, such as your or anyone else's Social Security number; date of birth; driver's license number or other state identification number, or foreign country equivalent; passport number; financial account number; or credit or debit card number. You are also solely responsible for making sure that your comment does not include any sensitive health information, such as medical records or other individually identifiable health information. In addition, your comment should not include any “trade secret or any commercial or financial information which . . . is privileged or confidential”—as provided by section 6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 4.10(a)(2)—including in particular competitively sensitive information such as costs, sales statistics, inventories, formulas, patterns, devices, manufacturing processes, or customer names.

    Comments containing material for which confidential treatment is requested must be filed in paper form, must be clearly labeled “Confidential,” and must comply with FTC Rule 4.9(c). In particular, the written request for confidential treatment that accompanies the comment must include the factual and legal basis for the request, and must identify the specific portions of the comment to be withheld from the public record. See FTC Rule 4.9(c). Your comment will be kept confidential only if the General Counsel grants your request in accordance with the law and the public interest. Once your comment has been posted on the public FTC Web site—as legally required by FTC Rule 4.9(b)—we cannot redact or remove your comment from the FTC Web site, unless you submit a confidentiality request that meets the requirements for such treatment under FTC Rule 4.9(c), and the General Counsel grants that request.

    Visit the FTC Web site at http://www.ftc.gov to read this Notice and the news release describing it. The FTC Act and other laws that the Commission administers permit the collection of public comments to consider and use in this proceeding, as appropriate. The Commission will consider all timely and responsive public comments that it receives on or before October 10, 2017. For information on the Commission's privacy policy, including routine uses permitted by the Privacy Act, see https://www.ftc.gov/site-information/privacy-policy.

    Analysis of Agreement Containing Consent Order To Aid Public Comment

    The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC” or “Commission”) has accepted, subject to final approval, an agreement containing a consent order from CSGOLotto, Inc., Trevor Martin (“Martin”), and Thomas Cassell (“Cassell”) (collectively “respondents”).

    The proposed consent order (“order”) has been placed on the public record for 30 days for receipt of comments by interested persons. Comments received during this period will become part of the public record. After 30 days, the Commission will again review the agreement and the comments received, and will decide whether it should withdraw from the agreement or make the final the agreement's order.

    This matter involves respondents' advertising for their Web site, www.csgolotto.com (“CSGO Lotto”), which offered consumers the opportunity to gamble using what is in effect a virtual currency. The complaint alleges that respondents violated section 5(a) of the FTC Act by misrepresenting that videos of Martin, Cassell, and other influencers gambling on CSGO Lotto and their social media posts about CSGO Lotto reflected the independent opinions or experiences of impartial users of the service. According to the complaint, Martin is the President, Cassell is the Vice President, and both are owners of the company operating CSGO Lotto, and the other influencers were paid to promote CSGO Lotto and were prohibited from impairing its reputation. The complaint further alleges that respondents deceptively failed to disclose that Martin and Cassell were owners and officers of the company operating CSGO Lotto and that other influencers received compensation, including monetary payment, to promote CSGO Lotto.

    The order includes injunctive relief to address these alleged violations and fences in similar and related violations.

    Provision I prohibits respondents, in connection with the sale of any product or service, from misrepresenting that any endorser of such product or service is an independent user or ordinary consumer of the product or service.

    Provision II prohibits respondents from making any representation about any consumer or other endorser of a product or service without disclosing, clearly and conspicuously, and in close proximity to that representation, any unexpected material connection between the consumer or endorser and (1) any respondent, (2) any other individual or entity affiliated with the product or service, or (3) the product or service (“relevant material connections”). The order defines “clearly and conspicuously” as the term applies to the required disclosures.

    Provision III sets out certain monitoring and compliance obligations to ensure that when respondents advertise or promote any product or service through endorsers with relevant material connections, the endorsers comply with Provisions I and II of the order. These obligations include: Obtaining signed acknowledgements from such endorsers that they will disclose their relevant material connections; monitoring the endorsers' representations and disclosures; maintaining records of monitoring efforts; and, under certain circumstances, terminating and ceasing payment to endorsers who misrepresent their independence or fail to properly disclose a relevant material connection.

    Provision IV mandates that respondents acknowledge receipt of the order, distribute the order to principals, officers, and certain employees and agents, and obtain signed acknowledgments from them.

    Provision V requires that respondents submit compliance reports to the FTC one year after the order's issuance and submit notifications when certain events occur.

    Provision VI requires that for ten years respondents must create and retain certain records.

    Provision VII provides for the FTC's continued compliance monitoring of respondent's activity during the order's effective dates.

    Provision VIII provides the effective dates of the order, including that, with exceptions, the order will terminate in 20 years.

    The purpose of this analysis is to facilitate public comment on the order, and it is not intended to constitute an official interpretation of the complaint or order, or to modify the order's terms in any way.

    By direction of the Commission.

    Donald S. Clark, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19390 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6750-01-P
    GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION [OMB Control No. 3090-0300; Docket No. 2017-0001; Sequence 9] Information Collection; General Services Administration Acquisition Regulation; Implementation of Information Technology Security Provision AGENCY:

    Office of Acquisition Policy, General Services Administration (GSA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of request for comments regarding an extension to an existing OMB information collection.

    SUMMARY:

    Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Regulatory Secretariat Division will be submitting to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request to review and approve a renewal of the currently approved information collection requirement regarding Implementation of Information Technology Security Provision.

    DATES:

    Submit comments on or before November 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments identified by Information Collection 3090-0300, Implementation of Information Technology Security Provision, by any of the following methods:

    Regulations.gov: http://www.regulations.gov. Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by searching the OMB control number 3090-0300. Select the link “Comment Now” that corresponds with “Information Collection 3090-0300, Implementation of Information Technology Security Provision”. Follow the instructions provided on the screen. Please include your name, company name (if any), and “Information Collection 3090-0300, Implementation of Information Technology Security Provision” on your attached document.

    Mail: General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW., Washington, DC 20405. ATTN: Mr. Poe/IC 3090-0300.

    Instructions: Please submit comments only and cite Information Collection 3090-0300, Implementation of Information Technology Security Provision, in all correspondence related to this collection. Comments received generally will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal and/or business confidential information provided. To confirm receipt of your comment(s), please check www.regulations.gov, approximately two to three days after submission to verify posting (except allow 30 days for posting of comments submitted by mail).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Kevin Funk, Program Analyst, Office of Acquisition Policy, at 202-357-5805 or via email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    A. Purpose

    Clause 552.239-71 requires contractors, within 30 days after contract award, to submit an IT Security Plan to the Contracting Officer and Contacting Officer's Representative that describes the processes and procedures that will be followed to ensure appropriate security of IT resources that are developed, processed, or used under the contract. The clause will also require that contractors submit written proof of IT security authorization six months after contract award, and verify that the IT Security Plan remains valid annually.

    B. Annual Reporting Burden

    Respondents: 160.

    Responses per Respondent: 2.

    Total Annual Responses: 320.

    Hours per Response: 5.

    Total Burden Hours: 1,600.

    C. Public Comments

    Public comments are particularly invited on: Whether this collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of functions of the GSAR, and whether it will have practical utility; whether our estimate of the public burden of this collection of information is accurate, and based on valid assumptions and methodology; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways in which we can minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, through the use of appropriate technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Obtaining Copies of Proposals: Requesters may obtain a copy of the information collection documents from the General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW., Washington, DC 20405, telephone 202-501-4755. Please cite OMB Control No. 3090-0300, Implementation of Information Technology Security Provision, in all correspondence.

    Jeffrey A. Koses, Director, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of Government-wide Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19349 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-61-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION [OMB Control No. 9000-0013; Docket 2017-0053; Sequence 7] Information Collection; Certified Cost or Pricing Data and Data Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data AGENCY:

    Department of Defense (DOD), General Services Administration (GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of request for public comments regarding an extension to an existing OMB information collection.

    SUMMARY:

    Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Regulatory Secretariat Division will be submitting to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request to review and approve an extension of a previously approved information collection requirement concerning Certified Cost or Pricing Data and Data Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data.

    DATES:

    Submit comments on or before November 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments identified by Information Collection 9000-0013, Certified Cost or Pricing Data and Data Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data, by any of the following methods:

    Regulations.gov: http://www.regulations.gov. Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by searching the OMB control number 9000-0013. Select the link that corresponds with “Information Collection 9000-0013, Certified Cost or Pricing Data and Data Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data”. Follow the instructions provided on the screen. Please include your name, company name (if any), and “Information Collection 9000-0013, Certified Cost or Pricing Data and Data Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data”, on your attached document.

    Mail: General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW., Washington, DC 20405. ATTN: Mr. Poe/IC 9000-0013, Certified Cost or Pricing Data and Data Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data.

    Instructions: Please submit comments only and cite Information Collection 9000-0013, Certified Cost or Pricing Data and Data Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data, in all correspondence related to this collection. All comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal and/or business confidential information provided.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Michael O. Jackson, Procurement Analyst, Federal Acquisition Policy Division, GSA, 202-208-4949 or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    A. Purpose

    The Truth in Negotiations Act requires the Government to obtain certified cost or pricing data under certain circumstances. Contractors may request an exemption from this requirement under certain conditions and provide other information instead.

    B. Annual Reporting Burden

    Fiscal year 2016 data was obtained from the Federal Procurement Data System to estimate burdens for the provisions and clauses addressed in this information collection notice. This update does not include the requirements at FAR 42.7, Indirect Cost Rates, as this requirement is covered under OMB Control Number 9000-0069. The data for 52.215-20 is for new contract awards in FY 2016. The data for modifications and orders executed in FY 2016 applies to new contract awards as well as to prior multiple year contracts that continue to be active. The following is a summary of the FY 2016 data:

    1. Subcontractor C&P Data-Mods (FAR 52.214-28)

    Respondents: 8.

    Responses per Respondent: 1.

    Total Responses: 8.

    Hours per Response: 160.

    Total Burden Hours: 1,280.

    2. Subcontractor C&P Data (FAR 52.215-12)

    Respondents: 3,832.

    Responses per Respondent: 1.

    Total Responses: 3,832.

    Hours per Response: 160.

    Total Burden Hours: 613,120.

    3. Subcontractor C&P Data-Mods (FAR 52.214-13)

    Respondents: 1,292.

    Responses per Respondent: 1.

    Total Responses: 1,292.

    Hours per Response: 160.

    Total Burden Hours: 206,720.

    4. Requirement for C&P Data and Data Other than C&P Data (FAR 52.215-20)

    Respondents: 25,853.

    Responses per Respondent: 1.69.

    Total Responses: 117,225.

    Hours per Response: 143.

    Total Burden Hours: 6,506,140.

    5. Requirement for C&P Data and Data Other than C&P Data-Mods (FAR 52.215-21)

    Respondents: 8,440.

    Responses per Respondent: 3.

    Total Responses: 27,623.

    Hours per Response: 106.

    Total Burden Hours: 2,432,560.

    6. Total

    Respondents: 39,425.

    Responses per Respondent: 3.80.

    Total Responses: 149,980.

    Hours per Response: 65.

    Total Burden Hours: 9,759,820.

    C. Public Comments

    Public comments are particularly invited on: Whether this collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of functions of the FAR, and whether it will have practical utility; whether our estimate of the public burden of this collection of information is accurate, and based on valid assumptions and methodology; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways in which we can minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, through the use of appropriate technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Obtaining Copies of Proposals: Requesters may obtain a copy of the information collection documents from the General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW., Washington, DC 20405, telephone 202-501-4755. Please cite OMB Control No. 9000-0013, Certified Cost or Pricing Data and Data Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data, in all correspondence.

    Dated: September 6, 2017. Lorin S. Curt, Director, Federal Acquisition Policy Division, Office of Government-wide Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of Government-wide Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19340 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-EP-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Board of Scientific Counselors, National Center for Environmental Health/Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (BSC, NCEH/ATSDR); Cancellation of Meeting

    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the Board of Scientific Counselors, National Center for Environmental Health/Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (BSC, NCEH/ATSDR), September 13, 2017 8:30 a.m.-4:30 p.m., EST; and September 14, 2017 8:30 a.m.-11:30 a.m., EST, which was published in the Federal Register on July 26, 2017, at 83 FR 34674.

    This meeting is being canceled in its entirety and this notice is being published on less than 15 days prior to the meeting date due to Hurricane Irma.

    For further information contact Amanda Malasky, BS, ORISE Fellow, CDC, 4770 Buford Highway, Atlanta, Georgia 30341-3717, telephone 770-488-7699; [email protected]

    The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.

    Elaine L. Baker, Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19530 Filed 9-11-17; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health (ABRWH or the Advisory Board), National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) AGENCY:

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), announces the following meeting of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health (ABRWH). This meeting is open to the public, but without a public comment period. The public is welcome to submit written comments in advance of the meeting, to the contact person below. Written comments received in advance of the meeting will be included in the official record of the meeting. The public is also welcome to listen to the meeting by joining the teleconference at the USA toll-free, dial-in number at 1-866-659-0537; the pass code is 9933701. The conference line has 150 ports for callers.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on October 5, 2017, 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. EDT.

    ADDRESSES:

    Audio Conference Call via FTS Conferencing. The USA toll-free dial-in number is 1-866-659-0537; the pass code is 9933701.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Theodore Katz, MPA, Designated Federal Officer, NIOSH, CDC, 1600 Clifton Road, Mailstop E-20, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, Telephone (513) 533-6800, Toll Free 1 (800) CDC-INFO, Email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background: The Advisory Board was established under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000 to advise the President on a variety of policy and technical functions required to implement and effectively manage the new compensation program. Key functions of the Advisory Board include providing advice on the development of probability of causation guidelines which have been promulgated by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) as a final rule, advice on methods of dose reconstruction which have also been promulgated by HHS as a final rule, advice on the scientific validity and quality of dose estimation and reconstruction efforts being performed for purposes of the compensation program, and advice on petitions to add classes of workers to the Special Exposure Cohort (SEC). In December 2000, the President delegated responsibility for funding, staffing, and operating the Advisory Board to HHS, which subsequently delegated this authority to the CDC. NIOSH implements this responsibility for CDC. The charter was issued on August 3, 2001, renewed at appropriate intervals, rechartered on March 22, 2016 pursuant to Executive Order 13708, and will expire on September 30, 2017.

    Purpose: This Advisory Board is charged with (a) providing advice to the Secretary, HHS, on the development of guidelines under Executive Order 13179; (b) providing advice to the Secretary, HHS, on the scientific validity and quality of dose reconstruction efforts performed for this program; and (c) upon request by the Secretary, HHS, advising the Secretary on whether there is a class of employees at any Department of Energy facility who were exposed to radiation but for whom it is not feasible to estimate their radiation dose, and on whether there is reasonable likelihood that such radiation doses may have endangered the health of members of this class.

    Matters To Be Considered: The agenda will include discussions on: Final Vote Counts from the August ABRWH Meeting for Feeds Material Production Center SEC petition (Fernald, OH), Idaho National Laboratory SEC petition (Scoville, ID), and Grand Junction Facilities SEC petition (Grand Junction, CO); Savannah River Site SEC Petition (Aiken, SC); Work Group and Subcommittee Reports; Update on the Status of SEC Petitions; Plans for the December 2017 Advisory Board Meeting; and Advisory Board Correspondence. Agenda items are subject to change as priorities dictate.

    The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.

    Claudette Grant, Acting Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19443 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-19-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), ICD-10 Coordination and Maintenance (C&M) Committee Meeting AGENCY:

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), Classifications and Public Health Data Standards Staff, announces the following meeting of the ICD-10 Coordination and Maintenance (C&M) Committee meeting. This meeting is open to the public, limited only by the space available. The meeting room accommodates approximately 240 people. We will be broadcasting the meeting live via Webcast at http://www.cms.gov/live/.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on September 12, 2017, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. EDT and September 13, 2017, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. EDT.

    ADDRESSES:

    Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Auditorium, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Traci Ramirez, CCA, Program Specialist, CDC, National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), Classifications and Public Health Data Standards Staff (CPHDSS), 3311 Toledo Rd., Hyattsville, Maryland 20715, telephone (301) 458-4454, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Purpose: The ICD-10 Coordination and Maintenance (C&M) Committee is a public forum for the presentation of proposed modifications to the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification and ICD-10 Procedure Coding System.

    Matters To Be Considered: The agenda will include discussions on.

    ICD-10-PCS Topics Irreversible Electroporation (IRE) Shunt Ligation/Occlusion Spinal Fusion with Interbody Fusion Device Bypass Descending Thoracic Aorta to Abdominal Artery ICD-10-CM Diagnosis Topics Anemia due to Myelosuppressive Antineoplastic Chemotherapy Cyclic Vomiting Ecstasy Classification Elevated Lipoprotein(a) Factitious Disorder Incontinence-Associated Dermatitis (IAD) Intracranial Hypotension Muscular Dystrophy Neonatal Metabolic Disturbances Other Doubling of Uterus Primary Sclerosing Cholangitis Tarlov Perineural Cysts Williams Syndrome Zika related newborn conditions ICD-10-CM Addendum

    Agenda items are subject to change as priorities dictate.

    Security Considerations: Due to increased security requirements CMS has instituted stringent procedures for entrance into the building by non-government employees. Attendees will need to present valid government-issued picture identification, and sign-in at the security desk upon entering the building. Attendees who wish to attend the September 12-13, 2017, ICD-10-CM C&M meeting must submit their name and organization by September 8, 2017, for inclusion on the visitor list. This visitor list will be maintained at the front desk of the CMS building and used by the guards to admit visitors to the meeting.

    Participants who attended previous Coordination and Maintenance meetings will no longer be automatically added to the visitor list. You must request inclusion of your name prior to each meeting you wish attend.

    Please register to attend the meeting on-line at: http://www.cms.hhs.gov/apps/events/.

    Please contact Mady Hue (410-786-4510 or [email protected]), for questions about the registration process.

    Note:

    CMS and NCHS no longer provide paper copies of handouts for the meeting. Electronic copies of all meeting materials will be posted on the CMS and NCHS Web sites prior to the meeting at http://www.cms.hhs.gov/ICD9ProviderDiagnosticCodes/03_meetings.asp#TopOfPage and https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/icd/icd10cm_maintenance.htm.

    The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.

    Claudette Grant, Acting Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19444 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families Proposed Information Collection Activity; Comment Request

    Proposed Projects: Grant Reviewer Recruitment and Recordkeeping.

    Title: Case Plan Requirement, Title IV-E of the Social Security Act.

    OMB No.: 0970-0428.

    Respondents: State and Tribe title IV-B and title IV-E agencies.

    Description: Under section 471(a)(16) of title IV-E of the Social Security Act (the Act), to be eligible for payments, states and tribes must have an approved title IV-E plan that provides for the development of a case plan for each child for whom the State or Tribe receives foster care maintenance payments and that provides a case review system that meets the requirements in section 475(5) and 475(6) of the Act.

    The case review system assures that each child has a case plan designed to achieve placement in a safe setting that is the least restrictive (most family-like) setting available and in close proximity to the child's parental home, consistent with the best interest and special needs of the child. Through these requirements, States and Tribes also comply, in part, with title IV-B section 422(b) of the Act, which assures certain protections for children in foster care.

    The case plan is a written document that provides a narrative description of the child-specific program of care. Federal regulations at 45 CFR 1356.21(g) and section 475(1) of the Act delineate the specific information that should be addressed in the case plan. The Administration for Children and Families (ACF) does not specify a recordkeeping format for the case plan nor does ACF require submission of the document to the Federal government. Case plan information is recorded in a format developed and maintained by the State or Tribal child welfare agency.

    Annual Burden Estimates Instrument Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden hours
  • per response
  • Total burden
  • hours
  • Case Plan 544,098 1 4.80 2,626,436

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 2,626,436.

    In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, 44 U.S.C. Chap 35), the Administration for Children and Families is soliciting public comment on the specific aspects of the information collection described above. Copies of the proposed collection of information may be obtained and comments may be forwarded by writing to the Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, 330 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20201. Attn: ACF Reports Clearance Officer. Email address: [email protected] All requests should be identified by the title of the information collection.

    The Department specifically requests comments on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted within 60 days of this publication.

    Robert Sargis, Reports Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19367 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184-25-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2017-D-5297] Microdose Radiopharmaceutical Diagnostic Drugs: Nonclinical Study Recommendations; Draft Guidance for Industry; Availability AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled “Microdose Radiopharmaceutical Diagnostic Drugs: Nonclinical Study Recommendations.” This draft guidance is intended to assist developers of microdose radiopharmaceutical diagnostic drugs on the nonclinical studies recommended to support human clinical trials and marketing authorization. The draft guidance discusses how to refine nonclinical study recommendations for this class of drug given its unique characteristics. This draft guidance is intended to provide recommendations for a pathway to full drug development (marketing authorization) for microdose radiopharmaceutical diagnostic drugs.

    DATES:

    Submit either electronic or written comments on the draft guidance by November 13, 2017 to ensure that the Agency considers your comment on this draft guidance before it begins work on the final version of the guidance.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time as follows:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social Security number, or confidential business information, such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.

    • If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

    Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper submissions): 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-D-5297 for “Microdose Radiopharmaceutical Diagnostic Drugs: Nonclinical Study Recommendations; Draft Guidance for Industry; Availability.” 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.

    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR 10.115(g)(5)). Submit written requests for single copies of the draft guidance to the Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10001 New Hampshire Ave., Hillandale Building, 4th Floor, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing your requests. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic access to the draft guidance document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Adebayo Laniyonu, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 22, Rm. 5400, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-1392.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled “Microdose Radiopharmaceutical Diagnostic Drugs: Nonclinical Study Recommendations.” This draft guidance is intended to assist developers of microdose radiopharmaceutical diagnostic drugs on the nonclinical studies recommended to support human clinical trials and marketing authorization. The draft guidance discusses how to refine nonclinical study recommendations for this class of drug given its unique characteristics. This draft guidance is intended to provide recommendations for a pathway to full drug development (marketing authorization) for microdose radiopharmaceutical diagnostic drugs.

    This draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when finalized, will represent the current thinking of FDA on nonclinical studies recommended for microdose radiopharmaceutical diagnostic drugs. It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations. This guidance is not subject to Executive Order 12866.

    II. The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This guidance refers to previously approved collections of information that are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The collections of information in 21 CFR parts 312 and 314 have been approved under OMB control numbers 0910-0014 and 0910-0001, respectively. The collection of information for radioactive drug research committees in 21 CFR 361.1 has been approved under OMB control number 0910-0053. The collection of information for the regulations on in vivo radiopharmaceuticals used for diagnosis and monitoring in 21 CFR 315.4, 315.5, and 315.6 has been approved under OMB control number 0910-0409.

    II. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the internet may obtain the draft guidance at either https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm or https://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: September 7, 2017. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19435 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Government-Owned Inventions; Availability for Licensing AGENCY:

    National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Government owned intellectual property covering HIV-1 reverse transcriptase inhibitors available for licensing and commercialization.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Licensing information and copies of the patent applications listed below may be obtained by emailing the indicated licensing contact at the National Heart, Lung, and Blood, Office of Technology Transfer and Development Office of Technology Transfer, 31 Center Drive Room 4A29, MSC2479, Bethesda, MD 20892-2479; telephone: 301-402-5579. A signed Confidential Disclosure Agreement may be required to receive copies of the patent applications.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The inventions listed below are owned by an agency of the U.S. Government and are available for licensing in the U.S. in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR part 404 to achieve expeditious commercialization of results of federally-funded research and development. Foreign patent applications are filed on selected inventions to extend market coverage for companies and may also be available for licensing. A description of the technology available for licensing follows.

    Pyrophosphate Analog HIV-1 Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors

    Description of Technology: The invention relates to compounds that inhibit HIV-1 DNA synthesis mediated by reverse transcriptase (RT). HIV-1 DNA synthesis by RT utilizes deoxynucleoside 5′-triphosphate (dNTP) as substrate and like many other enzymes, the reaction is reversible. Pyrophosphate analogs like imidodiphosphate strongly promote reverse reaction dNTP products containing the imidodiphosphate group instead of the naturally occurring pyrophosphate group. This imidodiphosphate-containing dNTP was found to be a potent inhibitor of the forward RT reaction. Whereas pyrophosphorolysis is limited by a nonchemical step, replacing the bridging oxygen of pyrophosphate with an imido group resulted in a change in the rate-limiting step, so that the imidodiphosphate-dependent reverse reaction was limited by chemistry. There exists, then, the potential to use pyrophosphate analogs therapeutically.

    Potential Commercial Applications:

    • Anti-microbial.

    • HIV therapeutic.

    Development Stage:

    • In vitro data available.

    Inventors: Samuel Wilson, William Beard, David Dion Shock (all of NIEHS).

    Intellectual Property: HHS Reference No. E-210-2017/0-US-01.

    • U.S. Provisional Patent Application 62/542,600 filed August 8, 2017.

    Licensing Contact: Michael Shmilovich, Esq, CLP; 301-435-5019; [email protected]

    Collaborative Research Opportunity: The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences seeks statements of capability or interest from parties interested in collaborative research to further develop and evaluate, please contact Sally E. Tilotta, Ph.D., Director, Office of Technology Transfer, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Phone: (919) 316-4526; [email protected]

    Dated: September 7, 2017. Michael Shmilovich, Senior Licensing and Patenting Manager, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Office of Technology Transfer and Development.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19315 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel Shared Instruments: NMR spectrometers and X-ray crystallography/scattering.

    Date: October 3, 2017.

    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: David R Jollie, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4150, MSC 7806, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-1722, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel Shared Instruments: NMR spectrometers and X-ray crystallography/scattering.

    Date: October 3, 2017.

    Time: 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: James W Mack, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4154, MSC 7806, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-2037, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Healthcare Delivery and Methodologies Integrated Review Group Community Influences on Health Behavior Study Section.

    Date: October 4-5, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Washington Plaza Hotel, 10 Thomas Circle, NW., Washington, DC 20005.

    Contact Person: Tasmeen Weik, DRPH, MPH, Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3141, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-827-6480, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel Lymphatics in Health and Disease in the Digestive System, Kidney and Urinary Tract.

    Date: October 4, 2017.

    Time: 2:00 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Jianxin Hu, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 2156, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-827-4417, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Neuroscience Integrated Review Group Neurogenesis and Cell Fate Study Section.

    Date: October 5, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Hyatt Regency Crystal City, 2799 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA 22202.

    Contact Person: Joanne T Fujii, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4184, MSC 7850, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-1178, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Oncology 2—Translational Clinical Integrated Review Group Developmental Therapeutics Study Section.

    Date: October 5-6, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Embassy Suites Alexandria Old Town, 1900 Diagonal Road, Alexandria, VA 22314.

    Contact Person: Sharon K Gubanich, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6214, MSC 7804, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 408-9512, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Interdisciplinary Molecular Sciences and Training Integrated Review Group Enabling Bioanalytical and Imaging Technologies Study Section.

    Date: October 5-6, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Renaissance Washington, DC Dupont Circle Hotel, 1143 New Hampshire Ave NW., Washington, DC 20037.

    Contact Person: Kenneth Ryan, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3218, MSC 7717, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-0229, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Oncology 1-Basic Translational Integrated Review Group Molecular Oncogenesis Study Section.

    Date: October 5-6, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Lorien Hotel & Spa, 1600 King Street, Alexandria, VA 22314.

    Contact Person: Nywana Sizemore, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6204, MSC 7804, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1718, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Neuroscience Integrated Review Group Biophysics of Neural Systems Study Section.

    Date: October 5, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Hotel Monaco Baltimore, 2 North Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21201.

    Contact Person: Geoffrey G Schofield, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4040-A, MSC 7850, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1235, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Population Sciences and Epidemiology Integrated Review Group Behavioral Genetics and Epidemiology Study Section.

    Date: October 5, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Washington Plaza Hotel, 10 Thomas Circle, NW., Washington, DC 20005.

    Contact Person: George Vogler, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3140, MSC 7770, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 237-2693, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Risk, Prevention and Health Behavior Integrated Review Group Psychosocial Development, Risk and Prevention Study Section.

    Date: October 5-6, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: The Fairmont Washington, DC, 2401 M Street, NW., Washington, DC 20037.

    Contact Person: Anna L Riley, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3114, MSC 7759, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-2889, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Biobehavioral and Behavioral Processes Integrated Review Group Biobehavioral Regulation, Learning and Ethology Study Section.

    Date: October 5-6, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Pier 2620 Hotel Fisherman's Wharf, 2620 Jones Street, San Francisco, CA 94133.

    Contact Person: Unja Hayes, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, National Institutes of Health, Center for Scientific Review, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-827-6830, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Musculoskeletal, Oral and Skin Sciences Integrated Review Group Skeletal Biology Structure and Regeneration Study Section.

    Date: October 5-6, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Sheraton BWI (Baltimore), 1100 Old Elkridge Landing Road, Baltimore, MD 21090.

    Contact Person: Yanming Bi, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4214, MSC 7814, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-451-0996, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Digestive, Kidney and Urological Systems Integrated Review Group Clinical, Integrative and Molecular Gastroenterology Study Section.

    Date: October 5, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Mayflower Park Hotel, 405 Olive Way, Seattle, WA 98101.

    Contact Person: Jonathan K Ivins, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 2190, MSC 7850, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594-1245, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Biological Chemistry and Macromolecular Biophysics Integrated Review Group Macromolecular Structure and Function C Study Section.

    Date: October 5-6, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Residence Inn Bethesda, 7335 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Contact Person: William A Greenberg, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4168, MSC 7806, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-1726, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Genes, Genomes, and Genetics Integrated Review Group Prokaryotic Cell and Molecular Biology Study Section.

    Date: October 5-6, 2017.

    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Kinzie Hotel, 20 West Kinzie Street, Chicago, IL 60654.

    Contact Person: Dominique Lorang-Leins, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, National Institutes of Health, Center for Scientific Review, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5108, MSC 7766, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301.326.9721, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Immunology Integrated Review Group, Cellular and Molecular Immunology—A Study Section.

    Date: October 5-6, 2017.

    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Courtyard by Marriott, 5520 Wisconsin Avenue, Chevy Chase, MD 20815.

    Contact Person: David B Winter, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4204, MSC 7812, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1152, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR15-326: Imaging—Science Track Award for Research Transition (I/START).

    Date: October 5, 2017.

    Time: 12:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Yvonne Bennett, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5199, MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-379-3793, [email protected].

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: September 7, 2017. David Clary, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19361 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of a meeting of the Board of Scientific Counselors, NHLBI.

    The meeting will be closed to the public as indicated below in accordance with the provisions set forth in section 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended for the review, discussion, and evaluation of individual intramural programs and projects conducted by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, including consideration of personnel qualifications and performance, and the competence of individual investigators, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Board of Scientific Counselors, NHLBI.

    Date: October 23-24, 2017.

    Time: October 23, 2017, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate personal qualifications and performance, and competence of individual investigators.

    Place: National Institutes of Health Building 10, 10 Center Drive, 6th Floor, Room 6S233, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Time: October 24, 2017, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate personal qualifications and performance, and competence of individual investigators.

    Place: National Institutes of Health Building 10, 10 Center Drive, 6th Floor, Room 6S233, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Robert S Balaban, Ph.D., Scientific Director, Division of Intramural Research, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, Building 10, 10 Center Drive, 6th Floor, Room 6S233, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-2116, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.233, National Center for Sleep Disorders Research; 93.837, Heart and Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases Research; 93.839, Blood Diseases and Resources Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: September 7, 2017. Michelle Trout, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19363 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences Special Emphasis Panel; CTSA Collaborative Innovation Award Review.

    Date: November 7-8, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, One Democracy Plaza, Room 1068, 6701 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: M. Lourdes Ponce, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review, National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), National Institutes of Health, 6701 Democracy Blvd., Democracy 1, Room 1073 Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-0810, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.859, Pharmacology, Physiology, and Biological Chemistry Research; 93.350, B—Cooperative Agreements; 93.859, Biomedical Research and Research Training, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: September 7, 2017. David Clary, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19362 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel, Psychosocial Risk and Disease Prevention.

    Date: September 26, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Embassy Suites at the Chevy Chase Pavilion, 4300 Military Road NW., Washington, DC 20015.

    Contact Person: Marc Boulay, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3110, MSC 7808, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 300-6541, [email protected].

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: September 8, 2017. Anna Snouffer, Deputy Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19411 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Docket ID FEMA-2017-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-1742] 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 in 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 December 12, 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-1742, 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.”) Dated: August 10, 2017. Roy E. Wright, Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

    I. Non-watershed-based studies:

    Community Community map repository address San Diego County, California and Incorporated Areas Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata Project: 12-09-1327S Preliminary Date: February 3, 2017 City of Carlsbad Building and Development Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008. City of Chula Vista City Hall, 276 4th Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910. City of Coronado City Hall, 1825 Strand Way, Coronado, CA 92118. City of Del Mar City Hall, 2010 Jimmy Durante Boulevard, Suite 120, Del Mar, CA 92014. City of Encinitas City Hall, 505 South Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, CA 92024. City of Imperial Beach City Hall, 825 Imperial Beach Boulevard, Imperial Beach, CA 91932. City of National City City Hall, 1243 National City Boulevard, National City, CA 91950. City of Oceanside City Hall, 300 North Coast Highway, Oceanside, CA 92054. City of San Diego Engineering Branch, 525 B Street, Suite 750, MS 908A, San Diego, CA 92101. City of Solana Beach City Hall, 635 South Highway 101, Solana Beach, CA 92075. Unincorporated Areas of San Diego County Department of Public Works, 5510 Overland Avenue, Suite 410, MS 0326, San Diego, CA 92123.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19414 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-12-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Docket ID FEMA-2017-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-1741] 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 in 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 December 12, 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-1741, 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.”) Dated: August 10, 2017. Roy E. Wright, Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency. Community Community map repository address Bayou Meto Watershed Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata Lonoke County, Arkansas and Incorporated Areas City of Cabot City Hall, 101 North 2nd Street, Cabot, AR 72023. Unincorporated Areas of Lonoke County Lonoke County Courthouse Annex, 210 North Center Street, Lonoke, AR 72086.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19415 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-12-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4334-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001] Iowa; Major Disaster and Related Determinations AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of Iowa (FEMA-4334-DR), dated August 27, 2017, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    The declaration was issued August 27, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given that, in a letter dated August 27, 2017, the President issued a major disaster declaration under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the “Stafford Act”), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State of Iowa resulting from severe storms, tornadoes, straight-line winds, and flooding during the period of July 19-23, 2017, is of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant a major disaster declaration under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the “Stafford Act”). Therefore, I declare that such a major disaster exists in the State of Iowa.

    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and administrative expenses.

    You are authorized to provide Public Assistance in the designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout the State. Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance be supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for Hazard Mitigation will be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs. Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for Public Assistance also will be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs, with the exception of projects that meet the eligibility criteria for a higher Federal cost-sharing percentage under the Public Assistance Alternative Procedures Pilot Program for Debris Removal implemented pursuant to section 428 of the Stafford Act.

    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the Stafford Act.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Michael L. Parker, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major disaster.

    The following areas of the State of Iowa have been designated as adversely affected by this major disaster:

    Allamakee, Bremer, Buchanan, Chickasaw, Clayton, Fayette, and Mitchell Counties for Public Assistance.

    All areas within the State of Iowa are eligible for assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

    Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19429 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Docket ID FEMA-2017-0026; OMB No. 1660-NW103] Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Federal Emergency Management Agency Programs Customer Satisfaction Surveys AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of new information collection; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) will submit the information collection abstracted below to the Office of Management and Budget for review and clearance in accordance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The submission will describe the nature of the information collection, the categories of respondents, the estimated burden (i.e., the time, effort and resources used by respondents to respond) and cost, and the actual data collection instruments FEMA will use.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before October 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit written comments on the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to the Desk Officer for the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, and sent via electronic mail to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection should be made to Director, Records Management Division, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472-3100, email address [email protected], or, Maggie Billing, Program Analyst, FEMA at (940) 891-8709.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This proposed information collection previously published in the Federal Register on June 30, 2017 at 82 FR 29911 with a 60 day public comment period. No comments were received. The purpose of this notice is to notify the public that FEMA will submit the information collection abstracted below to the Office of Management and Budget for review and clearance.

    Collection of Information

    Title: Federal Emergency Management Agency Programs Customer Satisfaction Surveys.

    Type of information collection: New information collection.

    OMB Number: 1660-NW103.

    Form Titles and Numbers: FEMA Form 519-0-45, Preparedness Survey—Electronic; FEMA Form 519-0-44, Preparedness Survey—Phone; FEMA Form 519-0-47, Transitional Sheltering Assistance (TSA) Survey—Electronic; FEMA Form 519-0-46, Transitional Sheltering Assistance (TSA) Survey—Phone; FEMA Form 519-0-49, Temporary Housing Units (THU) Survey—Electronic; FEMA Form 519-0-48, Temporary Housing Units (THU) Survey—Phone; FEMA Form 519-0-51, Shelter and Temporary Essential Power (STEP) Survey—Electronic; FEMA Form 519-0-50, Shelter and Temporary Essential Power (STEP) Survey—Phone.

    Abstract: Federal agencies are required to survey their customers to determine the kind and quality of services customers want and their level of satisfaction with those services. Analysis from the survey is used to measure FEMA's survivor-centric mission of being accessible, simple, timely and effective in meeting the needs of survivors.

    Affected Public: Individuals and households.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 8,896.

    Estimated Number of Responses: 8,896.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 5,548.

    Estimated Total Annual Respondent Cost: The estimated annual burden hour cost to respondents is $193,292. The estimated annual non-labor cost to respondents participating and traveling to focus groups is $30,816.

    Estimated Respondents' Operation and Maintenance Costs: There are no annual costs to respondents' operations and maintenance costs for technical services.

    Estimated Respondents' Capital and Start-Up Costs: There are no annual start-up or capital costs.

    Estimated Total Annual Cost to the Federal Government: The cost to the Federal Government is $716,338.

    Comments

    Comments may be submitted as indicated in the ADDRESSES caption above. Comments are solicited to (a) evaluate whether the proposed data collection is necessary for the proper performance of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    Dated: September 8, 2017. William H. Holzerland, Senior Director for Information Management, Mission Support, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19413 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4332-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001] Texas; Amendment No. 3 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Texas (FEMA-4332-DR), dated August 25, 2017, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    This amendment was issued September 1, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Texas is hereby amended to include the following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of August 25, 2017.

    Polk, Tyler, and Walker Counties for Individual Assistance and assistance for debris removal and emergency protective measures [Categories A and B], including direct federal assistance, under the Public Assistance program.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

    Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19372 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4330-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001] Vermont; Major Disaster and Related Determinations AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of Vermont (FEMA-4330-DR), dated August 16, 2017, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    The declaration was issued August 16, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given that, in a letter dated August 16, 2017, the President issued a major disaster declaration under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the “Stafford Act”), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State of Vermont resulting from severe storms and flooding during the period of June 29 to July 1, 2017, is of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant a major disaster declaration under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the “Stafford Act”). Therefore, I declare that such a major disaster exists in the State of Vermont.

    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and administrative expenses.

    You are authorized to provide Public Assistance in the designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout the State. Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance be supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for Hazard Mitigation will be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs. Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for Public Assistance also will be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs, with the exception of projects that meet the eligibility criteria for a higher Federal cost-sharing percentage under the Public Assistance Alternative Procedures Pilot Program for Debris Removal implemented pursuant to section 428 of the Stafford Act.

    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the Stafford Act.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Mark H. Landry, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major disaster.

    The following areas of the State of Vermont have been designated as adversely affected by this major disaster:

    Addison, Bennington, Caledonia, Orange, Rutland, Washington, and Windsor Counties for Public Assistance.

    All areas within the State of Vermont are eligible for assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

    Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19428 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4327-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001] Wyoming; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Wyoming (FEMA-4327-DR), dated August 5, 2017, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    This amendment was issued September 1, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Wyoming is hereby amended to include the following area among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of August 5, 2017.

    Washakie County for Public Assistance.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

    Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19382 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4332-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001] Texas; Amendment No. 5 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Texas (FEMA-4332-DR), dated August 25, 2017, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    This amendment was issued September 4, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Texas is hereby amended to include the following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of August 25, 2017.

    Austin, Bastrop, DeWitt, Gonzales, Karnes, Lavaca, and Lee Counties for Individual Assistance and assistance for debris removal and emergency protective measures [Categories A and B], including direct federal assistance, under the Public Assistance program.

    Aransas, Brazoria, Calhoun, Chambers, Colorado, Fayette, Fort Bend, Galveston, Goliad, Hardin, Harris, Jackson, Jasper, Jefferson, Liberty, Matagorda, Montgomery, Newton, Nueces, Orange, Polk, San Jacinto, San Patricio, Tyler, Victoria, Walker, Waller, and Wharton Counties for Public Assistance [Categories C-G] (already designated for Individual Assistance and assistance for debris removal and emergency protective measures [Categories A and B], including direct federal assistance, under the Public Assistance program).

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

    Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19383 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4331-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001] West Virginia; Major Disaster and Related Determinations AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of West Virginia (FEMA-4331-DR), dated August 18, 2017, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    The declaration was issued August 18, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472 (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given that, in a letter dated August 18, 2017, the President issued a major disaster declaration under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the “Stafford Act”), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State of West Virginia resulting from severe storms, flooding, landslides, and mudslides during the period of July 28-29, 2017, is of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant a major disaster declaration under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the “Stafford Act”). Therefore, I declare that such a major disaster exists in the State of West Virginia.

    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and administrative expenses.

    You are authorized to provide Individual Assistance and Public Assistance in the designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout the State. Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance be supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for Hazard Mitigation and Other Needs Assistance will be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs. Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for Public Assistance also will be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs, with the exception of projects that meet the eligibility criteria for a higher Federal cost-sharing percentage under the Public Assistance Alternative Procedures Pilot Program for Debris Removal implemented pursuant to section 428 of the Stafford Act.

    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the Stafford Act.

    The time period prescribed for the implementation of section 310(a), Priority to Certain Applications for Public Facility and Public Housing Assistance, 42 U.S.C. 5153, shall be for a period not to exceed six months after the date of this declaration.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Steven S. Ward, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major disaster.

    The following areas of the State of West Virginia have been designated as adversely affected by this major disaster:

    Harrison, Marion, Marshall, and Wetzel Counties for Individual Assistance.

    Doddridge, Harrison, Marion, Marshall, Monongalia, Ohio, Preston, Randolph, Taylor, Tucker, Tyler, and Wetzel Counties for Public Assistance.

    All areas within the State of West Virginia are eligible for assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

    Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19427 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Docket ID FEMA-2017-0029; OMB No. 1660-0130] Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Generic Clearance for the Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on an extension, without change, of a currently approved information collection. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice seeks comments concerning the Generic Clearance for the Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before November 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    To avoid duplicate submissions to the docket, please use only one of the following means to submit comments:

    (1) Online. Submit comments at www.regulations.gov under Docket ID FEMA-2017-0029. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    (2) Mail. Submit written comments to Docket Manager, Office of Chief Counsel, DHS/FEMA, 500 C Street SW., 8NE, Washington, DC 20472-3100.

    All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket ID. Regardless of the method used for submitting comments or material, all submissions will be posted, without change, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, and will include any personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting this information makes it public. You may wish to read the Privacy Act notice that is available via the link in the footer of www.regulations.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Contact Sherina Greene, Management and Program Analyst, FEMA Office of the Chief Administrative Officer, Information Management Division, at (202) 646-4343 for further information. You may contact the Information Management Division for copies of the proposed collection of information at email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Executive Order 12862 directs Federal agencies to provide service to the public that matches or exceeds the best service available in the private sector. In order to work continuously to ensure that our programs are effective and meet our customers' needs, Federal Emergency management Agency (FEMA) (hereafter “the Agency”) seeks to obtain OMB approval of a generic clearance to collect qualitative feedback on our service delivery. By qualitative feedback we mean information that provides useful insights on perceptions and opinions, but are not statistical surveys that yield quantitative results that can be generalized to the population of study.

    Collection of Information

    Title: Generic Clearance for the Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery.

    Type of Information Collection: Extension, without change, of a currently approved information collection.

    OMB Number: 1660-0130.

    FEMA Forms: None.

    Abstract: The information collection activity will garner qualitative customer and stakeholder feedback in an efficient, timely manner, in accordance with the Administration's commitment to improving service delivery. This feedback will provide insights into customer or stakeholder perceptions, experiences and expectations, provide an early warning of issues with service, or focus attention on areas where communication, training or changes in operations might improve delivery of products or services. These collections will allow for ongoing, collaborative and actionable communications between the Agency and its customers and stakeholders. It will also allow feedback to contribute directly to the improvement of program management. Feedback collected under this generic clearance will provide useful information, but it will not yield data that can be generalized to the overall population. This type of generic clearance for qualitative information will not be used for quantitative information collections that are designed to yield reliably actionable results, such as monitoring trends over time or documenting program performance. Such data uses require more rigorous designs that address: The target population to which generalizations will be made, the sampling frame, the sample design (including stratification and clustering), the precision requirements or power calculations that justify the proposed sample size, the expected response rate, methods for assessing potential non-response bias, the protocols for data collection, and any testing procedures that were or will be undertaken prior to fielding the study. Depending on the degree of influence the results are likely to have, such collections may still be eligible for submission for other generic mechanisms that are designed to yield quantitative results.

    Affected Public: Individuals or Households.

    Number of Respondents: 1,075,000.

    Number of Responses: 1,075,000.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 181,995 hours.

    Estimated Total Annual Respondent Cost: $6,340,705.80.

    Estimated Respondents' Operation and Maintenance Costs: None.

    Estimated Respondents' Capital and Start-Up Costs: None.

    Estimated Total Annual Cost to the Federal Government: $2,079,000.95.

    Comments

    Comments may be submitted as indicated in the ADDRESSES caption above. Comments are solicited to (a) evaluate whether the proposed data collection is necessary for the proper performance of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    Dated: September 6, 2017. Tammi Hines, Acting Records Management Program Chief, Mission Support, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19370 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-19-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-3382-EM; Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001] Louisiana; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of an Emergency Declaration AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice amends the notice of an emergency declaration for the State of Louisiana (FEMA-3382-EM), dated August 28, 2017, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    This amendment was issued August 31, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The notice of an emergency declaration for the State of Louisiana is hereby amended to include the following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the event declared an emergency by the President in his declaration of August 28, 2017.

    Allen, Acadia, Iberia, Natchitoches, Rapides, Sabine, and Vernon Parishes for emergency protective measures (Category B), including direct federal assistance, under the Public Assistance program.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

    Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19373 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4332-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001] Texas; Amendment No. 4 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice amends the notice of a major disaster for the State of Texas (FEMA-4332-DR), dated August 25, 2017, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    This amendment was issued September 2, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given that, in a letter dated September 2, 2017, the President amended the cost-sharing arrangements regarding Federal funds provided under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the “Stafford Act”), in a letter to Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security, under Executive Order 12148, as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State of Texas resulting from Hurricane Harvey beginning on August 23, 2017, and continuing, is of sufficient severity and magnitude that special cost sharing arrangements are warranted regarding Federal funds provided under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the “Stafford Act”).

    Therefore, I amend my declaration of August 25, 2017, to authorize a 90 percent Federal cost share for debris removal, including direct Federal assistance; and a 100 percent Federal cost share for emergency protective measures, including direct Federal assistance, for 30 days from the start of the incident period, and then a 90 percent Federal cost share thereafter.

    This adjustment to State and local cost sharing applies only to Public Assistance costs and direct Federal assistance eligible for such adjustments under the law. The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act specifically prohibits a similar adjustment for funds provided for Other Needs Assistance (section 408), and the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (section 404). These funds will continue to be reimbursed at 75 percent of total eligible costs.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.
    Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19371 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-6001-N-33] 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Performing Loan Servicing for the Home Equity Conversion Mortgage (HECM) AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    HUD is seeking approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the information collection described below. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD is requesting comment from all interested parties on the proposed collection of information. The purpose of this notice is to allow for 60 days of public comment.

    DATES:

    Comments Due Date: November 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to: Colette Pollard, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room 4176, Washington, DC 20410-5000; telephone 202-402-3400 (this is not a toll-free number) or email at [email protected] for a copy of the proposed forms or other available information. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ivery W. Himes, Director, Office of Single Family Asset Management, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20410; email Ivery W. Himes at [email protected] or telephone 202-708-1672, option 3. This is not a toll-free number. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.

    Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained from Ms. Pollard.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the information collection described in Section A.

    A. Overview of Information Collection

    Title of Information Collection: Performing Loan Servicing for the Home Equity Conversion Mortgage (HECM).

    OMB Approval Number: 2502-0611.

    Type of Request: Revision of currently approved collection.

    Form Numbers: HUD-27011, HUD-50002, HUD-50012, HUD-9519-A.

    Description of the need for the information and proposed use: This information request is a comprehensive collection of requirements for mortgagees that service HECM mortgages and the HECM mortgagors, who are involved with servicing-related activities that includes collection and payment of mortgage insurance premiums, escrow account administration, providing loan information and customer service.

    Respondents (i.e. affected public): Individuals or Household.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 10.

    Estimated Number of Responses: 21,345,282.

    Frequency of Response: On occasion.

    Average Hours per Response: 0.07 (4 minutes).

    Total Estimated Burdens: 1,494,170.

    B. Solicitation of Public Comment

    This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following:

    (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    HUD encourages interested parties to submit comment in response to these questions.

    Authority:

    Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.

    Dated: September 1, 2017. Dana T. Wade, General Deputy Assistant Secretary for Housing.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19437 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-6002-N-01] 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Application for Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control Grant Programs and Quality Assurance Plans AGENCY:

    HUD Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    HUD is seeking approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the information collection described below. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD is requesting comment from all interested parties on the proposed collection of information. The purpose of this notice is to allow for 60 days of public comment.

    DATES:

    Comments Due Date: November 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to: Colette Pollard, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room 4176, Washington, DC 20410-5000; telephone 202-402-3400 (this is not a toll-free number) or email at [email protected] for a copy of the proposed forms or other available information. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Colette Pollard, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20410; email Colette Pollard at [email protected] or telephone 202-402-3400. This is not a toll-free number. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.

    Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained from Ms. Pollard.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the information collection described in Section A.

    A. Overview of Information Collection

    Title of Information Collection: Application for Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control Grant Programs and Quality Assurance Plans.

    OMB Approval Number: 2539-0015.

    Type of Request: Renewal with some changes due to program changes.

    Form Numbers: SF 424, SF 424, HUD-424CBW, HUD-27061, HUD-2880, HUD-2991, HUD-96008, HUD-96011, SF-LLL, HUD-96012, HUD-96013, HUD-96014, HUD-96015.

    Description of the need for the information and proposed use: Applications for lead-based paint hazard control, lead hazard reduction demonstration, healthy homes productions, healthy homes technical studies, and lead technical studies grants, and quality assurance plans for those technical studies grants.

    Respondents: Cities, States and municipalities, universities, private companies.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 250.

    Estimated Number of Responses: 250.

    Frequency of Response: Annual.

    Average Hours per Response: 60.

    Total Estimated Burdens: 15,000 hours, $607,500.

    B. Solicitation of Public Comment

    This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following:

    (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;

    (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    (4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    HUD encourages interested parties to submit comment in response to these questions.

    Authority:

    Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.

    Dated: September 6, 2017. Matthew Ammon, Director, Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19440 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Evaluation of the American Apprenticeship Initiative AGENCY:

    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy, Chief Evaluation Office, Department of Labor.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Information Collection; request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Labor (DOL), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, conducts a preclearance consultation program to provide the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing collections of information in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA95). This program helps to ensure that requested data can be provided in the desired format, reporting burden (time and financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are clearly understood, and the impact of collection requirements on respondents is properly assessed.

    Currently, the Department of Labor is soliciting comments concerning the collection of data on the Evaluation of the American Apprenticeship Initiative. A copy of the proposed Information Collection Request (ICR) can be obtained by contacting the office listed below in the addressee section of this notice.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be submitted to the office listed in the addressee section below on or before November 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by either one of the following methods:

    Email: [email protected]; Mail or Courier: Janet Javar, Chief Evaluation Office, OASP, U.S. Department of Labor, Room S-2312, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210. Instructions: Please submit one copy of your comments by only one method. All submissions received must include the agency name and OMB Control Number identified above for this information collection. Because we continue to experience delays in receiving mail in the Washington, DC area, commenters are strongly encouraged to transmit their comments electronically via email or to submit them by mail early. Comments, including any personal information provided, become a matter of public record. They will also be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of the information collection request.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Janet Javar by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background: The American Apprenticeship Initiative awarded funds to 46 grantees to support the expansion of quality and innovative apprenticeship training programs. The Department of Labor is sponsoring an evaluation of this initiative that includes the following four components:

    1. An implementation study to describe how grant programs develop, operate and mature. It will examine the context in which the programs operate, the target group and recruitment strategies, employer perceptions of apprenticeship, partnerships, and training strategies.

    2. An outcomes study to examine in-program and post-program outcomes of apprentices, particularly around employment, earnings, wages, and employment retention, as well as pre-intervention and post-intervention certification and credential attainment. Particular attention will be given to outcomes for underrepresented populations in apprenticeship.

    3. A return on investment study to estimate the benefits and costs of apprenticeship to employers.

    4. A demonstration study to examine which recruitment methods and marketing strategies most successfully encourage employers to offer apprenticeships.

    This Federal Register Notice provides the opportunity to comment on proposed data collection instruments that will be used in the evaluation:

    Site visits. To support the implementation study, site visits will document the program context, program organization and staffing, the components of apprenticeship programs, and other relevant aspects of apprenticeship programs. During the visits, site teams will interview key grantee administrators, program staff, employers, training providers, and other key stakeholders using discussion guides.

    Grantee survey. To support the implementation study, an on-line survey will be administered to all 46 grantees for the purpose of systematically documenting program operations and the type of services provided across the study sites.

    Demonstration management information system (MIS). To support the demonstration study, the MIS will collect information on grantees' marketing and outreach activities to employers.

    A future information collection request will include an employer survey and participant survey.

    II. Desired Focus of Comments: Currently, the Department of Labor is soliciting comments concerning the above data collection for the Evaluation of the American Apprenticeship Initiative. DOL is particularly interested in comments that do the following:

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

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

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

    • 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—for example, permitting electronic submission of responses.

    III. Current Actions: At this time, the Department of Labor is requesting clearance for the implementation study site visits, grantee survey, and demonstration management information system (MIS).

    Type of Review: New information collection request.

    OMB Control Number: 1290-0NEW.

    Affected Public: American Apprenticeship Initiative grantee staff and grantee partners involved in providing apprenticeship-related services through the grant.

    Estimated Total Burden Hours Instrument Total
  • number
  • respondents
  • Annual
  • number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden time
  • per response
  • (hours)
  • Annual
  • estimated
  • burden
  • Estimated
  • total burden
  • (hours)
  • Interview Protocol—Grant Director 10 3.33 2 2 13.33 40 Interview Protocol—Grantee staff 20 6.67 2 1 13.33 40 Interview Protocol—Community College Leadership 10 3.33 2 1 6.67 20 Interview Protocol—Community College Instructors 20 6.67 2 1 13.33 40 Interview Protocol—Employer Partners 20 6.67 2 1 13.33 40 Interview Protocol—Workforce Development partners 20 6.67 2 1 13.33 40 Interview Protocol—CFBOs, Social Service Partners 10 3.33 2 1 6.67 20 Interview Protocol—Union Representatives 10 3.33 2 1 6.67 20 Grantee Survey * 41 13.67 1 4 54.67 164 MIS Data Entry—Grantee Supervisor 200 66.67 2 .25 33.33 100 MIS Data Entry—Grantee Staff 800 266.67 6 .25 400 1200 Total 574.66 1724 * 46 grantees with an estimated 90% response rate.

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

    Dated: August 31, 2017. Molly Irwin, Chief Evaluation Officer, U.S. Department of Labor.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19423 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-HX-P
    DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Occupational Safety and Health Administration [Docket No. OSHA-2006-0028] MET Laboratories, Inc.: Grant of Expansion of Recognition and Update to the NRTL Program's List of Appropriate Test Standards AGENCY:

    Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In this notice, OSHA announces its final decision to expand the scope of recognition for MET Laboratories, Inc., as a Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL). Additionally, OSHA announces its final decision to add two new test standards to the NRTL Program's List of Appropriate Test Standards.

    DATES:

    The expansion of the scope of recognition becomes effective on September 13, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Information regarding this notice is available from the following sources:

    Press inquiries: Contact Mr. Frank Meilinger, Director, OSHA Office of Communications, U.S. Department of Labor, telephone: (202) 693-1999; email: [email protected]

    General and technical information: Contact Mr. Kevin Robinson, Director, Office of Technical Programs and Coordination Activities, Directorate of Technical Support and Emergency Management, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, telephone: (202) 693-2110; email: [email protected] OSHA's Web page includes information about the NRTL Program (see http://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/index.html).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Notice of Final Decision

    OSHA hereby gives notice of the expansion of the scope of recognition of MET Laboratories, Inc. (MET) as a NRTL. MET's expansion covers the addition of three test standards to its scope of recognition.

    OSHA recognition of a NRTL signifies that the organization meets the requirements specified by 29 CFR 1910.7. Recognition is an acknowledgment that the organization can perform independent safety testing and certification of the specific products covered within its scope of recognition and is not a delegation or grant of government authority. As a result of recognition, employers may use products properly approved by the NRTL to meet OSHA standards that require testing and certification of the products.

    The Agency processes applications by a NRTL for initial recognition, or for expansion or renewal of this recognition, following requirements in Appendix A to 29 CFR 1910.7. This appendix requires that the Agency publish two notices in the Federal Register in processing an application. In the first notice, OSHA announces the application and provides its preliminary finding and, in the second notice, the Agency provides its final decision on the application. These notices set forth the NRTL's scope of recognition or modifications of that scope. OSHA maintains an informational Web page for each NRTL that details its scope of recognition. These pages are available from the Agency's Web site at: http://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/index.html.

    MET submitted three applications, dated October 15, 2015 (OSHA-2006-0028-0031), March 2, 2016 (OSHA-2006-0028-0032), and March 18, 2016 (OSHA-2006-0028-0033), to expand its recognition to include three additional test standards, including two test standards to be added to the NRTL Program's List of Appropriate Test Standards. OSHA staff performed a detailed analysis of the application packets and reviewed other pertinent information. OSHA did not perform any on-site reviews in relation to these applications.

    OSHA published the preliminary notice announcing MET's expansion applications in the Federal Register on June 1, 2017 (82 FR 25338). The Agency requested comments by June 16, 2017, but it received no comments in response to this notice. OSHA now is proceeding with this final notice to grant expansion of MET's scope of recognition.

    To obtain or review copies of all public documents pertaining to MET's application, go to: www.regulations.gov or contact the Docket Office, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N-3508, Washington, DC 20210. Docket No. OSHA-2006-0028 contains all materials in the record concerning MET's recognition.

    II. Final Decision and Order

    OSHA staff examined MET's expansion applications, its capability to meet the requirements of the test standards, and other pertinent information. Based on its review of this evidence, OSHA finds that MET meets the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.7 for expansion of its recognition, subject to the limitation and conditions listed below. OSHA, therefore, is proceeding with this final notice to grant MET's scope of recognition. OSHA limits the expansion of MET's recognition to testing and certification of products for demonstration of conformance to the test standards listed in Table 1 below.

    Additionally, Table 2, below, lists the test standards new to the NRTL Program's List of Appropriate Test Standards. The Agency evaluated the standards to (1) verify they represent product categories for which OSHA requires certification by a NRTL, (2) verify the documents represent end products and not components, and (3) verify the documents define safety test specifications (not installation or operational performance specifications). Based on this evaluation, OSHA finds that they are appropriate test standards and has added these standards to the NRTL Program's List of Appropriate Test Standards.

    Table 1—List of Appropriate Test Standards for Inclusion in MET's NRTL Scope of Recognition Test standard Test standard title UL 2108 Standard for Low Voltage Lighting Systems. UL 61010-2-91* Standard for Safety Requirements for Electrical Equipment for Measurement, Control, and Laboratory Use—Part 2-091: Particular Requirements for Cabinet X-Ray Systems. UL 61010-2-81* Standard for Safety Requirements for Electrical Equipment for Measurement, Control, and Laboratory Use—Part 2-081: Particular Requirements for Automatic and Semi-Automatic Laboratory Equipment for Analysis and Other Purposes. * Represents a new standard that OSHA is adding to the NRTL Program's List of Appropriate Test Standards, as specified in Table 2 below. Table 2—Test Standard OSHA Is Adding to the NRTL Program's List of Appropriate Test Standards Test standard Test standard title UL 61010-2-91 Standard for Safety Requirements for Electrical Equipment for Measurement, Control and Laboratory Use—Part 2-091: Particular Requirements for Cabinet X-Ray Systems. UL 61010-2-81 Standard for Safety Requirements for Electrical Equipment for Measurement, Control and Laboratory Use—Part 2-081: Particular Requirements for Automatic and Semi-Automatic Laboratory Equipment for Analysis and Other Purposes.

    OSHA's recognition of any NRTL for a particular test standard is limited to equipment or materials for which OSHA standards require third-party testing and certification before using them in the workplace. Consequently, if a test standard also covers any products for which OSHA does not require such testing and certification, a NRTL's scope of recognition does not include these products.

    The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) may approve the test standards listed above as American National Standards. However, for convenience, we may use the designation of the standards-developing organization for the standard as opposed to the ANSI designation. Under the NRTL Program's policy (see OSHA Instruction CPL 1-0.3, Appendix C, paragraph XIV), any NRTL recognized for a particular test standard may use either the proprietary version of the test standard or the ANSI version of that standard. Contact ANSI to determine whether a test standard is currently ANSI-approved.

    A. Conditions

    In addition to those conditions already required by 29 CFR 1910.7, MET must abide by the following conditions of the recognition:

    1. MET must inform OSHA as soon as possible, in writing, of any change of ownership, facilities, or key personnel, and of any major change in its operations as a NRTL, and provide details of the change(s);

    2. MET must meet all the terms of its recognition and comply with all OSHA policies pertaining to this recognition; and

    3. MET must continue to meet the requirements for recognition, including all previously published conditions on MET's scope of recognition, in all areas for which it has recognition.

    Pursuant to the authority in 29 CFR 1910.7, OSHA hereby expands the scope of recognition of MET, subject to the limitation and conditions specified above.

    III. Authority and Signature

    Loren Sweatt, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210, authorized the preparation of this notice. Accordingly, the Agency is issuing this notice pursuant to 29 U.S.C. 657(g)(2), Secretary of Labor's Order No. 1-2012 (77 FR 3912, Jan. 25, 2012), and 29 CFR 1910.7.

    Signed at Washington, DC, on August 30, 2017. Loren Sweatt, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19403 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-26-P
    OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET Proposed Designation of Databases for Treasury's Working System Under the Do Not Pay Initiative AGENCY:

    Office of Management and Budget.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed designation.

    SUMMARY:

    Section 5(b)(1)(B) of the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Improvement Act of 2012 (IPERIA) provides that the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), in consultation with agencies, may designate additional databases for inclusion under the Do Not Pay (DNP) Initiative. IPERIA further requires OMB to provide public notice and an opportunity for comment prior to designating additional databases. In fulfillment of this requirement, OMB is publishing this Notice of Proposed Designation to designate the following six databases: (1) The Department of the Treasury's (Treasury) Office of Foreign Assets Control's Specially Designated Nationals List (OFAC List), (2) data from the General Services Administration's (GSA) System for Award Management (SAM) sensitive financial data from entity registration records (including those records formerly housed in the legacy Excluded Parties List System), (3) the Internal Revenue Service's (IRS) Automatic Revocation of Exemption List (ARL), (4) the IRS's Exempt Organizations Select Check (EO Select Check), (5) the IRS's e-Postcard database, and (6) the commercial database American InfoSource (AIS) Deceased Data for inclusion in the Do Not Pay Initiative. This notice has a 30-day comment period.

    DATES:

    Please submit comments on or before October 13, 2017. At the conclusion of the 30-day comment period, if OMB decides to finalize the designation, OMB will publish a notice in the Federal Register to officially designate the database.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments must be submitted electronically before the comment closing date to www.regulations.gov. The public comments received by OMB will be a matter of public record and will be posted at www.regulations.gov. Accordingly, please do not include in your comments any confidential business information or information of a personal-privacy nature.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brian Nichols at the OMB Office of Federal Financial Management at 202-395-3993.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Among other things, IPERIA codified the DNP Initiative that was already underway across the Federal Government. The DNP Initiative includes multiple resources to help Federal agencies review payment eligibility for purposes of identifying and preventing improper payments. As part of the DNP Initiative, OMB designated Treasury to host Treasury's Working System, which is the primary system through which Federal agencies can verify payment eligibility.

    Pursuant to IPERIA,1 OMB has the authority to designate additional databases for inclusion in the DNP Initiative.2 OMB Memorandum M-13-20 3 provides guidance related to IPERIA and explains the process by which OMB will consider designating additional databases. The OMB guidance provides that OMB will only consider designating databases that are relevant and necessary to meet the objectives of section 5 of IPERIA. In addition, the guidance explains that six factors will inform OMB when considering additional databases for designation. These factors include: (1) Statutory or other limitations on the use and sharing of specific data; (2) privacy restrictions and risks associated with specific data; (3) likelihood that the data will strengthen program integrity across programs and agencies; (4) benefits of streamlining access to the data through the central DNP Initiative; (5) costs associated with expanding or centralizing access, including modifications needed to system interfaces or other capabilities in order to make data accessible; and (6) other policy and stakeholder considerations, as appropriate.

    1 31 U.S.C. 3321 note, Public Law 112-248 (2013).

    2 OMB designated the Department of the Treasury to host Treasury's Working System, which helps Federal agencies verify that their payments are proper. Treasury's Working System is part of the broader DNP Initiative.

    3 “Protecting Privacy while Reducing Improper Payments with the Do Not Pay Initiative”—August 16, 2013.

    For commercial databases, the OMB guidance establishes additional requirements. The guidance requires that the commercial data meet the following general standards: (1) Information in commercial databases must be relevant and necessary to meet the objectives described in section 5 of IPERIA; (2) information in commercial databases must be sufficiently accurate, up-to-date, relevant, and complete to ensure fairness to the individual record subjects; and (3) information in commercial databases must not contain information that describes how any individual exercises rights guaranteed by the First Amendment, unless use of the data is expressly authorized by statute. In addition, when OMB designates commercial databases for use in Treasury's Working System, Treasury must meet the following specific requirements: (1) Treasury shall establish rules of conduct for persons involved in the use of, or access to, commercial databases and instruct each person with respect to such rules, including penalties for noncompliance, as appropriate; and (2) Treasury shall establish appropriate administrative, technical, and physical safeguards to ensure the security and confidentiality of information in commercial databases when such information is under Treasury's control.

    Considerations for Designating the Office of Foreign Assets Control's Specially Designated Nationals List (OFAC List)

    OMB proposes to designate the Treasury OFAC List for inclusion in Treasury's Working System. Acting under Presidential national emergency powers, the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) derives its authority from a variety of U.S. Federal laws regarding embargoes and economic sanctions such as those terrorism-related mandates found in 31 CFR parts 595-597. This database is a list of persons and entities whose assets are blocked and generally prohibited from entering into financial transactions with United States (U.S.) financial institutions and the U.S. Government.

    Currently, each payment-issuing agency has its own procedure for blocking or rejecting payments to persons or entities on the OFAC List. By designating the OFAC List as an additional database in Treasury's Working System, Treasury would improve and streamline access by allowing agencies to verify payment eligibility at multiple points in the payment process.

    OMB has reached the following initial determinations and is seeking public comment before finalizing the designation of the database.

    1. There are no statutory or other limitations that would prevent including this public database within Treasury's Working System for the purposes of verifying payment eligibility. Due to the broad audience of government agencies required to check OFAC's List, this database was made accessible to agencies matching against Treasury's Working System soon after IPERIA became effective and before the issuance of OMB Memorandum M-13-20 establishing this designation process. The database is formatted for information processing on OFAC's Web site and requires no changes to existing processes or any additional expense for Treasury.

    2. There are no prohibitive privacy restrictions or risks for Treasury to make this publicly facing database already available on OFAC's Web site also available in Treasury's Working System. Risk mitigation measures include maintaining a current and compliant Security Accreditation and Authorization (SA&A) package for Treasury's Working System in accordance with OMB Circular No. A-130, Managing Information as a Strategic Resource, and complying with the Federal Information Security Modernization Act (FISMA) requirements. To reduce the likelihood of incidents triggered by unauthorized access, login to Treasury's Working System requires public key infrastructure (PKI) or personal identity verification (PIV) credentials. All users and administrators are required to sign rules of behavior stipulating their responsibilities to minimize risks and support DNP's mission to “Protect the integrity of the government's payment process by assisting agencies in mitigating and eliminating improper payments in a cost-effective manner while safeguarding the privacy of individuals.” In this vein, Treasury has also dedicated resources to establish a Privacy Program based on applicable requirements, the Fair Information Practice Principles (FIPPs), and industry best practices. Treasury's Privacy Program champions various internal controls in concert with agency leadership and counsel such as a data usage governance process charged with vetting projects that support a data driven approach to reducing improper payments for Treasury's specific customers and government-wide.

    3. Designating the OFAC List would likely strengthen program integrity. With access to the OFAC List through Treasury's Working System, an agency will be better equipped to minimize the risk that it makes a payment to a person or entity on the list and the potentially catastrophic impact of such a payment.

    4. It would be beneficial to streamline access to the OFAC List through its inclusion as an additional database within Treasury's Working System. IPERIA requires agencies to check the Act's enumerated databases prior to making a payment with Federal funds. Federal regulations, such as 31 CFR parts 595-597, require paying agencies to check the OFAC List. Many of DNP's customers are paying agencies that are required to check the OFAC List. They will now be able to check it along with the other databases that comprise Treasury's Working System. This will enable agencies to make more informed payment decisions, increase efficiency, and strengthen internal controls.

    5. There are no additional costs associated with expanding or centralizing access to the OFAC List within Treasury's Working System.

    6. No additional stakeholder considerations were identified. Regarding policy, the designation further ensures that Treasury customers adhere to terrorism-related mandates set forth in Federal regulations, such as those found in 31 CFR parts 595-597.

    Considerations for Designating System for Award Management (SAM) Sensitive Financial Data From Entity Registration Records

    OMB proposes to designate SAM sensitive financial data from entity registration records specifically the sensitive financial data and exclusion data for use in the DNP initiative via Treasury's Working System. SAM is the single registration point for entities seeking Federal contracts or grants (with limited exceptions defined in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) or Title 2 of the Code of Federal Regulations). As such, key data that are essential to appropriately identifying unique entities for DNP are included in the entity registration records in SAM and identified as sensitive data, meaning they are not disclosed publically. These data include information used in financial transactions.

    By designating SAM sensitive financial data from entity registration records as an additional data source in DNP via Treasury's Working System, agencies using the system will have greater confidence in results returned from the Treasury Working System and used in analysis for processing payments. This would reduce the administrative burden for agencies having to check both systems prior to finalizing pre- and post-payment analysis.

    OMB has reached the following initial determinations and is seeking public comment before finalizing the designation of the database.

    1. There are no statutory or other limitations that would prevent the DNP Initiative from using SAM sensitive financial data from entity registration records for the purposes of verifying payment eligibility. GSA is authorized to maintain SAM pursuant to the FAR Subparts 4.11, 9.4, 28.2, and 52.204, 2 CFR part 25, and 40 U.S.C. 121(c), and the data collection requirements from entities is governed by the FAR and Title 2 of the Code of Federal Regulations. The records in SAM sensitive financial data from entity registration records are covered by a Privacy Act system of records. Pursuant to the system of records notice's (SORN) 4 routine use (m), GSA is permitted to disclose SAM sensitive entity registration data for the purposes of the DNP Initiative. DNP currently receives SAM sensitive financial data from entity registration records and comports with the GSA routine use when re-disclosing the data to Federal agencies `for the purpose of identifying, preventing, or recouping improper payments to an applicant for, or recipient of, Federal funds, including funds disbursed by a state in a state-administered, federally funded program' (78 FR 11648, Feb. 19, 2013). Adding this data source to the DNP Initiative will not require any additional action because this database was made accessible to agencies for DNP soon after IPERIA became effective and before the issuance of OMB Memorandum M-13-20 establishing this designation process and Treasury's Working System.

    4 SAM SORN: http://www.gsa.gov/portal/mediaId/205455/fileName/2013-03743.action.

    2. There are some privacy restrictions and risks associated with the DNP Initiative's use of the SAM sensitive entity registration data. For example, SAM is a system of records, so the Privacy Act governs the DNP Initiative's use of these records. As mentioned above with respect to the first consideration, DNP would comport with the SORN's routine use (m), which mitigates the privacy risks with respect to the Privacy Act. Risk mitigation measures also include maintaining a current and compliant SA&A package for Treasury's Working System in accordance with OMB Circular No. A-130 requirements. To reduce the likelihood of incidents triggered by unauthorized access, login to Treasury's Working System requires PKI or PIV credentials. All users and administrators are required to sign rules of behavior stipulating their responsibilities to minimize risks and support DNP's mission to “Protect the integrity of the government's payment process by assisting agencies in mitigating and eliminating improper payments in a cost-effective manner while safeguarding the privacy of individuals.” In this vein, Treasury has also dedicated resources to establish a Privacy Program based on applicable requirements, FIPPs, and industry best practices. Treasury's Privacy Program champions various internal controls in concert with agency leadership and counsel such as a data usage governance process charged with vetting projects that support a data driven approach to reducing improper payments for Treasury's specific customers and government-wide.

    3. Designating SAM sensitive financial data from entity registration records would strengthen program integrity. With SAM sensitive financial data from entity registration records as a data source in DNP, agencies would have more convenient access to these data, strengthening their ability to make stronger and more efficient payment determinations and reducing false positives that result in improper withholding of or late payments.

    4. It would be beneficial to streamline access to SAM sensitive financial data from entity registration records as an additional database within Treasury's Working System. Many of Treasury's Working System users are payment-issuing agencies that are required to check SAM prior to payment. They will now be able to check SAM sensitive financial data from entity registration records alongside the other Treasury's Working System databases. This will enable agencies to make more informed and efficient payment decisions.

    5. There are no additional costs associated with expanding or centralizing access to SAM sensitive financial data from entity registration records because Treasury's Working System already includes this data. As a result, Treasury's Working System already has interfaces in place to allow for access to GSA's existing SAM technology feeds.

    6. No additional policy or stakeholder considerations were identified.

    Consideration for Designating the Internal Revenue Service's (IRS) Automatic Revocation of Exemption List (ARL)

    OMB proposes to designate the IRS's ARL, which maintains records of entities that have lost tax-exempt status due to failure to file an annual information return or notice with the IRS for three consecutive years. The Federal government administers a number of grant programs that pertain specifically to tax-exempt entities. As such, verification against ARL will assist grant-making agencies in verifying tax-exempt status prior to payment.

    OMB has reached the following initial determinations and is seeking public comment before finalizing the designation of the database.

    1. There are no statutory or other limitations that would prevent including this public database within Treasury's Working System.

    2. There are no prohibitive privacy restrictions or risks for Treasury to make this publicly facing database also available in Treasury's Working System. Risk mitigation measures include maintaining a current and compliant SA&A package for Treasury's Working System in accordance with OMB Circular No. A-130. To reduce the likelihood of incidents triggered by unauthorized access, login to Treasury's Working System requires PKI or PIV credentials. All users and administrators are required to sign rules of behavior stipulating their responsibilities to minimize risks and support DNP's mission to “Protect the integrity of the government's payment process by assisting agencies in mitigating and eliminating improper payments in a cost-effective manner while safeguarding the privacy of individuals.” In this vein, Treasury has also dedicated resources to establish a Privacy Program based on applicable requirements, FIPPs, and industry best practices. This Treasury's Privacy Program champions various internal controls in concert with agency leadership and counsel such as a data usage governance process charged with vetting projects that support foster a data driven approach to reducing improper payments for Treasury's specific customers and government-wide.

    3. Designating IRS' ARL would likely strengthen program integrity. With access to this database through Treasury's Working System, an agency will be better equipped to minimize the risk that it makes a payment to an entity that has not had its tax-exempt status verified.

    4. It would be beneficial to streamline access to the ARL through its inclusion within Treasury's Working System. Many of DNP's customers are grant-issuing agencies. This will enable agencies to make more informed payment decisions, increase efficiency, and strengthen internal controls.

    5. Aside from budgeted system development costs, there are no additional costs associated with expanding or centralizing access to this publically available database within Treasury's Working System.

    6. No additional policy or stakeholder considerations were identified.

    Consideration for Designating the IRS's Exempt Organizations Select Check (EO Select Check)

    OMB proposes to designate the IRS's EO Select Check, which maintains records of organizations eligible to receive tax-deductible charitable contributions. IRS Publication 78 requires organizations with gross receipts over $50,000 to file Form 990 once every three years in order to remain eligible for tax-exempt status. The EO Select Check database is even more valuable when used in concert with ARL, and will allow agencies to verify an entity's tax-exempt status prior to payment.

    OMB has reached the following initial determinations and is seeking public comment before finalizing the designation of the database.

    1. There are no statutory or other limitations that would prevent including this public database within Treasury's Working System.

    2. There are no prohibitive privacy restrictions or risks for Treasury to make this publicly facing database also available in Treasury's Working System. Risk mitigation measures include maintaining a current and compliant SA&A package for Treasury's Working System in accordance with OMB Circular No. A-130. To reduce the likelihood of incidents triggered by unauthorized access, login to Treasury's Working System requires PKI or PIV credentials. All users and administrators are required to sign rules of behavior stipulating their responsibilities to minimize risks and support DNP's mission to “Protect the integrity of the government's payment process by assisting agencies in mitigating and eliminating improper payments in a cost-effective manner while safeguarding the privacy of individuals.” In this vein, Treasury has also dedicated resources to establish a Privacy Program based on applicable requirements, the FIPPs, and industry best practices. This Treasury's Privacy Program champions various internal controls in concert with agency leadership and counsel such as a data usage governance process charged with vetting projects that support foster a data driven approach to reducing improper payments for Treasury's specific customers and government-wide.

    3. Designating IRS's EO Select Check database would likely strengthen program integrity. With access to this database through Treasury's Working System, an agency will be better equipped to minimize the risk that it makes a payment to an entity that has not had its tax-exempt status verified.

    4. It would be beneficial to streamline access to the EO Select Check through its inclusion as an additional database within Treasury's Working System. Many of DNP's customers are grant issuing agencies. This will enable agencies to make more informed payment decisions, increase efficiency, and strengthen internal controls.

    5. Aside from budgeted system development costs, there are no additional costs associated with expanding or centralizing access to this publically available database within Treasury's Working System.

    6. No additional policy or stakeholder considerations were identified.

    Consideration for Designating the IRS's e-Postcard

    OMB proposes to designate the IRS's e-Postcard database, which maintains records of small entities eligible to receive tax-deductible charitable contributions. Entities within e-Postcard are considered both small businesses and tax-exempt, with gross receipts under $50,000. These organizations are required to file a Form 990-N once every three years in order to remain eligible for tax-exempt status. As with the EO Select Check database, e-Postcard will allow agencies to verify tax-exempt status before making a payment.

    OMB has reached the following initial determinations and is seeking public comment before finalizing the designation of the database.

    1. There are no statutory or other limitations that would prevent including this public database within Treasury's Working System.

    2. There are no prohibitive privacy restrictions or risks for Treasury to make this publicly facing database also available in Treasury's Working System. Risk mitigation measures include maintaining a current and compliant SA&A package for Treasury's Working System in accordance with OMB Circular No. A-130. To reduce the likelihood of incidents triggered by unauthorized access, login to Treasury's Working System requires PKI or PIV credentials. All users and administrators are required to sign rules of behavior stipulating their responsibilities to minimize risks and support DNP's mission to “Protect the integrity of the government's payment process by assisting agencies in mitigating and eliminating improper payments in a cost-effective manner while safeguarding the privacy of individuals.” In this vein, Treasury has also dedicated resources to establish a Privacy Program based on applicable requirements, the FIPPs, and industry best practices. This Treasury's Privacy Program champions various internal controls in concert with agency leadership and counsel such as a data usage governance process charged with vetting projects that support foster a data driven approach to reducing improper payments for Treasury's specific customers and government-wide.

    3. Designating IRS' e-Postcard database would likely strengthen program integrity. With access to this database through Treasury's Working System, an agency will be better equipped to minimize the risk that it makes a payment to an entity that has not had its tax-exempt status verified.

    4. It would be beneficial to streamline access to the e-Postcard through its inclusion as additional database within Treasury's Working System. Many of DNP's customers are grant issuing agencies. This will enable agencies to make more informed payment decisions, increase efficiency, and strengthen internal controls.

    5. Aside from budgeted system development costs, there are no additional costs associated with expanding or centralizing access to this publically available database within Treasury's Working System.

    6. No additional policy or stakeholder considerations were identified.

    Considerations for Designating American InfoSource (AIS) Deceased Data

    OMB has considered Treasury's recommendation and assessment of the suitability of AIS Deceased Data for designation within Treasury's Working System. OMB proposes to designate AIS Deceased Data for inclusion in Treasury's Working System. Treasury's suitability assessment, which evaluates the suitability of AIS Deceased Data, is attached.

    Highlights of Treasury's assessment on AIS Deceased Data against the considerations and factors outlined in Section 5(b) of OMB Memorandum M-13-20 follow:

    1. There are no statutory or other limitations that would prevent Treasury from using or sharing AIS Deceased Data through Treasury's Working System.

    2. Treasury assessed privacy restrictions and risks by reviewing AIS' responses to a questionnaire based on Federal Trade Commission (FTC) vendor management guidance and conducting a data source profile. The information AIS provided regarding data restrictions and risks helped inform Treasury's decision to request this OMB designation of AIS.

    The questionnaire includes sections on Products and Services, Breach Notification, Consumer Access and Redress, and Legal Action/Complaints/Inquiries. AIS' response indicated that there are no consumer access or redress procedures in place because their data is not directly acquired from the consumer. AIS data is gathered through public records and additional data sources. AIS maintains that policies, practices and procedures relating to the monitoring, auditing, or evaluation of the accuracy of personally identifiable information may be customized and approved by Treasury as its customer.

    Treasury evaluated AIS Deceased Data in various areas, including a data quality assessment at the attribute level, and at the level of the source as a whole. Per-data element measures include quantifications of accuracy, coverage, and conformity. Whole-source measures include assessments of the freshness, completeness, and uniqueness of all records. These six assessments factors, some of which are multi-part, reduce to six quantitative scores, and these six scores are combined into an overall data source quality benchmark. The quality assessment was performed on a snapshot of the data source from July 14, 2014, for December and January deaths and from March 28, 2014, for November deaths.

    3. Designating AIS Deceased Data will strengthen program integrity. Treasury performed an analysis, in which it was conservatively estimated, that the program's use of just three months of AIS Deceased Data would have resulted in the identification of 226 additional improper payments, with a corresponding reduction of roughly $450,000 in improper payments to deceased persons. Please see sections IV(A)(5) and IV(B)(2) of the AIS Deceased Data suitability assessment for more detail on the results of this analysis.

    4. Streamlining Federal officials' access to AIS Deceased Data as an additional database within Treasury's Working System supports the Administration's objectives to reduce duplication and costs to taxpayers. Adding in this needed data source without streamlining through Treasury would require each agency to purchase the data set separately, resulting in delays to access and redundant.

    5. There will be some additional costs associated with expanding or centralizing access to AIS Deceased Data. However, Treasury has performed a trial assessment with respect to AIS Deceased Data, and has determined that the return on investment (ROI) is positive and outweighs the costs. Please see sections IV(A)(5) and IV(B)(2) of the AIS Deceased Data suitability assessment for more detail on how this analysis was performed and the results.

    6. No additional policy or stakeholder considerations were identified.

    We invite public comments on the proposed designation of each of the six databases described in this notice.

    Mark Reger, Deputy Controller. Do Not Pay: Written Assessment of the Suitability of the AIS Deceased Data Commercial Database

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Memorandum M-13-20 requires the Department of the Treasury to prepare and submit to OMB a written assessment to document the suitability of any commercial database proposed for use in Treasury's Working System. Section 11(d) of M-13-20 requires the assessment to address four topics:

    (i) The need to use or access the data;

    (ii) how the data will be used or accessed;

    (iii) a description of the data, including each data element that will be used or accessed; and

    (iv) how the database meets all applicable requirements of M-13-20.

    Treasury has completed its assessment of the suitability of American InfoSource (AIS) Deceased Data for inclusion as a database in Treasury's Working System. Based on its assessment, Treasury recommends that OMB propose the inclusion of AIS Deceased Data into Treasury's Working System. Below are Treasury's evaluations and conclusions regarding the Section 11(d) topics.

    I. Explanation of the Need To Use or Access the Data

    Decedent persons are ineligible to receive payments with few exceptions, such as to payments to survivors under the deceased name or payments to an estate for work completed before death. As such, the deceased are ineligible for most benefits, grants, or awards. There is a business need for the government to use the most complete, timely, and accurate data to ensure an improper payment is not made to these persons. Currently, government sources of death data include the Social Security Administration's (SSA) Death Master File (DMF), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) National Vital Statistics System, and data maintained by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) derived from Table 2000CM of tax returns.

    The AIS Deceased Data database includes information about deceased persons from all 50 states. AIS Deceased Data provides death data from states currently unavailable to Treasury customers through SSA's DMF. Treasury's Working System currently uses the public version of SSA's DMF. There is also a restricted version of DMF (known as the “public plus state” DMF), which is more comprehensive and contains more data reported from states than the public version. The Social Security Act limits the disclosure of state death records contained in the “public plus state” DMF to only benefit paying agencies. SSA has determined that Treasury's Working System does not meet the requirements for access to the “public plus state” DMF. Therefore, Treasury evaluated the coverage of AIS Deceased Data by state “public plus state” DMF and found that AIS does have significant coverage in many states above and beyond public DMF which are not contained within “public plus state” DMF. In addition to inputs from SSA's public DMF, AIS gathers information from probate court records and published obituaries. Obituaries are obtained by AIS from over 3,000 funeral homes and thousands of newspapers, and probate records are collected from the county courts. These sources are not currently available to agencies accessing Treasury's Working System. Out of 600,000 records Treasury received from AIS when assessing the suitability of the database, approximately 230,000 came from sources (obituaries and probationary records) other than the public version of DMF. The positive return on investment (ROI) analysis (Section IV) removed DMF files from its calculations further supporting that including records from AIS in Treasury's Working System will create value to Federal agencies that require this additional death data to make payment decisions.

    II. Explanation of How the Data Will Be Used or Accessed

    Generally, when payment-issuing agencies identify a business need to match against a specific type of database, Treasury will work with the payment-issuing agency to complete an Initial Questionnaire. An Initial Questionnaire is the form that Treasury must approve for each payment-issuing agency to initiate the onboarding process, and begin the process of accessing the requested databases. The objectives of the onboarding process are to:

    • Allow the payment-issuing agency to gain access to Treasury's Working System;

    • Outline business needs and legal authorities for the payment-issuing agency to access Treasury's Working System; and

    • Ensure that payment-issuing agency files are ready for use in Treasury's Working System.

    During the onboarding process, if an agency determines it has a business need to access death data like AIS Deceased Data—typically, to assist the agency in making eligibility determinations for payments or awards, customers will also identify the method by which their agency will search, or be disclosed, AIS Deceased Data (via online single search, batch matching, continuous monitoring, DNP Analytics, or a combination of these services). To access the batch matching and continuous monitoring matching functions, customers must establish a secure file transfer process with Treasury. Treasury then works with customers to provision access credentials and obtain supplementary information necessary to access Treasury's Working System. Each customer must certify and agree to Rules of Behavior for Treasury's Working System and certify and execute several legal agreements. Customers will then identify AIS Deceased Data as the specific database relevant to their matching needs.

    Upon obtaining access to use Treasury's Working System, a comparison between AIS data and agency payment data could be made, resulting in the return of positive matches. Users may either use Treasury's online portal to view automated match results on a regular basis, or request analytical services to be performed in order to gain additional insight. It is then the customer's responsibility to review the information received and make a determination, or request additional services.

    5 The Acquired and Age data elements reflect the timeliness of the data, and document when AIS compiled the specific death record.

    III. Description of the Data (Including Each Data Element That Will Be Used or Accessed) Data Element Definitions Header Description of data Related fields in DMF Last Name The last name of the deceased individual lastname. First Name The first name of the deceased individual firstname. Middle Name The middle name of the deceased individual middlename. City The city of residence for the deceased individual State The state of residence for the deceased individual Social Security Number (SSN) A 9-digit identification number used by the SSA. It is exclusively issued by SSA and is predominantly used for the individual classification ssn. Date of Death (Dod) The date of death for the deceased individual, used to determine if payment date is before or after death date dateofdeath. Date of birth (Dob) The date of birth for the deceased individual, which is a supplemental matching element payment-issuing agencies may use as an additional unique identifier to increase confidence in match accuracy dateofbirth. Acquired 5 Identifies when the data was first acquired by AIS Age Identifies the number of days between the acquired date and the date of death Confidence Level of confidence in the data within the record, determined by the source of the death report (DMF, probate court, obituary, and/or independent verification by AIS) verifyproof_cd. Source count The number of death sources in which the record was found Source The source from which the record was first acquired IV. Explanation of How the Database Meets All the Applicable Requirements of OMB M-13-20

    M-13-20 outlines three distinct sets of requirements for including additional databases in Treasury's Working System.

    A. M-13-20 Section 5(b)—Considerations for Designation of Additional Databases

    M-13-20 section 5(b) requires that when considering additional databases for designation, OMB will consider:

    1. Statutory or other limitations on the use and sharing of specific data;

    2. Privacy restrictions and risks associated with specific data;

    3. Likelihood that the data will strengthen program integrity across programs and agencies;

    4. Benefits of streamlining access to the data through the central DNP Initiative;

    5. Costs associated with expanding or centralizing access, including modifications needed to system interfaces or other capabilities in order to make data accessible; and

    6. Other policy and stakeholder considerations, as appropriate.

    Treasury has assessed AIS Deceased Data against the considerations and factors outlined in Section 5(b) of M-13-20. Treasury has determined that:

    1. There are no statutory or other limitations that would prevent Treasury from using or sharing AIS Deceased Data through Treasury's Working System.

    2. Treasury assessed privacy restrictions and risks by reviewing AIS' responses to a questionnaire based on Federal Trade Commission (FTC) vendor management guidance and conducting a data source profile. These inputs that considered data restrictions and risks informed Treasury's decision to request this designation request.

    The questionnaire includes sections on Products and Services, Breach Notification, Consumer Access and Redress, and Legal Action/Complaints/Inquiries. AIS' response indicated that there are no consumer access or redress procedures in place because their data is not directly acquired from the consumer. AIS data is gathered through public records and additional data sources. AIS maintains that policies, practices and procedures relating to the monitoring, auditing, or evaluation of the accuracy of personally identifiable information may be customized and approved by the Treasury as its customer.

    Treasury evaluated AIS Deceased Data in various areas, including a data quality assessment at the attribute level, and at the level of the source as a whole. Per-data element measures include quantifications of accuracy, coverage, and conformity. Whole-source measures include assessments of the freshness, completeness, and uniqueness of all records. These six assessments factors, some of which are multi-part, reduce to six quantitative scores, and these six scores are combined into an overall data source quality benchmark. The quality assessment was performed on a snapshot of the data source, from July 14, 2014 for December and January deaths and from March 28, 2014 for November deaths.

    3. Designating AIS Deceased Data will strengthen program integrity. Treasury performed an analysis in which it was conservatively estimated that the program's use of just three months of AIS Deceased Data would have resulted in the identification of 226 additional improper payments, with a corresponding reduction of roughly $450,000 in improper payments to deceased persons. Please see section IV(A)(5) and IV(B)(2) for more detail on how this analysis was performed and the results.

    4. It is beneficial to the Federal government and to taxpayers to streamline access to AIS Deceased Data as an additional database within Treasury's Working System. Currently, in order to access AIS Deceased Data, customer agencies must each procure the data themselves. This process can take up to six months to complete and is costly and duplicative. With over 140 programs currently accessing Treasury's Working System, the amount of time saved with a single procurement will have a positive ROI.

    5. There will be some additional costs associated with expanding or centralizing access to AIS Deceased Data. However, Treasury has performed a trial assessment with respect to AIS Deceased Data, and it has determined that the ROI is positive and outweighs the costs. Specifically, the trial assessment compared three months of AIS data to current and historical payment data in order to determine which payments would result in matches. Agency-specific business rules identified in Treasury's current processes were then applied to reduce false positives. ROI was 400%. Recurring payments were then eliminated to simulate an agency stopping the first payment, thus nullifying benefit from future payments. ROI was found to be 315%.

    6. No additional policy or stakeholder considerations were identified.

    B. M-13-20 Section 11(b)—General Standards for the Use or Access to Commercial Databases

    M-13-20 Section 11(b) provides that Treasury may use or access a commercial database for Treasury's Working System only if OMB has officially, previously designated such database for inclusion following a period of public notice and comment, as described in section 5(b) of this Memorandum. Because commercial databases used or accessed for purposes of the DNP Initiative will be used to help agencies make determinations about persons, it is important that agencies apply safeguards that are similarly rigorous to those that apply to systems of records under the Privacy Act. Thus, commercial data may only be used or accessed for the DNP Initiative when the commercial data in question would meet the following general standards:

    1. Information in commercial databases must be relevant and necessary to meet the objectives described in section 5 of IPERIA.

    2. Information in commercial databases must be sufficiently accurate, up-to-date, relevant, and complete to ensure fairness to the individual record subjects.

    3. Information in commercial databases must not contain information that describes how any individual exercises rights guaranteed by the First Amendment, unless use of the data is expressly authorized by statute.

    Treasury has assessed AIS Deceased Data against the considerations and factors outlined in Section 11(b) of M-13-20. Treasury has determined that:

    1. AIS Deceased Data is relevant and necessary to meet objectives set out in the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Improvement Act of 2012 (IPERIA). IPERIA requires payment-issuing agencies to verify eligibility of payments and awards by reviewing the SSA DMF, as appropriate. Treasury has access to the public DMF, but does not currently have access to the “public plus state” DMF or probate court records and obituaries. AIS Deceased Data provides the latter two categories, creating value for payment-issuing agencies in this additional death data. Additionally, AIS Deceased Data includes records from states, including 18 states that do not report deaths to SSA via the Internet Electronic Death Registration (I-EDR), and would not be included in the “public plus state” DMF anyway. AIS Deceased Data will supplement the existing data provided by SSA in the public DMF and further inform the payment decisions of Treasury customers.

    2. In its trial assessment, Treasury determined that AIS Deceased Data is sufficiently accurate, up-to-date, relevant, and complete to ensure fairness. Treasury compared the AIS Deceased Data city and state data to other databases that are considered “gold standards” and over 99 percent of these data were accurate. Treasury also assessed AIS Deceased Data social security number (SSN), date of death, and date of birth data elements and determined that: over 99 percent of the SSN data are accurate; all records contain a date of death; and 89 percent of the data contain a date of birth, which is sufficiently accurate for a supplemental matching element. The data elements that AIS will provide to Treasury's Working System all directly relate to confirming the identification of a person's status as deceased and would be fully refreshed on a quarterly basis. Extraneous fields are not included to ensure that data minimization standards (see M-13-20 section 5(c)) are applied. In addition, Treasury only receives records from AIS, which contain a SSN, first name, and last name. These practices and the data elements will ensure fewer false positives and fairness to the record subjects.

    3. AIS Deceased Data does not contain information that describes how an individual exercises rights guaranteed by the First Amendment.

    C. M-13-20 Section 11(c)—Specific Requirements for Use or Access to Commercial Databases

    M-13-20 Section 11(c) provides that in addition to the general standards provided above, Treasury shall meet the following specific requirements whenever agencies use or access a commercial database as part of Treasury's Working System:

    1. Treasury shall establish rules of conduct for persons involved in the use of or access to commercial databases and instruct each person with respect to such rules, including penalties for noncompliance, as appropriate.

    2. Treasury shall establish appropriate administrative, technical, and physical safeguards to ensure the security and confidentiality of information in commercial databases when such information is under Treasury's control.

    Treasury has assessed AIS Deceased Data against the considerations and factors outlined in Section 11(c) of M-13-20. Treasury has determined that it has fulfilled the requirements of Section 11(c) because:

    1. Treasury has established rules of conduct for users of the Treasury's Working System. Users must agree to the following:

    • To use information to perform job duties and to only access data necessary to perform said duties;

    • To not use data for fraud;

    • To not browse or access data without authorization;

    • To make no changes to data delivered;

    • To not use data for personal gain;

    • To report conflicts of interest immediately;

    • To terminate access when access is no longer required for job duties; and

    • To not disclose information to unauthorized persons.

    Terms and conditions which must be accepted each time a customer accesses the Treasury's Working System include a description of penalties for misuse of data. These include:

    • Criminal and civil penalties.

    • disciplinary actions and other consequences including the loss of system access.

    2. Treasury has strong safeguards to protect the security and confidentiality of information. Access to the Treasury's Working System is available only by authorized persons on a need-to-know basis. External access logs to Treasury's Working System are reviewed to ensure compliance with the Rules of Behavior agreed to by credentialed users. Internal access log control measures are reviewed to ensure compliance with security guidelines governing access to Privacy Act data. Audit logs allow system managers to monitor external and internal user actions and address any misuse or violation of access privileges. Access to computerized records is limited through the use of internal mechanisms available to only those whose official duties require access. Facilities where records are physically located are secured by various means, such as security guards, locked doors with key entry, and equipment requiring a physical token to gain access. The Bureau of the Fiscal Service may agree to additional safeguards for some data through a written agreement with the entity supplying the data.

    Treasury's Working System recently completed its Security Assessment and Authorization (SA&A), which is reviewed at the Bureau of the Fiscal Service level. The SA&A adheres to the processes outlined in the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication (SP) 800 series. More specifically, NIST SP 800-115; NIST SP 800-53, Rev. 3; NIST SP-800-53A, Rev. 1; NIST SP 800-37, Rev. 1; and NIST SP 800-30. Treasury's Working System also complies with the Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA). For example, detailed SA&A information is currently safeguarded within the Treasury FISMA Information Management System; in the event of an audit, this documentation may be made available.

    [FR Doc. 2017-19433 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3110-01-P
    NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION [Notice: (17-063)] Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel; Charter Renewal AGENCY:

    National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of renewal of charter of the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel.

    SUMMARY:

    Pursuant to sections 14(b)(1) and 9(c) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), and after consultation with the Committee Management Secretariat, U.S. General Services Administration, the NASA Acting Administrator has determined that renewal of the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP) is in the public interest in connection with the performance of duties imposed on NASA by law. The renewed charter is for a two-year period ending on August 15, 2019.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Carol Hamilton, Designated Federal Officer, Office of International and Interagency Relations, NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC 20546; phone (202) 358-1857; email [email protected]

    Patricia D. Rausch, Advisory Committee Management Officer, National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19406 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7510-13-P
    NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION [Notice: 17-061] International Space Station Advisory Committee; Charter Renewal AGENCY:

    National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of renewal of charter of the International Space Station Advisory Committee.

    SUMMARY:

    Pursuant to sections 14(b)(1) and 9(c) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, and after consultation with the Committee Management Secretariat, U.S. General Services Administration, the NASA Acting Administrator has determined that renewal of the International Space Station Advisory Committee is in the public interest in connection with the performance of duties imposed on NASA by law. The renewed charter is for a one-year period ending on September 30, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Patrick Finley, Designated Federal Officer, Office of International and Interagency Relations, NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC 20546; phone (202) 358-5684; email [email protected]

    Patricia D. Rausch, Advisory Committee Management Officer, National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19405 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7510-13-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC-2016-0223] Information Collection: Grant and Cooperative Agreement Provisions AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice of submission to the Office of Management and Budget; request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has recently submitted a request for renewal of an existing collection of information to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. The information collection is entitled, “Grant and Cooperative Agreement Provisions.”

    DATES:

    Submit comments by October 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments directly to the OMB reviewer at: Aaron Szabo, Desk Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (3150-0107), NEOB-10202, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503; telephone: 202-395-3621; email: [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David Cullison, NRC Clearance Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-2084; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2016-0223 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2016-0223. A copy of the collection of information and related instructions may be obtained without charge by accessing Docket ID NRC-2016-0223 on this Web site.

    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] The supporting statement is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17241A042.

    ANRC'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.

    NRC's Clearance Officer: A copy of the collection of information and related instructions may be obtained without charge by contacting the NRC's Clearance Officer, David Cullison, Office of the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-2084; email: [email protected]

    B. Submitting Comments

    The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information in comment submissions that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. All comment submissions are posted at http://www.regulations.gov and entered into ADAMS. Comment submissions are not routinely edited to remove identifying or contact information.

    If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the OMB, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that comment submissions are not routinely edited to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.

    II. Background

    Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the NRC recently submitted a request for renewal of an existing collection of information to OMB for review entitled, “Grant and Cooperative Agreement Provisions.” The NRC hereby informs potential respondents that an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and that a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    The NRC published a Federal Register notice with a 60-day comment period on this information collection on June 21, 2017, 82 FR 28362.

    1. The title of the information collection: Grant and Cooperative Agreement Provisions.

    2. OMB approval number: 3150-0107.

    3. Type of submission: Extension.

    4. The form number if applicable: Not applicable.

    5. How often the collection is required or requested: Technical Performance reports are required every 6 months; other information is submitted on occasion as needed.

    6. Who will be required or asked to respond: Grant and Cooperative Agreement recipients.

    7. The estimated number of annual responses: 548 (370 responses plus 178 record keepers).

    8. The estimated number of annual respondents: 178.

    9. An estimate of the total number of hours needed annually to comply with the information collection requirement or request: 4,173. (3,894 reporting hours plus 279 recordkeeping hours).

    10. Abstract: The Acquisition Management Division is responsible for awarding grants and cooperative agreements (financial assistance) for the NRC. The Acquisition Management Division collects information from assistance recipients in accordance with grant and cooperative agreement provisions in order to administer the NRC's financial assistance program. The information collected under the provisions ensures that the Government's rights are protected, the agency adheres to public laws, the work proceeds on schedule, and that disputes between the Government and the recipient are settled.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day of September, 2017.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    David Cullison, NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19384 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC-2016-0264] Information Collection: Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Wastes in a Geologic Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice of submission to the Office of Management and Budget; request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has recently submitted a request for renewal of an existing collection of information to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. The information collection is entitled, “Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Wastes in a Geologic Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada.”

    DATES:

    Submit comments by October 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments directly to the OMB reviewer at: Aaron Szabo, Desk Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (3150-0199), NEOB-10202, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503; telephone: 202-395-3621, email: [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David Cullison, NRC Clearance Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-2084; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2016-0264 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2016-0264.

    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] The supporting statement is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17205A471.

    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.

    NRC's Clearance Officer: A copy of the collection of information and related instructions may be obtained without charge by contacting the NRC's Clearance Officer, David Cullison, Office of the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-2084; email: [email protected]

    B. Submitting Comments

    The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information in comment submissions that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. All comment submissions are posted at http://www.regulations.gov and entered into ADAMS. Comment submissions are not routinely edited to remove identifying or contact information.

    If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the OMB, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that comment submissions are not routinely edited to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.

    II. Background

    Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the NRC recently submitted a request for renewal of an existing collection of information to OMB for review entitled, “Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Wastes in a Geologic Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada.” The NRC hereby informs potential respondents that an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and that a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    The NRC published a Federal Register notice with a 60-day comment period on this information collection on May 31, 2017 (82 FR 25015).

    1. The title of the information collection: 10 CFR part 63, “Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Wastes in a Geologic Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada.”

    2. OMB approval number: OMB approval number 3150-0199.

    3. Type of submission: Extension.

    4. The form number if applicable: Not applicable.

    5. How often the collection is required or requested: One time.

    6. Who will be required or asked to respond: The State of Nevada, local governments, or affected Indian tribes, or their representatives, requesting consultation with the NRC staff regarding review of the potential high level waste geologic repository site, or wishing to participate in a license application review for the potential geologic repository.

    7. The estimated number of annual responses: 12.

    8. The estimated number of annual respondents: 12.

    9. An estimate of the total number of hours needed annually to comply with the information collection requirement or request: 1,452.

    10. Abstract: Part 63 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, requires the State of Nevada, local governments, or affected Indian tribes to submit information to the NRC that describes their request for any consultation with the NRC staff concerning review of the potential repository site or NRC's facilitation for their participation in a license application review for the potential repository. Representatives of the State of Nevada, local governments, or affected Indian tribes must submit a statement of their authority to act in such a representative capacity. The information submitted by the State of Nevada, local governments, or affected Indian tribes is used by the Director of the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards as a basis for decisions about the commitment of the NRC staff resources to the consultation and participation efforts.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day of September 2017. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. David Cullison, NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19432 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC-2016-0265] Information Collection: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Acquisition Regulation (NRCAR) AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Renewal of existing information collection; request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) invites public comment on the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) approval for renewal of an existing information collection. The document details clauses and provisions that affect NRC contractors. The NRCAR implements and supplements the government-wide Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and ensures that the policies governing the procurement of goods and services within the NRC satisfy the needs of the agency. The information collection is entitled, “Nuclear Regulatory Commission Acquisition Regulation.”

    DATES:

    Submit comments by November 13, 2017. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the Commission is able to ensure consideration only for comments received on or before this date.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2016-0265. 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.

    Mail comments to: David Cullison, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Mail Stop: T-2 F43, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

    For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting comments, see “Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments” in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David Cullison, Office of the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-2084; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2016-0265 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2016-0265.

    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] The supporting statement is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17074A579.

    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.

    NRC's Clearance Officer: A copy of the collection of information and related instructions may be obtained without charge by contacting the NRC's Clearance Officer, David Cullison, Office of the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-2084; email: [email protected]

    B. Submitting Comments

    Please include Docket ID NRC-2016-0265 in the subject line of your comment submission, in order to ensure that the NRC is able to make your comment submission available to the public in this docket.

    The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information in comment submissions that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. All comment submissions are posted at http://www.regulations.gov and entered into ADAMS. Comment submissions are not routinely edited to remove identifying or contact information.

    If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that comment submissions are not routinely edited to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.

    II. Background

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the NRC is requesting public comment on its intention to request the OMB's approval for the information collection summarized below.

    1. The title of the information collection: 48 CFR 20 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Acquisition Regulation (NRCAR).

    2. OMB approval number: 3150-0169.

    3. Type of submission: Extension.

    4. The form number, if applicable: N/A.

    5. How often the collection is required or requested: On occasion, one time.

    6. Who will be required or asked to respond: NRC contractors and potential contractors.

    7. The estimated number of annual responses: 5,613.

    8. The estimated number of annual respondents: 4,985.

    9. The estimated number of hours needed annually to comply with the information collection requirement or request: 37,337 (34,393 reporting + 2,944 recordkeeping).

    10. Abstract: The mandatory requirements of the NRCAR implement and supplement the government-wide Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), and ensure that the regulations governing the procurement of goods and services with the NRC satisfy the particular needs of the agency. Because of differing statutory authorities among Federal agencies, the FAR permits agencies to issue a regulation to implement FAR policies and procedures internally to satisfy the specific need of the agency.

    III. Specific Requests for Comments

    The NRC is seeking comments that address the following questions:

    1. Is the proposed collection of information necessary for the NRC to properly perform its functions? Does the information have practical utility?

    2. Is the estimate of the burden of the information collection accurate?

    3. Is there a way to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected?

    4. How can the burden of the information collection on respondents be minimized, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology?

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day of September, 2017.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    David Cullison, NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19368 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD Agency Forms Submitted for OMB Review, Request for Comments

    Summary: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Railroad Retirement Board (RRB) is forwarding an Information Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Our ICR describes the information we seek to collect from the public. Review and approval by OIRA ensures that we impose appropriate paperwork burdens.

    The RRB invites comments on the proposed collections of information to determine (1) the practical utility of the collections; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden of the collections; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information that is the subject of collection; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of collections on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments to the RRB or OIRA must contain the OMB control number of the ICR. For proper consideration of your comments, it is best if the RRB and OIRA receive them within 30 days of the publication date.

    1. Title and purpose of information collection: Supplemental Information on Accident and Insurance; OMB 3220-0036.

    Under Section 12(o) of the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act (RUIA), the Railroad Retirement Board (RRB) is entitled to reimbursement of the sickness benefits paid to a railroad employee if the employee receives a sum or damages for the same infirmity for which the benefits are paid. Section 2(f) of the RUIA requires employers to reimburse the RRB for days in which salary, wages, pay for time lost or other remuneration is later determined to be payable. Reimbursements under section 2(f) generally result from the award of pay for time lost or the payment of guaranteed wages. The RUIA prescribes that the amount of benefits paid be deducted and held by the employer in a special fund for reimbursement to the RRB.

    The RRB currently utilizes Forms SI-1c, Supplemental Information on Accident and Insurance; SI-5, Report of Payments to Employee Claiming Sickness Benefits Under the RUIA; ID-3s and ID-3s (Internet), Request for Lien Information—Report of Settlement; ID-3s-1, Lien Information Under Section 12(o) of the RUIA; ID-3u and ID-3u (Internet), Request for Section 2(f) Information; ID-30k, Notice to Request Supplemental Information on Injury or Illness; and ID-30k-1, Notice to Request Supplemental Information on Injury or Illness; to obtain the necessary information from claimants and railroad employers. Completion is required to obtain benefits. One response is requested of each respondent.

    Previous Requests for Comments: The RRB has already published the initial 60-day notice (82 FR 31108 on July 5, 2017) required by 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2). That request elicited no comments.

    Information Collection Request (ICR)

    Title: Supplemental Information on Accident and Insurance.

    OMB Control Number: 3220-0036.

    Form(s) submitted: SI-1c, SI-5, ID-3s, ID-3s (Internet), ID-3s.1, ID3u, ID-3u (Internet), ID-30k, and ID-30k.1.

    Type of request: Extension without change of a currently approved collection.

    Affected public: Individuals or Households.

    Abstract: The Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act provides for the recovery of sickness benefits paid if an employee receives a settlement for the same injury for which benefits were paid. The collection obtains information that is needed to determine the amount of the RRB's reimbursement from the person or company responsible for such payments.

    Changes proposed: The RRB proposes no changes to the forms in the collection.

    The burden estimate for the ICR is as follows:

    Form No. Annual
  • responses
  • Time
  • (minutes)
  • Burden
  • (hours)
  • SI-1c 475 5 40 SI-5 7 5 1 ID-3s (Paper & Telephone) 4,000 3 200 ID-3s (Internet) 2,000 3 100 ID-3s-1 (Paper & Telephone) 3,000 3 150 ID-3u (Paper & Telephone) 400 3 20 ID-3u (Internet) 200 3 10 ID-30k 55 5 5 ID-30k.1 65 5 5 Total 10,202 531

    2. Title and Purpose of information collection: Pension Plan Reports; OMB 3220-0089. Under Section 2(b) of the Railroad Retirement Act (RRA), the Railroad Retirement Board (RRB) pays supplemental annuities to qualified RRB employee annuitants. A supplemental annuity, which is computed according to Section 3(e) of the RRA, can be paid at age 60 if the employee has at least 30 years of creditable railroad service or at age 65 if the employee has 25-29 years of railroad service. In addition to 25 years of service, a “current connection” with the railroad industry is required. Eligibility is further limited to employees who had at least 1 month of rail service before October 1981 and were awarded regular annuities after June 1966. Further, if an employee's 65th birthday was prior to September 2, 1981, he or she must not have worked in rail service after certain closing dates (generally the last day of the month following the month in which age 65 is attained). Under Section 2(h)(2) of the RRA, the amount of the supplemental annuity is reduced if the employee receives monthly pension payments, or a lump-sum pension payment from a private pension from a railroad employer, to the extent the payments are based on contributions from that employer. The employee's own contribution to their pension account does not cause a reduction. A private railroad employer pension is defined in 20 CFR 216.42.

    The RRB requires the following information from railroad employers to calculate supplemental annuities: (a) The current status of railroad employer pension plans and whether such plans cause reductions to the supplemental annuity; (b) whether the employee receives monthly payments from a private railroad employer pension, elected to receive a lump sum in lieu of monthly pension payments from such a plan, or was required to receive a lump sum from such a plan due to the plan's small benefit provision; and (c) the amount of the payments attributable to the railroad employer's contributions. The requirement that railroad employers furnish pension information to the RRB is contained in 20 CFR 209.2.

    The RRB currently utilizes Form G-88p and G-88p (Internet), Employer's Supplemental Pension Report, and Form G-88r, Request for Information About New or Revised Employer Pension Plan, to obtain the necessary information from railroad employers. One response is requested of each respondent. Completion is mandatory.

    Previous Requests for Comments: The RRB has already published the initial 60-day notice (82 FR 31108 on July 5, 2017) required by 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2). That request elicited no comments.

    Information Collection Request (ICR)

    Title: Pension Plan Reports.

    OMB Control Number: 3220-0089.

    Forms submitted: G-88p and G-88r.

    Type of request: Revision of a currently approved collection of information.

    Affected public: Businesses or other for-profits.

    Abstract: The Railroad Retirement Act provides for payment of a supplemental annuity to a qualified railroad retirement annuitant. The collection obtains information from the annuitant's employer to determine (a) the existence of railroad employer pension plans and whether such plans, if they exist, require a reduction to supplemental annuities paid to the employer's former employees and (b) the amount of supplemental annuities due railroad employees.

    Changes proposed: The RRB proposes to revise Forms G-88p and G-88p (Internet) to acquire more accurate employee pension information by asking the employer whether the employee is currently eligible for a pension and instructing the employer to indicate whether the employee filed for the pension or instead elected to defer distribution from the pension account in Items 11a and 11b (paper) and Items 10a and 10b (Internet). The RRB also proposes to make other editorial changes. The RRB proposes no changes to Form G-88r.

    The burden estimate for the ICR is as follows:

    Form No. Annual
  • responses
  • Time
  • (minutes)
  • Burden
  • (hours)
  • G-88p 100 8 13 G-88p (Internet) 200 6 20 G-88r 10 8 1 Total 310 34

    3. Title and Purpose of information collection: Statement Regarding Contributions and Support; OMB 3220-0099.

    Under Section 2 of the Railroad Retirement Act, dependency on an employee for one-half support at the time of the employee's death can affect (1) entitlement to a survivor annuity when the survivor is a parent of the deceased employee; (2) the amount of spouse and survivor annuities; and (3) the Tier II restored amount payable to a widow(er) whose annuity was reduced for receipt of an employee annuity, and who was dependent on the railroad employee in the year prior to the employee's death. One-half support may also negate the public service pension offset in Tier I for a spouse or widow(er). The Railroad Retirement Board (RRB) utilizes Form G-134, Statement Regarding Contributions and Support, to secure information needed to adequately determine if the applicant meets the one-half support requirement. One response is completed by each respondent. Completion is required to obtain benefits.

    Previous Requests for Comments: The RRB has already published the initial 60-day notice (82 FR 31109 on July 5, 2017) required by 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2). That request elicited no comments.

    Information Collection Request (ICR)

    Title: Statement Regarding Contributions and Support.

    OMB Control Number: 3220-0099.

    Form(s) submitted: G-134.

    Type of request: Extension without change of a currently approved collection.

    Affected public: Individuals or Households.

    Abstract: Dependency on the employee for one-half support at the time of the employee's death can be a condition affecting eligibility for a survivor annuity provided for under Section 2 of the Railroad Retirement Act. One-half support is also a condition which may negate the public service pension offset in Tier I for a spouse or widow(er).

    Changes proposed: The RRB proposes no changes to Form G-134.

    The burden estimate for the ICR is as follows:

    Form No. Annual
  • responses
  • Time
  • (minutes)
  • Burden
  • (hours)
  • G-134: With Assistance 75 147 184 Without assistance 25 180 75 Total 100 259

    Additional Information or Comments: Copies of the forms and supporting documents can be obtained from Dana Hickman at (312) 751-4981 or [email protected]

    Comments regarding the information collection should be addressed to Brian Foster, Railroad Retirement Board, 844 North Rush Street, Chicago, Illinois, 60611-1275 or [email protected] and to the OMB Desk Officer for the RRB, Fax: 202-395-6974, Email address: [email protected]

    Brian D. Foster, Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19442 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7905-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-81545; File No. SR-NSCC-2017-804] Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Securities Clearing Corporation; Notice of No Objection to an Advance Notice To Expand the Application of the Family-Issued Securities Charge September 7, 2017.

    On July 10, 2017, National Securities Clearing Corporation (“NSCC”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) advance notice SR-NSCC-2017-804 (“Advance Notice”) pursuant to Section 806(e)(1) of Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act entitled the Payment, Clearing, and Settlement Supervision Act of 2010 (“Clearing Supervision Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4(n)(1)(i) 2 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”).3 The Advance Notice was published for comment in the Federal Register on August 8, 2017.4 The Commission did not receive any comments on the Advance Notice. This publication serves as notice that the Commission does not object to the changes set forth in the Advance Notice.

    1 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1). The Financial Stability Oversight Council designated NSCC a systemically important financial market utility on July 18, 2012. See Financial Stability Oversight Council 2012 Annual Report, Appendix A, http://www.treasury.gov/initiatives/fsoc/Documents/2012%20Annual%20Report.pdf. Therefore, NSCC is required to comply with the Clearing Supervision Act and file advance notices with the Commission. See 12 U.S.C. 5465(e).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4(n)(1)(i).

    3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    4 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81286 (August 2, 2017), 82 FR 37141 (August 8, 2017) (SR-NSCC-2017-804) (“Notice”). NSCC also filed a related proposed rule change with the Commission pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Exchange Act and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, seeking approval of changes to its rules necessary to implement the Advance Notice. 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1) and 17 CFR 240.19b-4, respectively. The proposed rule change was published in the Federal Register on July 31, 2017. Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81203 (July 25, 2017), 82 FR 35563 (July 31, 2017) (SR-NSCC-2017-010). The Commission did not receive any comments on that proposal.

    I. Description of the Advance Notice

    The Advance Notice is a proposal by NSCC to further address specific wrong-way risk 5 that is present when NSCC acts as central counterparty to a transaction with an NSCC member (“Member”) where the underlying securities are securities issued by such Member or an affiliate of such Member (“family-issued securities”).6 Currently, NSCC applies a targeted margin charge to address the specific wrong-way risk of family-issued securities transactions (“FIS Charge”) where the Member is on NSCC's Watch List.7 NSCC believes that Members on the Watch List present a higher credit risk (i.e., a greater risk of defaulting on their settlement obligations), compared to Members not on the Watch List. As such, the family-issued securities of Members on the Watch List currently receive a FIS Charge because of the increased credit risk presented by such Members. As described in detail below, NSCC proposes in the Advance Notice to expand the application of the FIS Charge to all Members, regardless of a Member's Watch List status, but still maintain a higher FIS Charge for Members that present a greater credit risk to NSCC, such as Members on the Watch List.

    5 Specific wrong-way risk is the risk that an exposure to a counterparty is highly likely to increase when the creditworthiness of that counterparty is deteriorating. See Principles for financial market infrastructures, issued by the Committee on Payment and Settlement Systems and the Technical Committee of the International Organization of Securities Commissions 47 n.65 (April 2012), available at http://www.bis.org/publ/cpss101a.pdf.

    6 As part of this proposal, NSCC proposes to define in its rules that, for a given Member, a family-issued security is a security that was issued by such Member or an affiliate of such Member.

    7 As part of its ongoing monitoring of its membership, NSCC utilizes an internal credit risk rating matrix to rate its risk exposures to its Members based on a scale from 1 (the strongest) to 7 (the weakest). Members that fall within the weakest three rating categories (i.e., 5, 6, and 7) are placed on NSCC's “Watch List” and, as provided under NSCC's Rules and Procedures (“Rules”), may be subject to enhanced surveillance or additional margin charges. See Section 4 of Rule 2B and Section I(B)(1) of Procedure XV of NSCC's Rules, available at http://dtcc.com/~/media/Files/Downloads/legal/rules/nscc_rules.pdf.

    Currently, in calculating a Watch List Member's overall margin charge (i.e., a Watch List Member's required deposit to NSCC's clearing fund), NSCC excludes the Member's net, unsettled long position in family-issued securities from the volatility component of the margin calculation (“VaR Charge”). Instead, for such unsettled long positions, NSCC calculates the required margin (i.e., the FIS Charge) by multiplying the position value by a set percentage, which is determined based on a Member's rating on NSCC's internal credit risk rating matrix.8 NSCC applies this separate margin calculation to deal with specific wrong-way risk that arises from these positions because NSCC has to liquidate the unsettled family-issued security long positions in the Member's portfolio to manage the default.9 Given that the Member's default would likely adversely affect NSCC's ability to liquidate such positions at full value (because the value of the family-issued securities will decline in response to the Member's default), NSCC applies the FIS Charge to try to address the risk of a shortfall. According to NSCC, the FIS Charge constitutes a more conservative approach to collecting margin on family-issued security positions than what may be achieved by applying the VaR Charge, which does not recognize the relationship between the Member and the family-issued securities.

    8 More specifically, fixed-income securities that are family-issued securities are charged a rate of no less than 80 percent for firms that are rated 6 or 7 on the credit risk rating matrix, and no less than 40 percent for firms that are rated 5 on the credit risk rating matrix. Equity securities that are family-issued securities are charged a rate of 100 percent for firms that are rated 6 or 7 on the credit risk rating matrix, and no less than 50 percent for firms that are rated 5 on the credit risk rating matrix.

    9 In a default scenario, NSCC would receive the family-issued securities from a Member's guaranteed long transactions and would have to liquidate the holding to unwind NSCC's position.

    Although the risk of default by Members that are not on the Watch List is lower than Members on the Watch List, NSCC believes that it is appropriate to apply the FIS Charge to all Members because all Members' long positions in family-issued securities present specific wrong-way risk. However, the proposal would still maintain the relation between the FIS Charge and the Member's risk of default (i.e., the Member's credit risk), while at the same time addressing the difference in risk posed by equity and fixed-income securities. As such, NSCC proposes in the Advance Notice to apply the FIS Charge to fixed-income securities that are family-issued securities of non-Watch List Members at a rate of no less than 40 percent, and to equities that are family-issued securities of non-Watch List Members at a rate of no less than 50 percent.10

    10 According to NSCC, it calibrated the FIS Charge rates based on historical corporate-issue recovery-rate data. The rate applicable to equities is higher than the rate applicable to fixed-income securities because NSCC determined that equities present a greater risk than fixed-income securities of having a value at or near zero when a Member defaults. The Commission understands that NSCC calculated the 40 and 50 percent rates based on a weighted value of the probability of a Member defaulting and the potential loss that NSCC may realize when liquidating family-issued securities after a Member default.

    II. Discussion and Commission Findings

    Although the Clearing Supervision Act does not specify a standard of review for an advance notice, its stated purpose is instructive: To mitigate systemic risk in the financial system and promote financial stability by, among other things, promoting uniform risk management standards for systemically important financial market utilities and strengthening the liquidity of systemically important financial market utilities.11 Section 805(a)(2) of the Clearing Supervision Act 12 authorizes the Commission to prescribe risk management standards for the payment, clearing, and settlement activities of designated clearing entities engaged in designated activities for which the Commission is the supervisory agency. Section 805(b) of the Clearing Supervision Act 13 provides the following objectives and principles for the Commission's risk management standards prescribed under Section 805(a):

    11See 12 U.S.C. 5461(b).

    12 12 U.S.C. 5464(a)(2).

    13 12 U.S.C. 5464(b).

    • Promote robust risk management;

    • promote safety and soundness;

    • reduce systemic risks; and

    • support the stability of the broader financial system.

    The Commission has adopted risk management standards under Section 805(a)(2) of the Clearing Supervision Act 14 and Section 17A of the Exchange Act (“Rule 17Ad-22”).15 Rule 17Ad-22 requires registered clearing agencies to establish, implement, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to meet certain minimum requirements for their operations and risk management practices on an ongoing basis.16 Therefore, it is appropriate for the Commission to review proposed changes in advance notices against the objectives and principles of these risk management standards as described in Section 805(b) of the Clearing Supervision Act 17 and against Rule 17Ad-22.18

    14 12 U.S.C. 5464(a)(2).

    15 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.

    16 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22.

    17 12 U.S.C. 5464(b).

    18 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22.

    The Commission believes the proposal in the Advance Notice is consistent with the objectives and principles described in Section 805(b) of the Act,19 and Rule 17Ad-22, in particular Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(i) 20 and Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6)(i) and (v) 21 under the Exchange Act, as described in detail below.

    19 12 U.S.C. 5464(b).

    20 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(i).

    21 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6)(i) and (v).

    A. Consistency With Section 805(b) of the Clearing Supervision Act

    As discussed below, the Commission believes that the changes proposed in the Advance Notice are consistent with Section 805(b) of the Clearing Supervision Act because they: (i) Are designed to reduce systemic risk; (ii) are designed to support the stability of the financial system; (iii) are designed to promote robust risk management; and (iv) are consistent with promoting safety and soundness.

    The Commission believes that the proposal is designed to help promote robust risk management. As described above, the FIS Charge is calculated and collected to help mitigate NSCC's loss exposure to specific wrong-way risk that NSCC may face when liquidating family-issued security positions that are depreciating in value in response to a Member's default. By expanding the FIS Charge to family-issued security transactions presented to NSCC by all Members, the proposal would assist NSCC in collecting margin and maintaining a clearing fund amount that more accurately reflects NSCC's overall risk exposure to its Members. Therefore, the proposal is designed to help better promote robust risk management at NSCC by reducing NSCC's loss exposure to the specific wrong-way risk that NSCC faces from Member transactions in family-issued securities.

    The Commission also believes that the proposal is designed to promote safety and soundness, as well as support the stability of the financial system, and reduce systemic risk. By providing for the collection by NSCC of margin amounts that contemplate and help address the specific wrong-way risk presented by all Members, the proposal would assist NSCC in helping to ensure that it maintains sufficient margin in the event that a Member holding family-issued securities defaults and such positions significantly decrease in value. Without this increased margin, NSCC is at a greater risk of not having enough margin to offset potential losses from the reduced value of family-issued securities in a default scenario. Such losses could threaten NSCC's ability to continue operations of its critical clearance and settlement services. Because the proposal would generally increase the level of financial resources available to NSCC, better enabling NSCC to continue operating in default scenarios, the proposal would help NSCC operate more safely and soundly and reduce the systemic risk associated with NSCC not providing critical clearance and settlement services in the event of a Member default. Therefore, the Commission believes that the changes proposed in the Advance Notice are consistent with Section 805(b) of the Clearing Supervision Act.22

    22Id.

    B. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(i)

    The Commission believes that the changes proposed in the Advance Notice are consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(i) under the Exchange Act, which requires, in part, that NSCC establish, implement, maintain and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to effectively identify, measure, monitor, and manage its credit exposures to participants and those arising from its payment, clearing, and settlement processes, including by maintaining sufficient financial resources to cover its credit exposure to each participant fully with a high degree of confidence.23

    23 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(i).

    As described above, NSCC is exposed to specific wrong-way risk where it acts as central counterparty for its Members for transactions in family-issued securities. The expanded application of the FIS Charge to all Members would help further mitigate NSCC's loss exposure to this risk. The charge is calculated and imposed based on the value and type of family-issued securities in each Member's portfolio and in consideration of the Members' credit rating, as calculated by NSCC's internal credit risk matrix. Although the FIS Charge may not fully reflect the recovery rate on a family-issue security when a Member defaults, the Commission understands that expanding the FIS Charge to non-Watch List Members, as proposed, would enable NSCC to collect more margin on such positions than would a VaR Charge, more accurately reflecting the risks those positions present. Thus, the expanded FIS Charge is designed to help NSCC collect sufficient financial resources to help cover the specific risk exposure, with a high degree of confidence, which is presented by all Members seeking to clear and settle transactions in family-issued securities. Therefore, the Commission believes that the proposal to expand the FIS Charge to all Members is consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(i) under the Exchange Act.24

    24Id.

    C. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6)(i) and (v)

    The Commission believes that the changes proposed in the Advance Notice are consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6)(i) and (v) under the Exchange Act, which require, in part, that NSCC establish, implement, maintain and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to cover its credit exposures to its participants by establishing a risk-based margin system that, at a minimum considers, and produces margin levels commensurate with, the risks and particular attributes of each relevant product, portfolio, and market; and uses an appropriate method for measuring credit exposure that accounts for relevant product risk factors and portfolio effects across products.25

    25 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6)(i) and (v).

    As described above, NSCC faces specific wrong-way risk where it acts as central counterparty to Member transactions in family-issued securities. To help address this risk, NSCC applies the FIS Charge in calculating the Member's required margin. Specifically, the FIS Charge is a component of the margin that NSCC calculates and collects using a risk-based margin methodology that is designed to help maintain the coverage of NSCC's credit exposures to its Members at a confidence level of at least 99 percent. The FIS Charge is tailored to consider both the value and type of family-issued securities held by the Member, as well as the credit risk presented by the Member, as calculated by NSCC.

    However, currently, the FIS Charge is assessed only against Members on the Watch List because of the additional credit risk presented by such Members. Nevertheless, all Members, not just Members on the Watch List, present specific wrong-way risk. As such, NSCC proposes to expand the FIS Charge to all Members, while maintaining the relation between the FIS Charge and the Member's credit risk. Specifically, NSCC proposes to apply the FIS Charge to fixed-income securities that are family-issued securities of non-Watch List Members at a rate of no less than 40 percent, and to equities that are family-issued securities of non-Watch List Members at a rate of no less than 50 percent. Although NSCC proposes to apply a lesser percentage rate to non-Watch List Members than some Watch List Members, the proposed rate is designed to more accurately reflect the risks posed than what is reflected in a VaR Charge.

    Because the expanded FIS Charge also would be a tailored component of the margin that NSCC collects from non-Watch List Members to help cover NSCC credit exposure to such Members, as the charge would be based on different product risk factors with respect to equity and fixed-income securities, as described above, the Commission believes that the proposed changes in the Advance Notice are consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6)(i) and (v) under the Exchange Act.26

    26Id.

    III. Conclusion

    It is therefore noticed, pursuant to Section 806(e)(1)(I) of the Clearing Supervision Act,27 that the Commission does not object to Advance Notice (SR-NSCC-2017-804) and that NSCC is authorized to implement the proposed change as of the date of this notice or the date of an order by the Commission approving the proposed rule change (SR-NSCC-2017-010) that reflects rule changes that are consistent with this Advance Notice, whichever is later.

    27 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1)(I).

    By the Commission.

    Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19375 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-2736. Extension: Rule 10b-17, SEC File No. 270-427, OMB Control No. 3235-0476.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (“PRA”) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) a request for approval of extension of the previously approved collection of information provided for in Rule 10b-17 (17 CFR 240.10b-17), under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C 78a et seq.).

    Rule 10b-17 requires any issuer of a class of securities publicly traded by the use of any means or instrumentality of interstate commerce or of the mails or of any facility of any national securities exchange to give notice of the following specific distributions relating to such class of securities: (1) A dividend or other distribution in cash or in kind other than interest payments on debt securities; (2) a stock split or reverse stock split; or (3) a rights or other subscription offering. Notice shall be either given to the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. as successor to the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. or in accordance with the procedures of the national securities exchange upon which the securities are registered. The Commission may exempt an issuer of over-the-counter (but not listed) securities from the notice requirement. The requirements of 10b-17 do not apply to redeemable securities of registered open-end investment companies or unit investment trusts.

    The information required by Rule 10b-17 is necessary for the execution of the Commission's mandate under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to prevent fraudulent, manipulative, and deceptive acts and practices. The Commission has found that not requiring formal notices of the types of distributions covered by Rule 10b-17 has led to a number of abuses including purchasers not being aware of their rights to such distributions. It is only through formal notice of the distribution, including the date of the distribution, that current holders, potential buyers, or potential sellers of the securities at issue will know their rights to the distribution. Therefore, it is only through formal notice that investors can make an informed decision as to whether to buy or sell a security.

    There are approximately 12,127 respondents per year. These respondents make approximately 27,144 responses per year. Each response takes approximately 10 minutes to complete. Thus, the total compliance burden per year is 4,524 burden hours. The total internal labor cost of compliance for the respondents, associated with producing and filing the reports, is approximately $317,991.96.

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    The public may view background documentation for this information collection at the following Web site: http://www.reginfo.gov. Comments should be directed to: (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503, or by sending an email to: [email protected]; and (ii) Pamela Dyson, Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549 or by sending an email to: [email protected] Comments must be submitted to OMB within 30 days of this notice.

    Dated: September 7, 2017. Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19360 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-81548; File No. SR-NYSE-2017-44] Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Change To Amend Its Rules To Make Technical and Conforming Updates, in Connection With the Merger of NYSE Arca Equities, Inc. With and Into the Exchange's Affiliate NYSE Arca, Inc. and the Name Change of NYSE National, Inc. September 7, 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 August 25, 2017, New York Stock Exchange LLC (“NYSE” or the “Exchange”) 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 its rules to make technical and conforming updates in connection with (a) the merger of NYSE Arca Equities, Inc. with and into the Exchange's affiliate NYSE Arca, Inc. and (b) the name change of NYSE National, Inc. The proposed 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 its rules to make technical and conforming updates in connection with (a) the merger of NYSE Arca Equities, Inc. (“NYSE Arca Equities”) with and into the Exchange's affiliate NYSE Arca, Inc. (“NYSE Arca”), and (b) the name change of NYSE National, Inc.

    Background

    On June 2, 2017, the Exchange's affiliate, NYSE Arca, filed rule changes with the Commission in connection with the proposed merger of NYSE Arca's wholly-owned subsidiary, NYSE Arca Equities, with and into NYSE Arca (the “Merger”).4 The proposed changes were approved by the Commission on August 17, 2017, and the Merger occurred on that same date.5

    4See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80929 (June 14, 2017), 82 FR 28157 (June 20, 2017) (SR-NYSEArca-2017-40).

    5See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81419 (August 17, 2017), 82 FR 40044 (August 23, 2017) (SR-NYSEArca-2017-40).

    Prior to the Merger, NYSE Arca had two rulebooks: the NYSE Arca rules for its options market and the NYSE Arca Equities rules for its equities market. At the Merger, the NYSE Arca Equities rules were integrated into the NYSE Arca rules, so that there is now one NYSE Arca rulebook.6 As part of such integration, some of the NYSE Arca rules were renumbered. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to amend certain of its rules, as detailed below, to make technical and conforming updates to its rules that cross reference the NYSE Arca rules and delete references to the NYSE Arca Equities.

    6See id. at 40044.

    In January 2017, the Exchange's parent NYSE Group, Inc. acquired all the capital stock of National Stock Exchange, Inc., which was renamed “NYSE National, Inc.” 7 The Exchange proposes to update a reference to National Stock Exchange, Inc. found in the Exchange's rules to reflect the new name of such entity, NYSE National, Inc.

    7See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79902 (January 30, 2017), 82 FR 9258 (February 3, 2017) (SR-NSX-2016-16).

    Proposed Rule Changes

    • In Exchange Rule 5.2(j) (Exchange Traded Products), the Exchange proposes to update the cross references to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(1) by deleting the word “Equities” from the term “NYSE Arca Equities Rule” and appending an “-E” to the end of the rule number. The new cross reference would be to “NYSE Arca Rule 5.2-E(j)(1).” Similarly, the Exchange proposes to update the cross references to subsections of NYSE Arca Options Rule 5.13 and to NYSE Arca Options Rule 5.3 by deleting the word “Options” form the term “NYSE Arca Options Rule” and appending an “-O” to the end of the rules number. The new cross references would be to “NYSE Arca Rule 5.13-O” and “NYSE Arca Rule 5.3-O,” respectively, followed by any relevant subsection of the rule.

    • In Exchange Rules 8.4 (Account Approval), 8.5 (Suitability), 8.6 (Discretionary Accounts), 8.7 (Supervision of Accounts), 8.8 (Customer Complaints), the Exchange proposes to update the references to NYSE Arca Equities Rules 9.18 by deleting the word “Equities” from the term “NYSE Arca Equities Rules” and appending an “-E” to the end of the rule number. The new cross references would be to “NYSE Arca Rule 9.18-E,” followed by any relevant subsection of the rule.

    • In Exchange Rule 8.9 (Prior Approval of Certain Communications to Customers) the Exchange proposes to update the cross references to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 9.28 by deleting the word “Equities” from the term “NYSE Arca Equities Rule” and appending an “-E” to the end of the rule number. The new cross reference would be to “NYSE Arca Rule 9.28-E.”

    • Finally, in Exchange Rule 19, Supplementary Material .01 (Locking or Crossing Protected Quotations in NMS Stocks), the Exchange proposes to replace “NYSE Arca Equities, Inc.” with “NYSE Arca, Inc.” and replace “National Stock Exchange, Inc.” with “NYSE National, Inc.”.

    None of the foregoing changes are substantive.

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with section 6(b) of the Exchange Act,8 in general, and with section 6(b)(1) 9 in particular, in that it enables the Exchange to be so organized as to have the capacity to be able to carry out the purposes of the Exchange Act and to comply, and to enforce compliance by its exchange members and persons associated with its exchange members, with the provisions of the Exchange Act, the rules and regulations thereunder, and the rules of the Exchange.

    8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1).

    The proposed rule change is a non-substantive change and does not impact the governance or ownership of the Exchange. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change would enable the Exchange to continue to be so organized as to have the capacity to carry out the purposes of the Exchange Act and comply and enforce compliance with the provisions of the Exchange Act by its members and persons associated with its members, because ensuring that the rules accurately cross reference the rules of NYSE Arca and the name of NYSE National, Inc. would contribute to the orderly operation of the Exchange by adding clarity and transparency to its rules.

    For similar reasons, the Exchange also believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with section 6(b)(5) of the Act,10 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.

    10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    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 by ensuring that market participants can more easily navigate, understand and comply with its rules. The Exchange believes that, by ensuring that such rules accurately cross-reference the rules of NYSE Arca and the name of NYSE National, Inc., the proposed rule change would reduce potential investor or market participant confusion.

    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 proposed rule change is not intended to address competitive issues but rather is concerned solely with updating the rules to reflect its affiliate's merger and integrated rulebook.

    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

    The proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 11 and Rule 19b-4(f)(3) 12 thereunder.

    11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).

    12 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(3).

    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) 13 of the Act to determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved.

    13 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-NYSE-2017-44 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-NYSE-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-NYSE-2017-44 and should be submitted on or before October 4, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.14

    14 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19377 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-81547; File No. SR-NYSEAMER-2017-11] Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE American LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Change To Amend Its Price List September 7, 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 August 29, 2017, NYSE American LLC (the “Exchange” or “NYSE American”) 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

    The Exchange proposes to amend its Price List to (1) delete fees and credits that are not applicable to trading on the Pillar trading platform, and (2) prorate Port Fees to the number of trading days in a billing month that a port is utilized. The Exchange proposes to implement the rule change on September 1, 2017. The proposed 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 its Price List to (1) delete fees and credits that are not applicable to trading on the Pillar trading platform, and (2) prorate Port Fees to the number of trading days in a billing month that a port is utilized.

    The Exchange proposes to implement the rule change on September 1, 2017.

    Deletion of Non-Pillar Fees and Credits

    To effect its transition of cash equities trading to Pillar, the Exchange amended its Price List to adopt a new pricing model for trading on the Pillar platform.4 Because specified transaction fees and credits applicable to trading cash equities on a Floor-based trading platform are not applicable to trading on Pillar, the Exchange designated certain fees and credits with the following preamble: “The following Fees and Credits are not Applicable to Trading on the Pillar Trading Platform.” 5

    4See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. [sic] 81228 (July 27, 2017), 82 FR 36012 (August 2, 2017) (SR-NYSEMKT-2017-43).

    5See id., 82 FR at 36012-13.

    On July 24, 2017, the Exchange transitioned all cash equities trading to the Pillar platform. Because transaction fees and credits that are not applicable to trading on the Pillar trading platform are now obsolete, the Exchange proposes to delete the following fees and credits in their entirety: 6

    6 The Exchange proposes to delete these fees and credits in their entirety, including (1) the section headings of all of credits and fees being deleted, (2) all associated footnotes, and (3) the recently added preamble.

    • Equity Transaction Fees and Credits for Listed Securities and the following subheadings:

    ○ Transactions in Securities with a Per Share Price of $1.00 or More;

    ○ Transactions in Securities with a Per Share Price Below $1.00;

    ○ Fees and Credits Applicable to Designated Market Makers on Transactions in Securities with a Per Share Price of $1.00 or more;

    ○ Fees and Credits Applicable to Designated Market Makers on Transactions in Securities with a Per Share Price below $1.00;

    ○ Credits Applicable to Supplemental Liquidity Providers; and

    ○ Fees and Credits Applicable to Executions in the Retail Liquidity Program.

    • Transaction Fees and Credits For Non-ETP Securities Traded Pursuant to Unlisted Trading Privileges and the following subheadings:

    ○ Fees and Credits applicable to Market Participants;

    ○ Fees and Credits applicable to Designated Market Makers (DMMs);

    ○ Fees and Credits applicable to Supplemental Liquidity Providers (SLPs); and

    ○ Fees and Credits Applicable to Executions in the Retail Liquidity Program.

    • Transaction Fees and Credits For ETPs Traded Pursuant to Unlisted Trading Privileges and the following subheadings:

    ○ Fees and Credits applicable to Market Participants;

    ○ Fees and Credits applicable to DMMs;

    ○ Fees and Credits applicable to SLPs;

    ○ Fees and Credits Applicable to Executions in the Retail Liquidity Program; and

    ○ Crossing Sessions

    • Port Fees.

    The Exchange proposes to delete the following additional fees as being inapplicable to trading on Pillar:

    ○ Risk Management Gateway (“RMG”);

    ○ Equipment fees;

    ○ Radio Paging Service;

    ○ Financial Vendor Services;

    ○ Cellular Phones;

    ○ Booth Telephone System;

    ○ Service Charges; and

    ○ System Processing Fees, comprising fees for the Online Comparison System (OCS) and Merged Order Report.

    The RMG is no longer supported in Pillar and the various equipment fees relate to trading cash equities on a Floor-based trading platform, and are thus obsolete. Similarly, the Exchange no longer utilizes OCS or makes Merged Order Reports available.

    The Exchange also proposes to delete footnotes 17-19 designated as “Reserved” in the “CRD Fees for Member Organizations that are not FINRA Members” section of the Price List. The Exchange believes it would reduce confusion and promote transparency to delete footnotes that do not have any substantive content.

    The Exchange also proposes a technical, non-substantive amendment to replace the heading “Pillar Trading Platform” with “NYSE American Trading Fees and Credits.”

    Proration of Port Fees

    Until October 1, 2017, the Exchange is not charging market participants for the use of order/quote entry ports or for the use of drop copy ports.7 Thereafter, a $250 per port per month fee will apply for order/quote entry and drop copy ports.

    7 Order/quote entry ports provide connectivity to the Exchange's trading systems for entry of orders and/or quotes. Drop copy ports allow for the receipt of “drop copies” of order or transaction information.

    The Exchange proposes to amend the Price List to add a footnote to the heading of Section V (Port Fees) providing that port fees for order/quote entry and drop copies will be prorated to the number of trading days in a billing month.

    The proposed changes are not otherwise intended to address any other issues, and the Exchange is not aware of any problems that member organizations would have in complying with the proposed change.

    2. Statutory Basis

    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”),8 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) 9 of the Act, in particular, because it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members, issuers and other persons using its facilities and does not unfairly discriminate between customers, issuers, brokers or dealers. The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,10 in particular in that it 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.

    8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).

    10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    The Exchange believes that its proposed rule change to eliminate fees and credits that are not applicable to trading on Pillar would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system because it would eliminate fees and credits that are now obsolete. Eliminating obsolete fees and credits would reduce potential confusion and add transparency and clarity to the Exchange's rules, thereby ensuring that members, regulators, and the public can more easily navigate and understand the Exchange's rulebook.

    The Exchange also believes that prorating the fees for order/quote entry and drop copy ports is reasonable because it would provide a nexus between the Exchange's charge for use of its ports and the number of trading days in a billing month that the market participant utilizes the applicable port. The Exchange believes that the proposed prorating of monthly port fees rebate is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because it directly ties the monthly port fees to the number of trading days in that billing month. The Exchange also believes that the proposed prorating is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because all market participants utilizing ports to connect to the Exchange would be treated the same.

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,11 the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change would not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change is not intended to address any competitive issues, but rather it is designed to eliminate obsolete fees and credits.

    11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).

    Finally, the Exchange notes that it operates in a highly competitive market in which market participants can readily favor competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be excessive or rebate opportunities available at other venues to be more favorable. In such an environment, the Exchange must continually adjust its fees and rebates to remain competitive with other exchanges and with alternative trading systems that have been exempted from compliance with the statutory standards applicable to exchanges. Because competitors are free to modify their own fees and credits in response, and because market participants may readily adjust their order routing practices, the Exchange believes that the degree to which fee changes in this market may impose any burden on competition is extremely limited. As a result of all of these considerations, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed changes will impair the ability of member organizations or competing order execution venues to maintain their competitive standing in the financial markets.

    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

    The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) 12 of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4 13 thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange.

    12 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).

    13 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such 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) 14 of the Act to determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved.

    14 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-NYSEAMER-2017-11 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-NYSEAMER-2017-11. 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-NYSEAMER-2017-11 and should be submitted on or before October 4, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.15

    Eduardo A. Aleman, <E T="03">Assistant Secretary.</E>

    15 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    [FR Doc. 2017-19376 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-81550; File No. SR-NSCC-2017-010] Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Securities Clearing Corporation; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change To Expand the Application of the Family-Issued Securities Charge September 7, 2017.

    On July 10, 2017, National Securities Clearing Corporation (“NSCC”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) proposed rule change SR-NSCC-2017-010 (“Proposed Rule Change”) pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder.2 The Proposed Rule Change was published for comment in the Federal Register on July 31, 2017.3 The Commission did not receive any comments on the Proposed Rule Change. For the reasons discussed below, the Commission approves the Proposed Rule Change.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    3 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81203 (July 25, 2017), 82 FR 35563 (July 31, 2017) (SR-NSCC-2017-010) (“Notice”). NSCC also filed a related advance notice with the Commission pursuant to Section 806(e)(1) of the Payment, Clearing, and Settlement Supervision Act of 2010 and Rule 19b-4(n)(1) under the Act. 15 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1) and 17 CFR 240.19b-4(n)(1). The advance notice was published in the Federal Register on August 2, 2017. Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81286 (August 2, 2017), 82 FR 37141 (August 8, 2017) (SR-NSCC-2017-804). The Commission did not receive any comments on that proposal.

    I. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Proposed Rule Change is a proposal by NSCC to further address specific wrong-way risk 4 that is present when NSCC acts as central counterparty to a transaction with an NSCC member (“Member”) where the underlying securities are securities issued by such Member or an affiliate of such Member (“family-issued securities”).5 Currently, NSCC applies a targeted margin charge to address the specific wrong-way risk of family-issued securities transactions (“FIS Charge”) where the Member is on NSCC's Watch List.6 NSCC believes that Members on the Watch List present a higher credit risk (i.e., a greater risk of defaulting on their settlement obligations), compared to Members not on the Watch List.7 As such, the family-issued securities of Members on the Watch List currently receive a FIS Charge because of the increased credit risk presented by such Members.8 As described in detail below, NSCC proposes in the Proposed Rule Change to expand the application of the FIS Charge to all Members, regardless of a Member's Watch List status, but still maintain a higher FIS Charge for Members that present a greater credit risk to NSCC, such as Members on the Watch List.9

    4 Specific wrong-way risk is the risk that an exposure to a counterparty is highly likely to increase when the creditworthiness of that counterparty is deteriorating. See Principles for financial market infrastructures, issued by the Committee on Payment and Settlement Systems and the Technical Committee of the International Organization of Securities Commissions 47 n.65 (April 2012), available at http://www.bis.org/publ/cpss101a.pdf.

    5 Notice, 82 at 35563-64. As part of this proposal, NSCC proposes to define in its rules that, for a given Member, a family-issued security is a security that was issued by such Member or an affiliate of such Member. Notice, 82 at 35563.

    6 Notice, 82 at 35563. As part of its ongoing monitoring of its membership, NSCC utilizes an internal credit risk rating matrix to rate its risk exposures to its Members based on a scale from 1 (the strongest) to 7 (the weakest). Members that fall within the weakest three rating categories (i.e., 5, 6, and 7) are placed on NSCC's “Watch List” and, as provided under NSCC's Rules and Procedures (“Rules”), may be subject to enhanced surveillance or additional margin charges. See Section 4 of Rule 2B and Section I(B)(1) of Procedure XV of NSCC's Rules, available at http://dtcc.com/~/media/Files/Downloads/legal/rules/nscc_rules.pdf.

    7 Notice, 82 at 35564.

    8Id.

    9Id.

    Currently, in calculating a Watch List Member's overall margin charge (i.e., a Watch List Member's required deposit to NSCC's clearing fund), NSCC excludes the Member's net, unsettled long position in family-issued securities from the volatility component of the margin calculation (“VaR Charge”).10 Instead, for such unsettled long positions, NSCC calculates the required margin (i.e., the FIS Charge) by multiplying the position value by a set percentage, which is determined based on a Member's rating on NSCC's internal credit risk rating matrix.11 NSCC applies this separate margin calculation to deal with specific wrong-way risk that arises from these positions because NSCC has to liquidate the unsettled family-issued security long positions in the Member's portfolio to manage the default.12 Given that the Member's default would likely adversely affect NSCC's ability to liquidate such positions at full value (because the value of the family-issued securities will decline in response to the Member's default), NSCC applies the FIS Charge to try to address the risk of a shortfall.13 According to NSCC, the FIS Charge constitutes a more conservative approach to collecting margin on family-issued security positions than what may be achieved by applying the VaR Charge, which does not recognize the relationship between the Member and the family-issued securities.14

    10Id.

    11Id. More specifically, fixed-income securities that are family-issued securities are charged a rate of no less than 80 percent for firms that are rated 6 or 7 on the credit risk rating matrix, and no less than 40 percent for firms that are rated 5 on the credit risk rating matrix. Equity securities that are family-issued securities are charged a rate of 100 percent for firms that are rated 6 or 7 on the credit risk rating matrix, and no less than 50 percent for firms that are rated 5 on the credit risk rating matrix. See Section I(B)(1) of Procedure XV of NSCC's Rules, available at http://dtcc.com/~/media/Files/Downloads/legal/rules/nscc_rules.pdf.

    12 Notice, 82 at 35564. In a default scenario, NSCC would receive the family-issued securities from a Member's guaranteed long transactions and would have to liquidate the holding to unwind NSCC's position. Id.

    13Id.

    14Id.

    Although the risk of default by Members that are not on the Watch List is lower than Members on the Watch List, NSCC believes that it is appropriate to apply the FIS Charge to all Members because all Members' long positions in family-issued securities present specific wrong-way risk. However, the proposal would still maintain the relation between the FIS Charge and the Member's risk of default (i.e., the Member's credit risk), while at the same time addressing the difference in risk posed by equity and fixed-income securities. As such, NSCC proposes in the Proposed Rule Change to apply the FIS Charge to fixed-income securities that are family-issued securities of non-Watch List Members at a rate of no less than 40 percent, and to equities that are family-issued securities of non-Watch List Members at a rate of no less than 50 percent.15

    15Id. According to NSCC, it calibrated the FIS Charge rates based on historical corporate-issue recovery-rate data. The rate applicable to equities is higher than the rate applicable to fixed-income securities because NSCC determined that equities present a greater risk than fixed-income securities of having a value at or near zero when a Member defaults. The Commission understands that NSCC calculated the 40 and 50 percent rates based on a weighted value of the probability of a Member defaulting and the potential loss that NSCC may realize when liquidating family-issued securities after a Member default. Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75768 (August 27, 2015), 80 FR 53219, 53220 (September 2, 2015) (SR-NSCC-2015-003).

    II. Discussion and Commission Findings

    Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Act directs the Commission to approve a proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if it finds that such proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and rules and regulations thereunder applicable to such organization.16 After carefully considering the Proposed Rule Change, the Commission finds that the Proposed Rule Change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to NSCC. In particular, the Commission believes the proposal is consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act,17 as well as Rules 17Ad-22(e)(4)(i) and 17Ad-22(e)(6)(i) and (e)(6)(v) thereunder.18

    16 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C).

    17 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).

    18 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(vi); (e)(6)(i); and (e)(6)(v).

    A. Consistency With Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act

    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires, in part, that the rules of a clearing agency be designed to promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions, and