Federal Register Vol. 82, No.179,

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 179 (September 18, 2017)

Page Range43457-43666
FR Document

82_FR_179
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
82 FR 43665 - Regarding the Proposed Acquisition of Lattice Semiconductor Corporation by China Venture Capital Fund Corporation LimitedPDF
82 FR 43663 - National POW/MIA Recognition Day, 2017PDF
82 FR 43661 - National Hispanic Heritage Month, 2017PDF
82 FR 43540 - Sunshine Act MeetingsPDF
82 FR 43618 - Sunshine Act MeetingPDF
82 FR 43517 - Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From India: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015-2016PDF
82 FR 43536 - Sunshine Act MeetingsPDF
82 FR 43541 - Sunshine Act MeetingPDF
82 FR 43640 - Certification Related to Foreign Military Financing for Colombia Under Section 7045(b)(6) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2017PDF
82 FR 43572 - Importer of Controlled Substances Application: Sharp Clinical Services, Inc.PDF
82 FR 43541 - Updated OGE Senior Executive Service Performance Review BoardPDF
82 FR 43571 - Bulk Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Application: Halo Pharmaceutical, Inc.PDF
82 FR 43569 - Importer of Controlled Substances Application: Catalent Centers, LLCPDF
82 FR 43572 - Importer of Controlled Substances Application: Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc.PDF
82 FR 43569 - Bulk Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Application: AMPAC Fine Chemicals LLCPDF
82 FR 43571 - Importer of Controlled Substances Application: Unither Manufacturing LLCPDF
82 FR 43537 - Allocations of Cross-State Air Pollution Rule Allowances From New Unit Set-Asides for the 2017 Compliance YearPDF
82 FR 43494 - Postponement of Certain Compliance Dates for the Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source CategoryPDF
82 FR 43568 - Meeting of the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Rules of Civil ProcedurePDF
82 FR 43568 - Meeting of the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Rules of Appellate ProcedurePDF
82 FR 43637 - Privacy Act of 1974; System of RecordsPDF
82 FR 43576 - Information Collection Request; Submission for OMB ReviewPDF
82 FR 43573 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection, eComments Requested; Crime Data Explorer Feedback SurveyPDF
82 FR 43576 - Information Collection Request: Submission for OMB ReviewPDF
82 FR 43609 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend NYSE Arca Rule 7.35-E, NYSE Arca Rule 7.31-E and NYSE Arca Rule 7.23-EPDF
82 FR 43627 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Investors Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Related to Fees Pursuant to Rule 15.110PDF
82 FR 43633 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the NYSE Arca Equities Fees and ChargesPDF
82 FR 43598 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats EDGA Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Related to Transaction FeesPDF
82 FR 43621 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats BZX Exchange, Inc.; Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change To Permit the Listing and Trading of Managed Portfolio Shares; and To List and Trade Shares of the Following Under Proposed Rule 14.11(k): ClearBridge Appreciation ETF; ClearBridge Large Cap ETF; ClearBridge MidCap Growth ETF; ClearBridge Select ETF; and ClearBridge All Cap Value ETFPDF
82 FR 43618 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq ISE, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Make Non-Substantive, Clarifying Changes to ISE's Rulebook and Schedule of FeesPDF
82 FR 43597 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq MRX, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Remove Language From Chapter 19 of the RulebookPDF
82 FR 43587 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend MSRB Rule G-34, on CUSIP Numbers, New Issue, and Market Information RequirementsPDF
82 FR 43595 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 11.13, Order Execution and Routing, To Account for IEX as a Primary Listing Market and To Amend Certain Rules To Reflect the Name Change of NYSE MKT to NYSE AmericanPDF
82 FR 43611 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To List and Trade Shares of Calvert Ultra-Short Income NextSharesTMPDF
82 FR 43575 - Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS); Meeting of the ACRS Subcommittee on Northwest Medical Isotopes; Notice of MeetingPDF
82 FR 43575 - Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) Meeting of the ACRS Subcommittee on Plant Operations and Fire Protection; Notice of MeetingPDF
82 FR 43515 - Notice of 108th Commission MeetingPDF
82 FR 43523 - Upcoming 2018 International Trade Administration Aerospace Industry Trade Mission to SingaporePDF
82 FR 43567 - Certain Magnetic Data Storage Tapes and Cartridges Containing the Same; Notice of Request for Statements on the Public InterestPDF
82 FR 43549 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 43556 - Notice of Availability for Memorandum on Rescission of Deferred Action for Childhood ArrivalsPDF
82 FR 43555 - Meeting of The President's National Security Telecommunications Advisory CommitteePDF
82 FR 43554 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Emergency Notification System (ENS)PDF
82 FR 43568 - Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993-Open Platform for NFV Project, Inc.PDF
82 FR 43553 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Mitigation Grant Programs/e-GrantsPDF
82 FR 43569 - Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993-fd.Io Project, Inc.PDF
82 FR 43514 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 43548 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 43570 - Bulk Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Application: Specgx LLCPDF
82 FR 43641 - Notice of Intent To Rule on Request To Release Airport Property at the Lehigh Valley International Airport (ABE), Allentown, PennsylvaniaPDF
82 FR 43571 - Importer of Controlled Substances Application: Specgx LLCPDF
82 FR 43641 - Notice of Opportunity for Public Comment on a Land Use Change From Aeronautical to Non-Aeronautical Use for 4.2 Acres of Airport Land for Solar Farm Use at Newport Airport, Middletown, RIPDF
82 FR 43577 - Information Collection Request; Submission for OMB ReviewPDF
82 FR 43547 - Advisory Committee to the Director (ACD), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)-Health Disparities Subcommittee (HDS)PDF
82 FR 43547 - Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC)PDF
82 FR 43500 - Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; Adjustments to 2017 Northern Albacore Tuna Quota, 2017 North and South Atlantic Swordfish Quotas, and 2017 Atlantic Bluefin Tuna Reserve Category QuotaPDF
82 FR 43531 - Notice of Request for Information on Solar Energy Technology Analysis & Data NeedsPDF
82 FR 43516 - Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod From Italy and Turkey: Alignment of Final Countervailing Duty Determinations With Final Antidumping Duty DeterminationsPDF
82 FR 43516 - Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, From the People's Republic of China: Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative ReviewPDF
82 FR 43525 - Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin From India: Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015/2017PDF
82 FR 43522 - Multilayered Wood Flooring From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results of Administrative Review and Notice of Amended Final Results of Administrative Review Pursuant to Court DecisionPDF
82 FR 43526 - Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products From the Republic of Korea: Correction to the Opportunity To Request Administrative Review NoticePDF
82 FR 43530 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Integrated Partner Management (IPM) SystemPDF
82 FR 43531 - Agency Information Collection ExtensionPDF
82 FR 43529 - Board of Advisors to the Presidents of the Naval Postgraduate School and the Naval War College; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee MeetingPDF
82 FR 43642 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes MellitusPDF
82 FR 43652 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Epilepsy and Seizure DisordersPDF
82 FR 43566 - Notice of Filing of Plats of Survey; ArizonaPDF
82 FR 43647 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; VisionPDF
82 FR 43528 - Air University Board of Visitors MeetingPDF
82 FR 43651 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Epilepsy and Seizure DisordersPDF
82 FR 43486 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Sacramento River, Sacramento, CAPDF
82 FR 43487 - Safety Zone; Recurring Annual Event Held in Coast Guard Sector Boston Captain of the Port ZonePDF
82 FR 43529 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 43527 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Notice of Intent To Renew Collection Number 3038-0062, Off-Exchange Foreign Currency TransactionsPDF
82 FR 43542 - Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act ReviewPDF
82 FR 43530 - National Petroleum Council MeetingPDF
82 FR 43526 - Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public MeetingPDF
82 FR 43546 - Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act ReviewPDF
82 FR 43544 - Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act ReviewPDF
82 FR 43515 - EU-U.S. Privacy Shield; Invitation for Applications for Inclusion on the List of Arbitrators; CorrectionPDF
82 FR 43485 - Regattas and Marine Parades; Great Lakes Annual Marine EventsPDF
82 FR 43552 - National Boating Safety Advisory CouncilPDF
82 FR 43459 - Protection of Human SubjectsPDF
82 FR 43566 - Agency Information Collection Activities: 287(g) Needs Assessment; New CollectionPDF
82 FR 43637 - Presidential Declaration Amendment of a Major Disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of New HampshirePDF
82 FR 43636 - Presidential Declaration Amendment of a Major Disaster for the State of FloridaPDF
82 FR 43533 - Texas Gas Transmission, LLC; Notice of Request Under Blanket AuthorizationPDF
82 FR 43551 - National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
82 FR 43552 - National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
82 FR 43551 - National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
82 FR 43550 - Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
82 FR 43535 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
82 FR 43533 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
82 FR 43535 - PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.; Notice of Institution of Section 206 Proceeding and Refund Effective DatePDF
82 FR 43534 - Combined Notice of FilingsPDF
82 FR 43535 - Combined Notice of FilingsPDF
82 FR 43532 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
82 FR 43574 - National Industrial Security Program Policy Advisory CommitteePDF
82 FR 43574 - Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Advisory Committee; meetingPDF
82 FR 43506 - Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Arkansas; Revisions to Minor New Source Review ProgramPDF
82 FR 43573 - Notice of Lodging of Proposed Consent Decree Under the Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act, and Resource Conservation and Recovery ActPDF
82 FR 43565 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS); Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved CollectionPDF
82 FR 43629 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to the On-Floor Lead Market-Maker ProgramPDF
82 FR 43601 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE American LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 975NY and Rule 953NYPDF
82 FR 43578 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Amending Rule 6.87-O and Rule 6.65-OPDF
82 FR 43584 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 4703(a) To Allow Members To Designate When an Order With a RTFY or SCAN Routing Order Attribute Will Be ActivatedPDF
82 FR 43607 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Add a Missing Letter to Section IV, Part D of the Pricing SchedulePDF
82 FR 43539 - Availability of the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) Assessment Plans for Nitrate/Nitrite, Chloroform, and EthylbenzenePDF
82 FR 43491 - Outer Continental Shelf Air Regulations; Consistency Update for CaliforniaPDF
82 FR 43487 - Air Plan Approval; Alabama: Infrastructure Requirements for the 2012 PM2.5PDF
82 FR 43489 - Air Plan Approval; KY; Removal of Stage II Gasoline Vapor Recovery ProgramPDF
82 FR 43577 - New Postal ProductsPDF
82 FR 43640 - Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board MembersPDF
82 FR 43656 - Notice of Application for Approval To Discontinue or Modify a Railroad Signal SystemPDF
82 FR 43654 - Petition for Waiver of CompliancePDF
82 FR 43655 - Petition for Waiver of CompliancePDF
82 FR 43657 - Notice of Application for Approval To Discontinue or Modify a Railroad Signal SystemPDF
82 FR 43655 - Notice of Application for Approval To Discontinue or Modify a Railroad Signal SystemPDF
82 FR 43654 - Notice of Application for Approval To Discontinue or Modify a Railroad Signal SystemPDF
82 FR 43656 - Petition for Waiver of CompliancePDF
82 FR 43541 - Notice of Proposals To Engage in or To Acquire Companies Engaged in Permissible Nonbanking ActivitiesPDF
82 FR 43541 - Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding CompanyPDF
82 FR 43457 - Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc., AirplanesPDF
82 FR 43658 - Sanctions Actions Pursuant to Executive Order 13581PDF
82 FR 43503 - Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Reallocation of Pacific Cod in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area; CorrectionPDF
82 FR 43504 - Pears Grown in Oregon and Washington; Increased Assessment Rate for Processed PearsPDF
82 FR 43482 - New Animal Drugs; Approval of New Animal Drug Applications; Change of Sponsor's AddressPDF
82 FR 43511 - NASA Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Revised Voucher and Invoice Submission & Payment ProcessPDF
82 FR 43544 - Solicitation of Nominations for Appointment to the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC)PDF
82 FR 43543 - Clinical Laboratory Improvement Advisory Committee (CLIAC)PDF
82 FR 43637 - Small Business Size Standards: Class Waiver of the Nonmanufacturer RulePDF
82 FR 43556 - Privacy Act of 1974; System of RecordsPDF
82 FR 43470 - Safety Standard for Infant Bouncer SeatsPDF

Issue

82 179 Monday, September 18, 2017 Contents Agricultural Marketing Agricultural Marketing Service PROPOSED RULES Increased Assessment Rates: Pears Grown in Oregon and Washington, 43504-43506 2017-19615 Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Agricultural Marketing Service

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 43514-43515 2017-19733 2017-19788
AIRFORCE Air Force Department NOTICES Meetings: Air University Board of Visitors, 43528-43529 2017-19758 Antitrust Division Antitrust Division NOTICES Changes under National Cooperative Research and Production Act: fd.io Project, Inc., 43569 2017-19789 Open Platform for NFV Project, Inc., 43568-43569 2017-19791 Arctic Arctic Research Commission NOTICES Meetings: 108th Commission Meeting, 43515 2017-19798 Centers Disease Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 43542-43547 2017-19748 2017-19743 2017-19744 Meetings: Advisory Committee to the Director, Health Disparities Subcommittee, 43547 2017-19779 Clinical Laboratory Improvement Advisory Committee, 43543-43544 2017-19498 Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee, 43547-43548 2017-19778 Requests for Nominations: Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee, 43544 2017-19501 Centers Medicare Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 43548-43550 2017-19787 2017-19795 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Drawbridge Operations: Sacramento River, Sacramento, CA, 43486 2017-19754 Safety Zones: Recurring Annual Event held in Coast Guard Sector Boston Captain of the Port Zone, 43487 2017-19752 Special Local Regulations: Regattas and Marine Parades; Great Lakes Annual Marine Events, 43485-43486 2017-19741 NOTICES Meetings: National Boating Safety Advisory Council, 43552-43553 2017-19738 Commerce Commerce Department See

International Trade Administration

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Commodity Futures Commodity Futures Trading Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Off-Exchange Foreign Currency Transactions, 43527-43528 2017-19749 Consumer Product Consumer Product Safety Commission RULES Protection of Human Subjects, 43459-43470 2017-19737 Safety Standards: Infant Bouncer Seats, 43470-43482 2017-19255 Defense Department Defense Department See

Air Force Department

See

Navy Department

Drug Drug Enforcement Administration NOTICES Bulk Manufacturers of Controlled Substances; Applications: AMPAC Fine Chemicals, LLC, 43569 2017-19831 Halo Pharmaceutical, Inc., 43571 2017-19834 Specgx LLC, 43570-43571 2017-19786 Importers of Controlled Substances, Applications: Catalent Centers, LLC, 43569-43570 2017-19833 Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 43572-43573 2017-19832 Importers of Controlled Substances; Applications: Sharp Clinical Services, Inc., 43572 2017-19836 Specgx LLC, 43571 2017-19784 Unither Manufacturing, LLC, 43571-43572 2017-19830 Education Department Education Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Integrated Partner Management System, 43530 2017-19769 Energy Department Energy Department See

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Office

See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 43531 2017-19768 Meetings: National Petroleum Council, 43530-43531 2017-19747
Energy Efficiency Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Office NOTICES Requests for Information: Solar Energy Technology Analysis and Data Needs, 43531-43532 2017-19775 Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Alabama: Infrastructure Requirements for the 2012 PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard, 43487-43489 2017-19699 Kentucky; Removal of Stage II Gasoline Vapor Recovery Program, 43489-43491 2017-19697 Outer Continental Shelf Air Regulations: California; Consistency Update, 43491-43494 2017-19704 Postponement of Certain Compliance Dates for the Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category, 43494-43500 2017-19821 PROPOSED RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Arkansas; Revisions to Minor New Source Review Program, 43506-43510 2017-19716 NOTICES Allocations of Cross-State Air Pollution Rule Allowances from New Unit Set-Asides for the 2017 Compliance Year, 43537-43539 2017-19822 Integrated Risk Information System Assessment Plans: Nitrate/Nitrite, Chloroform, and Ethylbenzene, 43539-43540 2017-19707 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration RULES Airworthiness Directives: Bombardier, Inc., Airplanes, 43457-43459 2017-19658 NOTICES Changes in Land Use: 4.2 Acres of Airport Land for Solar Farm at Newport Airport, Middletown, RI, 43641 2017-19782 Lehigh Valley International Airport (ABE), Allentown, PA, 43641 2017-19785 Federal Bureau Federal Bureau of Investigation NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Crime Data Explorer Feedback Survey, 43573 2017-19814 Federal Election Federal Election Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 43540-43541 2017-19955 Federal Emergency Federal Emergency Management Agency NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Emergency Notification System, 43554-43555 2017-19792 Mitigation Grant Programs/e-Grants, 43553-43554 2017-19790 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Combined Filings, 43532-43536 2017-19722 2017-19723 2017-19724 2017-19726 2017-19727 Institution of Section 206 Proceeding and Refund Effective Date: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., 43535 2017-19725 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 43536-43537 2017-19870 Requests under Blanket Authorizations: Texas Gas Transmission, LLC, 43533 2017-19732 Federal Maritime Federal Maritime Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 43541 2017-19847 Federal Motor Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration NOTICES Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications: Diabetes Mellitus, 43642-43647 2017-19763 Epilepsy and Seizure Disorders, 43651-43654 2017-19757 2017-19762 Vision, 43647-43651 2017-19759 Federal Railroad Federal Railroad Administration NOTICES Applications: Approval to Discontinue or Modify a Railroad Signal System, 43655-43656 2017-19684 Approval to Discontinue or Modify a Railroad Signal System, 43657-43658 2017-19685 Railroad Signal Systems; Discontinuances or Modifications, 43654-43656 2017-19683 2017-19688 Petitions for Waivers of Compliance, 43654-43655 2017-19686 2017-19687 Petitions for Waivers of Compliance: San Luis Central Railroad, 43656-43657 2017-19682 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System NOTICES Changes in Bank Control: Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding Company, 43541 2017-19680 Proposals to Engage in or to Acquire Companies Engaged in Permissible Nonbanking Activities, 43541 2017-19681 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration RULES New Animal Drugs: Approval of New Animal Drug Applications; Change of Sponsor's Address, 43482-43485 2017-19602 Foreign Assets Foreign Assets Control Office NOTICES Blocking or Unblocking of Persons and Properties, 43658 2017-19634 Government Ethics Government Ethics Office NOTICES Updated Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board, 43541-43542 2017-19835 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

See

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

See

Food and Drug Administration

See

National Institutes of Health

Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

See

Federal Emergency Management Agency

See

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement

NOTICES Meetings: The President's National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee, 43555-43556 2017-19793 Privacy Act; Systems of Records, 43556-43565 2017-19365 Rescission of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, 43556 2017-19794
Information Information Security Oversight Office NOTICES Meetings: National Industrial Security Program Policy Advisory Committee, 43574 2017-19721 Interior Interior Department See

Land Management Bureau

International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES 2018 Aerospace Industry Trade Mission to Singapore, 43523-43525 2017-19797 Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Italy and Turkey, 43516 2017-19774 Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products from the Republic of Korea; Correction to the Opportunity to Request Administrative Review Notice, 43526 2017-19770 Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from India, 43517-43522 2017-19912 Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from India, 43525-43526 2017-19772 Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, from the People's Republic of China, 43516-43517 2017-19773 Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of China, 43522-43523 2017-19771 Applications: For Inclusion on the List of Arbitrators for the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield; Correction, 43515 2017-19742 International Trade Com International Trade Commission NOTICES Investigations; Determinations, Modifications, and Rulings, etc.: Certain Magnetic Data Storage Tapes and Cartridges Containing the Same, 43567-43568 2017-19796 Judicial Conference Judicial Conference of the United States NOTICES Meetings: Advisory Committee on Rules of Appellate Procedure, 43568 2017-19819 Advisory Committee on Rules of Civil Procedure, 43568 2017-19820 Justice Department Justice Department See

Antitrust Division

See

Drug Enforcement Administration

See

Federal Bureau of Investigation

NOTICES Proposed Consent Decrees: Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act, and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 43573-43574 2017-19715
Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Plats of Survey: Arizona, 43566-43567 2017-19761 NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration PROPOSED RULES Federal Acquisition Regulations: Revised Voucher and Invoice Submission and Payment Process, 43511-43513 2017-19542 National Archives National Archives and Records Administration See

Information Security Oversight Office

See

Office of Government Information Services

National Institute National Institutes of Health NOTICES Meetings: Center for Scientific Review, 43550-43551 2017-19728 National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 43551 2017-19729 National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, 43551-43552 2017-19730 2017-19731 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RULES Atlantic Highly Migratory Species: Adjustments to 2017 Northern Albacore Tuna Quota, 2017 North and South Atlantic Swordfish Quotas, and 2017 Atlantic Bluefin Tuna Reserve Category Quota, 43500-43503 2017-19777 Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska: Reallocation of Pacific Cod in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area; Correction, 43503 2017-19628 NOTICES Meetings: Pacific Fishery Management Council, 43526-43527 2017-19746 2017-19745 Navy Navy Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 43529 2017-19751 Meetings: Board of Advisors to the Presidents of the Naval Postgraduate School and the Naval War College, 43529-43530 2017-19764 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Meetings: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Subcommittee on Northwest Medical Isotopes, 43575-43576 2017-19801 Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Subcommittee on Plant Operations and Fire Protection, 43575 2017-19800 OGIS Office of Government Information Services NOTICES Meetings: Freedom of Information Act Advisory Committee, 43574-43575 2017-19720 Peace Peace Corps NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 43576-43577 2017-19780 2017-19813 2017-19815 2017-19816 Postal Regulatory Postal Regulatory Commission NOTICES New Postal Products, 43577-43578 2017-19695 Presidential Documents Presidential Documents PROCLAMATIONS Special Observances: National POW/MIA Recognition Day (Proc. 9638), 43663-43664 2017-20004 National Hispanic Heritage Month (Proc. 9637), 43659-43662 2017-20003 ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS Lattice Semiconductor Corporation; Proposed Acquisition by China Venture Capital Fund Corporation Limited (Order of September 13, 2017), 43665-43666 2017-20005 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 43618 2017-19918 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Bats BZX Exchange, Inc., 43595-43597, 43621-43627 2017-19803 2017-19808 Bats EDGA Exchange, Inc., 43598-43601 2017-19809 Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc., 43629-43633 2017-19712 Investors Exchange LLC, 43627-43629 2017-19811 Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board, 43587-43595 2017-19804 Nasdaq ISE, LLC, 43618-43621 2017-19807 Nasdaq MRX, LLC, 43597-43598 2017-19806 NASDAQ PHLX, LLC, 43607-43609 2017-19708 NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, 43611-43618 2017-19802 NASDAQ Stock Market, LLC, 43584-43587 2017-19709 NYSE American, LLC, 43601-43607 2017-19711 NYSE Arca, Inc., 43578-43584, 43609-43611, 43633-43636 2017-19710 2017-19810 2017-19812 Small Business Small Business Administration NOTICES Disaster Declarations: New Hampshire; Amendment 1, 43637 2017-19735 Major Disaster Declarations: Florida; Amendment 1, 43636 2017-19734 Small Business Size Standards: Class Waiver of the Nonmanufacturer Rule, 43637 2017-19457 State Department State Department NOTICES Foreign Military Financing: Colombia, 43640 2017-19837 Privacy Act; Systems of Records, 43637-43640 2017-19818 Trade Representative Trade Representative, Office of United States NOTICES Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board Members, 43640-43641 2017-19689 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

See

Federal Railroad Administration

Treasury Treasury Department See

Foreign Assets Control Office

Immigration U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Needs Assessment, 43566 2017-19736 Student and Exchange Visitor Information System, 43565 2017-19713 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Presidential Documents, 43659-43666 2017-20004 2017-20003 2017-20005 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.

82 179 Monday, September 18, 2017 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2016-8177; Product Identifier 2015-NM-129-AD; Amendment 39-19041; AD 2017-19-11] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc., Airplanes AGENCY:

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

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Bombardier, Inc., Model BD-700-1A10 and BD-700-1A11 airplanes. This AD was prompted by a determination that a certain task in the aircraft maintenance manual (AMM) will not accomplish the intent of a candidate certification maintenance requirement (CCMR) for detecting dormant failures of the pitch feel (PF) and rudder travel limiter actuator (RTLA) back-up modules. This AD requires doing an operational test of the flight control unit (FCU) back-up modules, and repair if necessary. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES:

This AD is effective October 23, 2017.

ADDRESSES: 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-2016-8177; 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:

Assata Dessaline, Aerospace Engineer, Avionics and 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: Discussion

We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Bombardier, Inc., Model BD-700-1A10 and BD-700-1A11 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on July 15, 2016 (81 FR 45997) (“the NPRM”). The NPRM was prompted by a determination that a certain task in the AMM will not accomplish the intent of a CCMR. This CCMR task tests the PF and RTLA back-up modules in the FCU to detect dormant failures. The NPRM proposed to require doing an operational test of the FCU back-up modules, and repair if necessary. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct a dormant failure of both FCU back-up modules. This condition, in combination with other failures in the FCU, may result in the inability to maintain the minimum control requirements for the PF and RTLA, which could create hazardous flight control inputs during flight.

Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2015-06R1, dated April 22, 2015 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Bombardier, Inc., Model BD-700-1A10 and BD-700-1A11 airplanes. The MCAI states:

It was discovered that the existing instruction in the Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) Task 27-61-05-710-801 will not accomplish the intent of the * * * [Canadian Certification Maintenance Requirement (CCMR)] task number 27-61-05-201. This * * * [CCMR] task was required to test the Pitch Feel (PF) and Rudder Travel Limiter Actuator (RTLA) back-up modules in the Flight Control Unit (FCU) to detect dormant failures. If not detected, a dormant failure of both FCU back-up modules, in combination with other failures in the FCU, may result in the inability to maintain the Minimum Control Requirements for the PF and RTLA, which could create hazardous flight control inputs during flight.

The original issue of this [Canadian] AD mandated the performance of an operational test of the FCU back-up modules using the proper AMM task instructions [and repair if necessary].

Revision 1 of this [Canadian] AD is to correct the model number designation in the Applicability section.

You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-8177.

Comments

We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to each comment.

Requests To Clarify Task Type

Bombardier, Inc. (Bombardier), and NetJets Aviation Inc. (NetJets), requested that we clarify that task 27-61-05-201 is not a CMR task. Bombardier stated that the task was misidentified as a certification maintenance requirement (CMR) task during the investigation into the cause of the identified unsafe condition. Bombardier further explained that task 27-61-05-201 is a candidate CMR, or CCMR.

We agree that the task type should be clarified. We have confirmed that task 27-61-05-201 is a CCMR task. Therefore, we have revised references to the task throughout this AD accordingly.

Requests To Reference Revised Service Information

Bombardier, Kacalp Flight Operation, and NetJets, requested that we revise the NPRM to reference revised service information. The commenters explained that the temporary revisions (TRs) referenced in the NPRM have been incorporated into the AMM, as have several subsequent revisions. The commenters asserted that the referenced TRs and certain subsequent AMM revisions are not available to operators.

We partially agree with the commenters' requests. We have confirmed that the TRs and subsequent AMM revisions referenced in the NPRM are no longer available. Therefore, we agree that this final rule needs to be revised. However, given the number of subsequent AMM revisions that have been issued for each of the AMMs since the NPRM was published, and the difficulties in obtaining the necessary material, we do not agree to reference subsequent AMM revisions in this final rule. Instead, we have revised paragraph (g) of this AD to specify doing the required actions in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO Branch, FAA. We have also removed the content provided in paragraphs (h) and (i) of the proposed AD from this AD. We have redesignated subsequent paragraphs accordingly.

Request To Revise the Compliance Time for the FCU Operational Test

NetJets requested that we revise the proposed compliance time for FCUs with less than 3,000 total flight hours in paragraph (g)(3) of the proposed AD to the later of the following:

• Prior to 3,000 total flight hours on the FCU; or

• Within 15 months or 700 flight hours after the effective date of the AD, whichever occurs first.

NetJets stated that, for an FCU with 2,999 total flight hours on the effective date of the AD, the proposed AD would require compliance prior to further flight. NetJets pointed out that no justification was given for the more restrictive compliance time. Further, NetJets explained that paragraph (g)(1) of the proposed AD has a grace period of 15 months or 700 hours flight hours, whichever occurs first for an FCU that has accumulated 3,000 total flight hours or more.

We partially agree with the commenter's request. We agree that a grace period is needed for FCUs having accumulated less than 3,000 total flight hours as of the effective date of this AD, on which an operational test has not been completed. We do not agree that the commenter's proposed grace period is adequate to address the unsafe condition. However, we have revised the compliance time in paragraph (g)(3) of this AD to provide a grace period of within 30 days after the effective date of this AD.

Request To Correct Typographical Errors in Paragraph (h)(5) of the Proposed AD

Bombardier requested that we correct a typographical error in paragraph (h)(5) of the proposed AD.

We agree that there is a typographical error in paragraph (h)(5) of the proposed AD. However, as explained previously, we have removed the content of paragraph (h) of the proposed AD from this AD. Therefore, no change to this AD is necessary in this regard.

Conclusion

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

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

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

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

Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this AD affects 76 airplanes of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it will take about 3 work-hours per product to comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD on U.S. operators to be $19,380, or $255 per product.

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

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

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 adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): 2017-19-11 Bombardier, Inc.: Amendment 39-19041; Docket No. FAA-2016-8177; Product Identifier 2015-NM-129-AD. (a) Effective Date

This AD is effective October 23, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

None.

(c) Applicability

This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc., Model BD-700-1A10 and BD-700-1A11 airplanes, certificated in any category, serial numbers 9002 and subsequent.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Reason

This AD was prompted by a determination that a certain task in the aircraft maintenance manual (AMM) will not accomplish the intent of a candidate certification maintenance requirement (CCMR). This CCMR task tests the pitch feel (PF) and rudder travel limiter actuator (RTLA) back-up modules in the flight control unit (FCU) to detect dormant failures. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct a dormant failure of both FCU back-up modules. This condition, in combination with other failures in the FCU, may result in the inability to maintain the minimum control requirements for the PF and RTLA, which could create hazardous flight control inputs during flight.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) FCU Operational Test

(1) For airplanes with an FCU that has accumulated 3,000 total flight hours or more as of the effective date of this AD: Within 15 months or 700 flight hours, whichever occurs first, after the effective date of this AD, do an operational test of the FCU back-up modules, in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO Branch, FAA.

(2) For airplanes with an FCU that has accumulated less than 3,000 total flight hours as of the effective date of this AD, and on which an operational test has been accomplished as specified in AMM task 27-61-05-710-801: Within 15 months or 700 flight hours, whichever occurs first, after the effective date of this AD, do an operational test of the FCU back-up modules, in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO Branch, FAA.

(3) For airplanes with an FCU that has accumulated less than 3,000 total flight hours as of the effective date of this AD, and on which an operational test has not been accomplished as specified in AMM task 27-61-05-710-801: Before the FCU accumulates 3,000 total flight hours or within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, perform an operational test of the FCU back-up modules, in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO Branch, FAA.

(h) Corrective Action

If any FCU fails any operational test required by this AD: Before further flight, repair 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).

(i) 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 certification office, 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. The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.

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

(j) Related Information

(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2015-06R1, dated April 22, 2015, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-8177.

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

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

None.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 7, 2017. Jeffrey E. Duven, Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-19658 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION 16 CFR Part 1028 Protection of Human Subjects AGENCY:

Consumer Product Safety Commission.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

On January 19, 2017, the Federal departments and agencies that are subject to the Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects (referred to as the Common Rule) published a final rule amending the Common Rule. The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC or Commission) adopts the Common Rule.

DATES:

The rule is effective on January 19, 2018. The compliance date for this rule, except for § 1028.114(b) (cooperative research), is January 19, 2018. The compliance date for § 1028.114(b) (cooperative research) is January 20, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Alice Thaler, Associate Executive Director for Health Sciences, Consumer Product Safety Commission, 5 Research Place, Rockville, MD 20850: 301-987-2240, or by email to: [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

On June 18, 1991, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued a rule setting forth the Common Rule requirements for the protection of human subjects. (56 FR 28003). The HHS regulations are codified at 45 CFR part 46. At that time, 15 other agencies, including CPSC, joined HHS in adopting a uniform set of rules for the protection of human subjects, identical to subpart A of 45 CFR part 46. The Common Rule is codified in CPSC's regulations at 16 CFR part 1028. The basic provisions of the Common Rule include, among other things, requirements related to the review of human subjects research by an institutional review board, obtaining and documenting informed consent of human subjects, and submitting written assurance of institutional compliance with the Common Rule.

On September 8, 2015 (80 FR 53933), HHS, on behalf of many of the same agencies that were signatories to the original Common Rule, proposed revisions to the Common Rule to modernize and strengthen the rule. Although CPSC was not a signatory to the Common Rule NPR, CPSC proposed to amend the Commission's regulations at 16 CFR part 1028, to cross-reference the HHS regulations in 45 CFR part 46, subpart A. 80 FR 57548 (Sept. 24, 2015). In addition, CPSC directed that any comments on the proposed Common Rule be sent to the HHS docket for the proceeding at HHS-OPHS-2015-0008.

On January 19, 2017, HHS issued a final rule on the Common Rule, which, among other things, establishes new requirements regarding the information that must be given to prospective research subjects as part of the informed consent process. 82 FR 7149. HHS also reviewed and addressed more than 2,100 comments. Although CPSC instructed that any comment on the Common Rule be submitted in the HHS docket, 22 comments were submitted, instead, to the CPSC docket. CPSC reviewed the comments and determined that all of the substantive issues were addressed in the Common Rule final rule.

Because CPSC's current regulations on the protection of human subjects, codified at 16 CFR part 1028, follow the HHS regulations in 45 CFR part 46, subpart A, CPSC proposed to adopt the amended regulatory text provided in the Common Rule final rule by providing a cross-reference to the HHS regulations in 45 CFR part 46, subpart A, rather than restating the text of HHS's regulation in CPSC's rule. However, at the direction of the Office of the Federal Register, for the final rule, CPSC is codifying the text of the revised Common Rule in CPSC's regulations at 16 CFR part 1028. CPSC's final rule is substantively identical to the HHS regulations in 45 CFR part 46, subpart A. Accordingly, CPSC now adopts the final Common Rule. The effective date of the Common Rule is January 19, 2018, with a compliance date of January 19, 2018, except for the section on cooperative research (§ 1028.114), which has a compliance date of January 20, 2020.

List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 1028

Human research subjects, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Research.

For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Consumer Product Safety Commission amends Title 16 of the Code of Federal Regulations by revising part 1028 to read as follows:

PART 1028—PROTECTION OF HUMAN SUBJECTS Sec. 1028.101 To what does this policy apply? 1028.102 Definitions for purposes of this policy. 1028.103 Assuring compliance with this policy—research conducted or supported by any Federal department or agency. 1028.104 Exempt research. 1028.105 [Reserved] 1028.106 [Reserved] 1028.107 IRB membership. 1028.108 IRB functions and operations. 1028.109 IRB review of research. 1028.110 Expedited review procedures for certain kinds of research involving no more than minimal risk, and for minor changes in approved research. 1028.111 Criteria for IRB approval of research. 1028.112 Review by institution. 1028.113 Suspension or termination of IRB approval of research. 1028.114 Cooperative research. 1028.115 IRB records. 1028.116 General requirements for informed consent. 1028.117 Documentation of informed consent. 1028.118 Applications and proposals lacking definite plans for involvement of human subjects. 1028.119 Research undertaken without the intention of involving human subjects. 1028.120 Evaluation and disposition of applications and proposals for research to be conducted or supported by a Federal department or agency. 1028.121 [Reserved] 1028.122 Use of Federal funds. 1028.123 Early termination of research support: Evaluation of applications and proposals. 1028.124 Conditions. Authority:

5 U.S.C. 301; 42 U.S.C. 300v-1(b).

§ 1028.101 To what does this policy apply?

(a) Except as detailed in § 1028.104, this policy applies to all research involving human subjects conducted, supported, or otherwise subject to regulation by any Federal department or agency that takes appropriate administrative action to make the policy applicable to such research. This includes research conducted by Federal civilian employees or military personnel, except that each department or agency head may adopt such procedural modifications as may be appropriate from an administrative standpoint. It also includes research conducted, supported, or otherwise subject to regulation by the Federal Government outside the United States. Institutions that are engaged in research described in this paragraph and institutional review boards (IRBs) reviewing research that is subject to this policy must comply with this policy.

(b) [Reserved]

(c) Department or agency heads retain final judgment as to whether a particular activity is covered by this policy and this judgment shall be exercised consistent with the ethical principles of the Belmont Report.1

1 The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research—Belmont Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 1979.

(d) Department or agency heads may require that specific research activities or classes of research activities conducted, supported, or otherwise subject to regulation by the Federal department or agency but not otherwise covered by this policy comply with some or all of the requirements of this policy.

(e) Compliance with this policy requires compliance with pertinent federal laws or regulations that provide additional protections for human subjects.

(f) This policy does not affect any state or local laws or regulations (including tribal law passed by the official governing body of an American Indian or Alaska Native tribe) that may otherwise be applicable and that provide additional protections for human subjects.

(g) This policy does not affect any foreign laws or regulations that may otherwise be applicable and that provide additional protections to human subjects of research.

(h) When research covered by this policy takes place in foreign countries, procedures normally followed in the foreign countries to protect human subjects may differ from those set forth in this policy. In these circumstances, if a department or agency head determines that the procedures prescribed by the institution afford protections that are at least equivalent to those provided in this policy, the department or agency head may approve the substitution of the foreign procedures in lieu of the procedural requirements provided in this policy. Except when otherwise required by statute, Executive Order, or the department or agency head, notices of these actions as they occur will be published in the Federal Register or will be otherwise published as provided in department or agency procedures.

(i) Unless otherwise required by law, department or agency heads may waive the applicability of some or all of the provisions of this policy to specific research activities or classes of research activities otherwise covered by this policy, provided the alternative procedures to be followed are consistent with the principles of the Belmont Report.2 Except when otherwise required by statute or Executive Order, the department or agency head shall forward advance notices of these actions to the Office for Human Research Protections, Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), or any successor office, or to the equivalent office within the appropriate Federal department or agency, and shall also publish them in the Federal Register or in such other manner as provided in department or agency procedures. The waiver notice must include a statement that identifies the conditions under which the waiver will be applied and a justification as to why the waiver is appropriate for the research, including how the decision is consistent with the principles of the Belmont Report.

2Id.

(j) Federal guidance on the requirements of this policy shall be issued only after consultation, for the purpose of harmonization (to the extent appropriate), with other Federal departments and agencies that have adopted this policy, unless such consultation is not feasible.

(k) [Reserved]

(l) Compliance dates and transition provisions:

(1) For purposes of this section, the pre-2018 Requirements means this subpart as published in the 2016 edition of the Code of Federal Regulations.

(2) For purposes of this section, the 2018 Requirements means the Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects requirements contained in this subpart. The compliance date for § 1028.114(b) (cooperative research) of the 2018 Requirements is January 20, 2020.

(3) Research initially approved by an IRB, for which such review was waived pursuant to § 1028.101(i), or for which a determination was made that the research was exempt before January 19, 2018, shall comply with the pre-2018 Requirements, except that an institution engaged in such research on or after January 19, 2018, may instead comply with the 2018 Requirements if the institution determines that such ongoing research will comply with the 2018 Requirements and an IRB documents such determination.

(4) Research initially approved by an IRB, for which such review was waived pursuant to § 1028.101(i), or for which a determination was made that the research was exempt on or after January 19, 2018, shall comply with the 2018 Requirements.

(m) Severability: Any provision of this part held to be invalid or unenforceable by its terms, or as applied to any person or circumstance, shall be construed so as to continue to give maximum effect to the provision permitted by law, unless such holding shall be one of utter invalidity or unenforceability, in which event the provision shall be severable from this part and shall not affect the remainder thereof or the application of the provision to other persons not similarly situated or to other dissimilar circumstances.

§ 1028.102 Definitions for purposes of this policy.

(a) Certification means the official notification by the institution to the supporting Federal department or agency component, in accordance with the requirements of this policy, that a research project or activity involving human subjects has been reviewed and approved by an IRB in accordance with an approved assurance.

(b) Clinical trial means a research study in which one or more human subjects are prospectively assigned to one or more interventions (which may include placebo or other control) to evaluate the effects of the interventions on biomedical or behavioral health-related outcomes.

(c) Department or agency head means the head of any Federal department or agency, for example, the Secretary of HHS, and any other officer or employee of any Federal department or agency to whom the authority provided by these regulations to the department or agency head has been delegated.

(d) Federal department or agency refers to a federal department or agency (the department or agency itself rather than its bureaus, offices or divisions) that takes appropriate administrative action to make this policy applicable to the research involving human subjects it conducts, supports, or otherwise regulates (e.g., the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the U.S. Department of Defense, or the Central Intelligence Agency).

(e)(1) Human subject means a living individual about whom an investigator (whether professional or student) conducting research:

(i) Obtains information or biospecimens through intervention or interaction with the individual, and uses, studies, or analyzes the information or biospecimens; or

(ii) Obtains, uses, studies, analyzes, or generates identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens.

(2) Intervention includes both physical procedures by which information or biospecimens are gathered (e.g., venipuncture) and manipulations of the subject or the subject's environment that are performed for research purposes.

(3) Interaction includes communication or interpersonal contact between investigator and subject.

(4) Private information includes information about behavior that occurs in a context in which an individual can reasonably expect that no observation or recording is taking place, and information that has been provided for specific purposes by an individual and that the individual can reasonably expect will not be made public (e.g., a medical record).

(5) Identifiable private information is private information for which the identity of the subject is or may readily be ascertained by the investigator or associated with the information.

(6) An identifiable biospecimen is a biospecimen for which the identity of the subject is or may readily be ascertained by the investigator or associated with the biospecimen.

(7) Federal departments or agencies implementing this policy shall:

(i) Upon consultation with appropriate experts (including experts in data matching and re-identification), reexamine the meaning of “identifiable private information,” as defined in paragraph (e)(5) of this section, and “identifiable biospecimen,” as defined in paragraph (e)(6) of this section. This reexamination shall take place within 1 year and regularly thereafter (at least every 4 years). This process will be conducted by collaboration among the Federal departments and agencies implementing this policy. If appropriate and permitted by law, such Federal departments and agencies may alter the interpretation of these terms, including through the use of guidance.

(ii) Upon consultation with appropriate experts, assess whether there are analytic technologies or techniques that should be considered by investigators to generate “identifiable private information,” as defined in paragraph (e)(5) of this section, or an “identifiable biospecimen,” as defined in paragraph (e)(6) of this section. This assessment shall take place within 1 year and regularly thereafter (at least every 4 years). This process will be conducted by collaboration among the Federal departments and agencies implementing this policy. Any such technologies or techniques will be included on a list of technologies or techniques that produce identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens. This list will be published in the Federal Register after notice and an opportunity for public comment. The Secretary, HHS, shall maintain the list on a publicly accessible Web site.

(f) Institution means any public or private entity, or department or agency (including federal, state, and other agencies).

(g) IRB means an institutional review board established in accord with and for the purposes expressed in this policy.

(h) IRB approval means the determination of the IRB that the research has been reviewed and may be conducted at an institution within the constraints set forth by the IRB and by other institutional and federal requirements.

(i) Legally authorized representative means an individual or judicial or other body authorized under applicable law to consent on behalf of a prospective subject to the subject's participation in the procedure(s) involved in the research. If there is no applicable law addressing this issue, legally authorized representative means an individual recognized by institutional policy as acceptable for providing consent in the nonresearch context on behalf of the prospective subject to the subject's participation in the procedure(s) involved in the research.

(j) Minimal risk means that the probability and magnitude of harm or discomfort anticipated in the research are not greater in and of themselves than those ordinarily encountered in daily life or during the performance of routine physical or psychological examinations or tests.

(k) Public health authority means an agency or authority of the United States, a state, a territory, a political subdivision of a state or territory, an Indian tribe, or a foreign government, or a person or entity acting under a grant of authority from or contract with such public agency, including the employees or agents of such public agency or its contractors or persons or entities to whom it has granted authority, that is responsible for public health matters as part of its official mandate.

(l) Research means a systematic investigation, including research development, testing, and evaluation, designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge. Activities that meet this definition constitute research for purposes of this policy, whether or not they are conducted or supported under a program that is considered research for other purposes. For example, some demonstration and service programs may include research activities. For purposes of this part, the following activities are deemed not to be research:

(1) Scholarly and journalistic activities (e.g., oral history, journalism, biography, literary criticism, legal research, and historical scholarship), including the collection and use of information, that focus directly on the specific individuals about whom the information is collected.

(2) Public health surveillance activities, including the collection and testing of information or biospecimens, conducted, supported, requested, ordered, required, or authorized by a public health authority. Such activities are limited to those necessary to allow a public health authority to identify, monitor, assess, or investigate potential public health signals, onsets of disease outbreaks, or conditions of public health importance (including trends, signals, risk factors, patterns in diseases, or increases in injuries from using consumer products). Such activities include those associated with providing timely situational awareness and priority setting during the course of an event or crisis that threatens public health (including natural or man-made disasters).

(3) Collection and analysis of information, biospecimens, or records by or for a criminal justice agency for activities authorized by law or court order solely for criminal justice or criminal investigative purposes.

(4) Authorized operational activities (as determined by each agency) in support of intelligence, homeland security, defense, or other national security missions.

(m) Written, or in writing, for purposes of this part, refers to writing on a tangible medium (e.g., paper) or in an electronic format.

§ 1028.103 Assuring compliance with this policy—research conducted or supported by any Federal department or agency.

(a) Each institution engaged in research that is covered by this policy, with the exception of research eligible for exemption under § 1028.104, and that is conducted or supported by a Federal department or agency, shall provide written assurance satisfactory to the department or agency head that it will comply with the requirements of this policy. In lieu of requiring submission of an assurance, individual department or agency heads shall accept the existence of a current assurance, appropriate for the research in question, on file with the Office for Human Research Protections, HHS, or any successor office, and approved for Federal-wide use by that office. When the existence of an HHS-approved assurance is accepted in lieu of requiring submission of an assurance, reports (except certification) required by this policy to be made to department and agency heads shall also be made to the Office for Human Research Protections, HHS, or any successor office. Federal departments and agencies will conduct or support research covered by this policy only if the institution has provided an assurance that it will comply with the requirements of this policy, as provided in this section, and only if the institution has certified to the department or agency head that the research has been reviewed and approved by an IRB (if such certification is required by paragraph (d) of this section).

(b) The assurance shall be executed by an individual authorized to act for the institution and to assume on behalf of the institution the obligations imposed by this policy and shall be filed in such form and manner as the department or agency head prescribes.

(c) The department or agency head may limit the period during which any assurance shall remain effective or otherwise condition or restrict the assurance.

(d) Certification is required when the research is supported by a Federal department or agency and not otherwise waived under § 1028.101(i) or exempted under § 1028.104. For such research, institutions shall certify that each proposed research study covered by the assurance and this section has been reviewed and approved by the IRB. Such certification must be submitted as prescribed by the Federal department or agency component supporting the research. Under no condition shall research covered by this section be initiated prior to receipt of the certification that the research has been reviewed and approved by the IRB.

(e) For nonexempt research involving human subjects covered by this policy (or exempt research for which limited IRB review takes place pursuant to § 1028.104(d)(2)(iii), (d)(3)(i)(C), or (d)(7) or (8)) that takes place at an institution in which IRB oversight is conducted by an IRB that is not operated by the institution, the institution and the organization operating the IRB shall document the institution's reliance on the IRB for oversight of the research and the responsibilities that each entity will undertake to ensure compliance with the requirements of this policy (e.g., in a written agreement between the institution and the IRB, by implementation of an institution-wide policy directive providing the allocation of responsibilities between the institution and an IRB that is not affiliated with the institution, or as set forth in a research protocol).

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under Control Number 0990-0260)
§ 1028.104 Exempt research.

(a) Unless otherwise required by law or by department or agency heads, research activities in which the only involvement of human subjects will be in one or more of the categories in paragraph (d) of this section are exempt from the requirements of this policy, except that such activities must comply with the requirements of this section and as specified in each category.

(b) Use of the exemption categories for research subject to the requirements of 45 CFR part 46, subparts B, C, and D: Application of the exemption categories to research subject to the requirements of 45 CFR part 46, subparts B, C, and D, is as follows:

(1) Subpart B. Each of the exemptions at this section may be applied to research subject to subpart B if the conditions of the exemption are met.

(2) Subpart C. The exemptions at this section do not apply to research subject to subpart C, except for research aimed at involving a broader subject population that only incidentally includes prisoners.

(3) Subpart D. The exemptions at paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(4) through (8) of this section may be applied to research subject to subpart D if the conditions of the exemption are met. Paragraphs (d)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section only may apply to research subject to subpart D involving educational tests or the observation of public behavior when the investigator(s) do not participate in the activities being observed. Paragraph (d)(2)(iii) of this section may not be applied to research subject to subpart D.

(c) [Reserved.]

(d) Except as described in paragraph (a) of this section, the following categories of human subjects research are exempt from this policy:

(1) Research, conducted in established or commonly accepted educational settings, that specifically involves normal educational practices that are not likely to adversely impact students' opportunity to learn required educational content or the assessment of educators who provide instruction. This includes most research on regular and special education instructional strategies, and research on the effectiveness of or the comparison among instructional techniques, curricula, or classroom management methods.

(2) Research that only includes interactions involving educational tests (cognitive, diagnostic, aptitude, achievement), survey procedures, interview procedures, or observation of public behavior (including visual or auditory recording) if at least one of the following criteria is met:

(i) The information obtained is recorded by the investigator in such a manner that the identity of the human subjects cannot readily be ascertained, directly or through identifiers linked to the subjects;

(ii) Any disclosure of the human subjects' responses outside the research would not reasonably place the subjects at risk of criminal or civil liability or be damaging to the subjects' financial standing, employability, educational advancement, or reputation; or

(iii) The information obtained is recorded by the investigator in such a manner that the identity of the human subjects can readily be ascertained, directly or through identifiers linked to the subjects, and an IRB conducts a limited IRB review to make the determination required by § 1028.111(a)(7).

(3)(i) Research involving benign behavioral interventions in conjunction with the collection of information from an adult subject through verbal or written responses (including data entry) or audiovisual recording if the subject prospectively agrees to the intervention and information collection and at least one of the following criteria is met:

(A) The information obtained is recorded by the investigator in such a manner that the identity of the human subjects cannot readily be ascertained, directly or through identifiers linked to the subjects;

(B) Any disclosure of the human subjects' responses outside the research would not reasonably place the subjects at risk of criminal or civil liability or be damaging to the subjects' financial standing, employability, educational advancement, or reputation; or

(C) The information obtained is recorded by the investigator in such a manner that the identity of the human subjects can readily be ascertained, directly or through identifiers linked to the subjects, and an IRB conducts a limited IRB review to make the determination required by § 1028.111(a)(7).

(ii) For the purpose of this provision, benign behavioral interventions are brief in duration, harmless, painless, not physically invasive, not likely to have a significant adverse lasting impact on the subjects, and the investigator has no reason to think the subjects will find the interventions offensive or embarrassing. Provided all such criteria are met, examples of such benign behavioral interventions would include having the subjects play an online game, having them solve puzzles under various noise conditions, or having them decide how to allocate a nominal amount of received cash between themselves and someone else.

(iii) If the research involves deceiving the subjects regarding the nature or purposes of the research, this exemption is not applicable unless the subject authorizes the deception through a prospective agreement to participate in research in circumstances in which the subject is informed that he or she will be unaware of or misled regarding the nature or purposes of the research.

(4) Secondary research for which consent is not required: Secondary research uses of identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens, if at least one of the following criteria is met:

(i) The identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens are publicly available;

(ii) Information, which may include information about biospecimens, is recorded by the investigator in such a manner that the identity of the human subjects cannot readily be ascertained directly or through identifiers linked to the subjects, the investigator does not contact the subjects, and the investigator will not re-identify subjects;

(iii) The research involves only information collection and analysis involving the investigator's use of identifiable health information when that use is regulated under 45 CFR parts 160 and 164, subparts A and E, for the purposes of “health care operations” or “research” as those terms are defined at 45 CFR 164.501 or for “public health activities and purposes” as described under 45 CFR 164.512(b); or

(iv) The research is conducted by, or on behalf of, a Federal department or agency using government-generated or government-collected information obtained for nonresearch activities, if the research generates identifiable private information that is or will be maintained on information technology that is subject to and in compliance with section 208(b) of the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. 3501 note, if all of the identifiable private information collected, used, or generated as part of the activity will be maintained in systems of records subject to the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a, and, if applicable, the information used in the research was collected subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

(5) Research and demonstration projects that are conducted or supported by a Federal department or agency, or otherwise subject to the approval of department or agency heads (or the approval of the heads of bureaus or other subordinate agencies that have been delegated authority to conduct the research and demonstration projects), and that are designed to study, evaluate, improve, or otherwise examine public benefit or service programs, including procedures for obtaining benefits or services under those programs, possible changes in or alternatives to those programs or procedures, or possible changes in methods or levels of payment for benefits or services under those programs. Such projects include, but are not limited to, internal studies by Federal employees, and studies under contracts or consulting arrangements, cooperative agreements, or grants. Exempt projects also include waivers of otherwise mandatory requirements using authorities such as sections 1115 and 1115A of the Social Security Act, as amended.

(i) Each Federal department or agency conducting or supporting the research and demonstration projects must establish, on a publicly accessible Federal Web site or in such other manner as the department or agency head may determine, a list of the research and demonstration projects that the Federal department or agency conducts or supports under this provision. The research or demonstration project must be published on this list prior to commencing the research involving human subjects.

(ii) [Reserved]

(6) Taste and food quality evaluation and consumer acceptance studies:

(i) If wholesome foods without additives are consumed, or

(ii) If a food is consumed that contains a food ingredient at or below the level and for a use found to be safe, or agricultural chemical or environmental contaminant at or below the level found to be safe, by the Food and Drug Administration or approved by the Environmental Protection Agency or the Food Safety and Inspection Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

(7) Storage or maintenance for secondary research for which broad consent is required: Storage or maintenance of identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens for potential secondary research use if an IRB conducts a limited IRB review and makes the determinations required by § 1028.111(a)(8).

(8) Secondary research for which broad consent is required: Research involving the use of identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens for secondary research use, if the following criteria are met:

(i) Broad consent for the storage, maintenance, and secondary research use of the identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens was obtained in accordance with § 1028.116(a)(1) through (4), (a)(6), and (d);

(ii) Documentation of informed consent or waiver of documentation of consent was obtained in accordance with § 1028.117;

(iii) An IRB conducts a limited IRB review and makes the determination required by § 1028.111(a)(7) and makes the determination that the research to be conducted is within the scope of the broad consent referenced in paragraph (d)(8)(i) of this section; and

(iv) The investigator does not include returning individual research results to subjects as part of the study plan. This provision does not prevent an investigator from abiding by any legal requirements to return individual research results.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under Control Number 0990-0260)
§ 1028.105 [Reserved.]
§ 1028.106 [Reserved]
§ 1028.107 IRB membership.

(a) Each IRB shall have at least five members, with varying backgrounds to promote complete and adequate review of research activities commonly conducted by the institution. The IRB shall be sufficiently qualified through the experience and expertise of its members (professional competence), and the diversity of its members, including race, gender, and cultural backgrounds and sensitivity to such issues as community attitudes, to promote respect for its advice and counsel in safeguarding the rights and welfare of human subjects. The IRB shall be able to ascertain the acceptability of proposed research in terms of institutional commitments (including policies and resources) and regulations, applicable law, and standards of professional conduct and practice. The IRB shall therefore include persons knowledgeable in these areas. If an IRB regularly reviews research that involves a category of subjects that is vulnerable to coercion or undue influence, such as children, prisoners, individuals with impaired decision-making capacity, or economically or educationally disadvantaged persons, consideration shall be given to the inclusion of one or more individuals who are knowledgeable about and experienced in working with these categories of subjects.

(b) Each IRB shall include at least one member whose primary concerns are in scientific areas and at least one member whose primary concerns are in nonscientific areas.

(c) Each IRB shall include at least one member who is not otherwise affiliated with the institution and who is not part of the immediate family of a person who is affiliated with the institution.

(d) No IRB may have a member participate in the IRB's initial or continuing review of any project in which the member has a conflicting interest, except to provide information requested by the IRB.

(e) An IRB may, in its discretion, invite individuals with competence in special areas to assist in the review of issues that require expertise beyond or in addition to that available on the IRB. These individuals may not vote with the IRB.

§ 1028.108 IRB functions and operations.

(a) In order to fulfill the requirements of this policy each IRB shall:

(1) Have access to meeting space and sufficient staff to support the IRB's review and recordkeeping duties;

(2) Prepare and maintain a current list of the IRB members identified by name; earned degrees; representative capacity; indications of experience such as board certifications or licenses sufficient to describe each member's chief anticipated contributions to IRB deliberations; and any employment or other relationship between each member and the institution, for example, full-time employee, part-time employee, member of governing panel or board, stockholder, paid or unpaid consultant;

(3) Establish and follow written procedures for:

(i) Conducting its initial and continuing review of research and for reporting its findings and actions to the investigator and the institution;

(ii) Determining which projects require review more often than annually and which projects need verification from sources other than the investigators that no material changes have occurred since previous IRB review; and

(iii) Ensuring prompt reporting to the IRB of proposed changes in a research activity, and for ensuring that investigators will conduct the research activity in accordance with the terms of the IRB approval until any proposed changes have been reviewed and approved by the IRB, except when necessary to eliminate apparent immediate hazards to the subject.

(4) Establish and follow written procedures for ensuring prompt reporting to the IRB; appropriate institutional officials; the department or agency head; and the Office for Human Research Protections, HHS, or any successor office, or the equivalent office within the appropriate Federal department or agency of

(i) Any unanticipated problems involving risks to subjects or others or any serious or continuing noncompliance with this policy or the requirements or determinations of the IRB; and (ii) Any suspension or termination of IRB approval.

(b) Except when an expedited review procedure is used (as described in § 1028.110), an IRB must review proposed research at convened meetings at which a majority of the members of the IRB are present, including at least one member whose primary concerns are in nonscientific areas. In order for the research to be approved, it shall receive the approval of a majority of those members present at the meeting.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under Control Number 0990-0260)
§ 1028.109 IRB review of research.

(a) An IRB shall review and have authority to approve, require modifications in (to secure approval), or disapprove all research activities covered by this policy, including exempt research activities under § 1028.104 for which limited IRB review is a condition of exemption (under § 1028.104(d)(2)(iii), (d)(3)(i)(C), or (d)(7) or (8)).

(b) An IRB shall require that information given to subjects (or legally authorized representatives, when appropriate) as part of informed consent is in accordance with § 1028.116. The IRB may require that information, in addition to that specifically mentioned in § 1028.116, be given to the subjects when in the IRB's judgment the information would meaningfully add to the protection of the rights and welfare of subjects.

(c) An IRB shall require documentation of informed consent or may waive documentation in accordance with § 1028.117.

(d) An IRB shall notify investigators and the institution in writing of its decision to approve or disapprove the proposed research activity, or of modifications required to secure IRB approval of the research activity. If the IRB decides to disapprove a research activity, it shall include in its written notification a statement of the reasons for its decision and give the investigator an opportunity to respond in person or in writing.

(e) An IRB shall conduct continuing review of research requiring review by the convened IRB at intervals appropriate to the degree of risk, not less than once per year, except as described in paragraph (f) of this section.

(f)(1) Unless an IRB determines otherwise, continuing review of research is not required in the following circumstances:

(i) Research eligible for expedited review in accordance with § 1028.110;

(ii) Research reviewed by the IRB in accordance with the limited IRB review described in § 1028.104(d)(2)(iii), (d)(3)(i)(C), or (d)(7) or (8);

(iii) Research that has progressed to the point that it involves only one or both of the following, which are part of the IRB-approved study:

(A) Data analysis, including analysis of identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens, or

(B) Accessing follow-up clinical data from procedures that subjects would undergo as part of clinical care.

(2) [Reserved.]

(g) An IRB shall have authority to observe or have a third party observe the consent process and the research.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under Control Number 0990-0260)
§ 1028.110 Expedited review procedures for certain kinds of research involving no more than minimal risk, and for minor changes in approved research.

(a) The Secretary of HHS has established, and published as a Notice in the Federal Register, a list of categories of research that may be reviewed by the IRB through an expedited review procedure. The Secretary will evaluate the list at least every 8 years and amend it, as appropriate, after consultation with other Federal departments and agencies and after publication in the Federal Register for public comment. A copy of the list is available from the Office for Human Research Protections, HHS, or any successor office.

(b)(1) An IRB may use the expedited review procedure to review the following:

(i) Some or all of the research appearing on the list described in paragraph (a) of this section, unless the reviewer determines that the study involves more than minimal risk;

(ii) Minor changes in previously approved research during the period for which approval is authorized; or

(iii) Research for which limited IRB review is a condition of exemption under § 1028.104(d)(2)(iii), (d)(3)(i)(C), and (d)(7) and (8).

(2) Under an expedited review procedure, the review may be carried out by the IRB chairperson or by one or more experienced reviewers designated by the chairperson from among members of the IRB. In reviewing the research, the reviewers may exercise all of the authorities of the IRB except that the reviewers may not disapprove the research. A research activity may be disapproved only after review in accordance with the nonexpedited procedure set forth in § 1028.108(b).

(c) Each IRB that uses an expedited review procedure shall adopt a method for keeping all members advised of research proposals that have been approved under the procedure.

(d) The department or agency head may restrict, suspend, terminate, or choose not to authorize an institution's or IRB's use of the expedited review procedure.

§ 1028.111 Criteria for IRB approval of research.

(a) In order to approve research covered by this policy the IRB shall determine that all of the following requirements are satisfied:

(1) Risks to subjects are minimized:

(i) By using procedures that are consistent with sound research design and that do not unnecessarily expose subjects to risk, and

(ii) Whenever appropriate, by using procedures already being performed on the subjects for diagnostic or treatment purposes.

(2) Risks to subjects are reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits, if any, to subjects, and the importance of the knowledge that may reasonably be expected to result. In evaluating risks and benefits, the IRB should consider only those risks and benefits that may result from the research (as distinguished from risks and benefits of therapies subjects would receive even if not participating in the research). The IRB should not consider possible long-range effects of applying knowledge gained in the research (e.g., the possible effects of the research on public policy) as among those research risks that fall within the purview of its responsibility.

(3) Selection of subjects is equitable. In making this assessment the IRB should take into account the purposes of the research and the setting in which the research will be conducted. The IRB should be particularly cognizant of the special problems of research that involves a category of subjects who are vulnerable to coercion or undue influence, such as children, prisoners, individuals with impaired decision-making capacity, or economically or educationally disadvantaged persons.

(4) Informed consent will be sought from each prospective subject or the subject's legally authorized representative, in accordance with, and to the extent required by, § 1028.116.

(5) Informed consent will be appropriately documented or appropriately waived in accordance with § 1028.117.

(6) When appropriate, the research plan makes adequate provision for monitoring the data collected to ensure the safety of subjects.

(7) When appropriate, there are adequate provisions to protect the privacy of subjects and to maintain the confidentiality of data.

(i) The Secretary of HHS will, after consultation with the Office of Management and Budget's privacy office and other Federal departments and agencies that have adopted this policy, issue guidance to assist IRBs in assessing what provisions are adequate to protect the privacy of subjects and to maintain the confidentiality of data.

(ii) [Reserved.]

(8) For purposes of conducting the limited IRB review required by § 1028.104(d)(7)), the IRB need not make the determinations at paragraphs (a)(1) through (7) of this section, and shall make the following determinations:

(i) Broad consent for storage, maintenance, and secondary research use of identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens is obtained in accordance with the requirements of § 1028.116(a)(1)-(4), (a)(6), and (d);

(ii) Broad consent is appropriately documented or waiver of documentation is appropriate, in accordance with § 1028.117; and

(iii) If there is a change made for research purposes in the way the identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens are stored or maintained, there are adequate provisions to protect the privacy of subjects and to maintain the confidentiality of data.

(b) When some or all of the subjects are likely to be vulnerable to coercion or undue influence, such as children, prisoners, individuals with impaired decision-making capacity, or economically or educationally disadvantaged persons, additional safeguards have been included in the study to protect the rights and welfare of these subjects.

§ 1028.112 Review by institution.

Research covered by this policy that has been approved by an IRB may be subject to further appropriate review and approval or disapproval by officials of the institution. However, those officials may not approve the research if it has not been approved by an IRB.

§ 1028.113 Suspension or termination of IRB approval of research.

An IRB shall have authority to suspend or terminate approval of research that is not being conducted in accordance with the IRB's requirements or that has been associated with unexpected serious harm to subjects. Any suspension or termination of approval shall include a statement of the reasons for the IRB's action and shall be reported promptly to the investigator, appropriate institutional officials, and the department or agency head.

§ 1028.114 Cooperative research.

(a) Cooperative research projects are those projects covered by this policy that involve more than one institution. In the conduct of cooperative research projects, each institution is responsible for safeguarding the rights and welfare of human subjects and for complying with this policy.

(b)(1) Any institution located in the United States that is engaged in cooperative research must rely upon approval by a single IRB for that portion of the research that is conducted in the United States. The reviewing IRB will be identified by the Federal department or agency supporting or conducting the research or proposed by the lead institution subject to the acceptance of the Federal department or agency supporting the research.

(2) The following research is not subject to this provision:

(i) Cooperative research for which more than single IRB review is required by law (including tribal law passed by the official governing body of an American Indian or Alaska Native tribe); or

(ii) Research for which any Federal department or agency supporting or conducting the research determines and documents that the use of a single IRB is not appropriate for the particular context.

(c) For research not subject to paragraph (b) of this section, an institution participating in a cooperative project may enter into a joint review arrangement, rely on the review of another IRB, or make similar arrangements for avoiding duplication of effort.

§ 1028.115 IRB Records.

(a) An institution, or when appropriate an IRB, shall prepare and maintain adequate documentation of IRB activities, including the following:

(1) Copies of all research proposals reviewed, scientific evaluations, if any, that accompany the proposals, approved sample consent forms, progress reports submitted by investigators, and reports of injuries to subjects.

(2) Minutes of IRB meetings, which shall be in sufficient detail to show attendance at the meetings; actions taken by the IRB; the vote on these actions including the number of members voting for, against, and abstaining; the basis for requiring changes in or disapproving research; and a written summary of the discussion of controverted issues and their resolution.

(3) Records of continuing review activities, including the rationale for conducting continuing review of research that otherwise would not require continuing review as described in § 1028.109(f)(1).

(4) Copies of all correspondence between the IRB and the investigators.

(5) A list of IRB members in the same detail as described in § 1028.108(a)(2).

(6) Written procedures for the IRB in the same detail as described in § 1028.108(a)(3) and (4).

(7) Statements of significant new findings provided to subjects, as required by § 1028.116(c)(5).

(8) The rationale for an expedited reviewer's determination under § 1028.110(b)(1)(i) that research appearing on the expedited review list described in § 1028.110(a) is more than minimal risk.

(9) Documentation specifying the responsibilities that an institution and an organization operating an IRB each will undertake to ensure compliance with the requirements of this policy, as described in § 1028.103(e).

(b) The records required by this policy shall be retained for at least 3 years, and records relating to research that is conducted shall be retained for at least 3 years after completion of the research. The institution or IRB may maintain the records in printed form, or electronically. All records shall be accessible for inspection and copying by authorized representatives of the Federal department or agency at reasonable times and in a reasonable manner.

§ 1028.116 General requirements for informed consent.

(a) General. General requirements for informed consent, whether written or oral, are set forth in this paragraph and apply to consent obtained in accordance with the requirements set forth in paragraphs (b) through (d) of this section. Broad consent may be obtained in lieu of informed consent obtained in accordance with paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section only with respect to the storage, maintenance, and secondary research uses of identifiable private information and identifiable biospecimens. Waiver or alteration of consent in research involving public benefit and service programs conducted by or subject to the approval of state or local officials is described in paragraph (e) of this section. General waiver or alteration of informed consent is described in paragraph (f) of this section. Except as provided elsewhere in this policy:

(1) Before involving a human subject in research covered by this policy, an investigator shall obtain the legally effective informed consent of the subject or the subject's legally authorized representative.

(2) An investigator shall seek informed consent only under circumstances that provide the prospective subject or the legally authorized representative sufficient opportunity to discuss and consider whether or not to participate and that minimize the possibility of coercion or undue influence.

(3) The information that is given to the subject or the legally authorized representative shall be in language understandable to the subject or the legally authorized representative.

(4) The prospective subject or the legally authorized representative must be provided with the information that a reasonable person would want to have in order to make an informed decision about whether to participate, and an opportunity to discuss that information.

(5) Except for broad consent obtained in accordance with paragraph (d) of this section:

(i) Informed consent must begin with a concise and focused presentation of the key information that is most likely to assist a prospective subject or legally authorized representative in understanding the reasons why one might or might not want to participate in the research. This part of the informed consent must be organized and presented in a way that facilitates comprehension.

(ii) Informed consent as a whole must present information in sufficient detail relating to the research, and must be organized and presented in a way that does not merely provide lists of isolated facts, but rather facilitates the prospective subject's or legally authorized representative's understanding of the reasons why one might or might not want to participate.

(6) No informed consent may include any exculpatory language through which the subject or the legally authorized representative is made to waive or appear to waive any of the subject's legal rights, or releases or appears to release the investigator, the sponsor, the institution, or its agents from liability for negligence.

(b) Basic elements of informed consent. Except as provided in paragraph (d), (e), or (f) of this section, in seeking informed consent the following information shall be provided to each subject or the legally authorized representative:

(1) A statement that the study involves research, an explanation of the purposes of the research and the expected duration of the subject's participation, a description of the procedures to be followed, and identification of any procedures that are experimental;

(2) A description of any reasonably foreseeable risks or discomforts to the subject;

(3) A description of any benefits to the subject or to others that may reasonably be expected from the research;

(4) A disclosure of appropriate alternative procedures or courses of treatment, if any, that might be advantageous to the subject;

(5) A statement describing the extent, if any, to which confidentiality of records identifying the subject will be maintained;

(6) For research involving more than minimal risk, an explanation as to whether any compensation and an explanation as to whether any medical treatments are available if injury occurs and, if so, what they consist of, or where further information may be obtained;

(7) An explanation of whom to contact for answers to pertinent questions about the research and research subjects' rights, and whom to contact in the event of a research-related injury to the subject;

(8) A statement that participation is voluntary, refusal to participate will involve no penalty or loss of benefits to which the subject is otherwise entitled, and the subject may discontinue participation at any time without penalty or loss of benefits to which the subject is otherwise entitled; and

(9) One of the following statements about any research that involves the collection of identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens:

(i) A statement that identifiers might be removed from the identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens and that, after such removal, the information or biospecimens could be used for future research studies or distributed to another investigator for future research studies without additional informed consent from the subject or the legally authorized representative, if this might be a possibility; or

(ii) A statement that the subject's information or biospecimens collected as part of the research, even if identifiers are removed, will not be used or distributed for future research studies.

(c) Additional elements of informed consent. Except as provided in paragraphs (d), (e), or (f) of this section, one or more of the following elements of information, when appropriate, shall also be provided to each subject or the legally authorized representative:

(1) A statement that the particular treatment or procedure may involve risks to the subject (or to the embryo or fetus, if the subject is or may become pregnant) that are currently unforeseeable;

(2) Anticipated circumstances under which the subject's participation may be terminated by the investigator without regard to the subject's or the legally authorized representative's consent;

(3) Any additional costs to the subject that may result from participation in the research;

(4) The consequences of a subject's decision to withdraw from the research and procedures for orderly termination of participation by the subject;

(5) A statement that significant new findings developed during the course of the research that may relate to the subject's willingness to continue participation will be provided to the subject;

(6) The approximate number of subjects involved in the study;

(7) A statement that the subject's biospecimens (even if identifiers are removed) may be used for commercial profit and whether the subject will or will not share in this commercial profit;

(8) A statement regarding whether clinically relevant research results, including individual research results, will be disclosed to subjects, and if so, under what conditions; and

(9) For research involving biospecimens, whether the research will (if known) or might include whole genome sequencing (i.e., sequencing of a human germline or somatic specimen with the intent to generate the genome or exome sequence of that specimen).

(d) Elements of broad consent for the storage, maintenance, and secondary research use of identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens. Broad consent for the storage, maintenance, and secondary research use of identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens (collected for either research studies other than the proposed research or nonresearch purposes) is permitted as an alternative to the informed consent requirements in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this paragraph. If the subject or the legally authorized representative is asked to provide broad consent, the following shall be provided to each subject or the subject's legally authorized representative:

(1) The information required in paragraphs (b)(2), (3), (5), and (8) and, when appropriate, (c)(7) and (9) of this section;

(2) A general description of the types of research that may be conducted with the identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens. This description must include sufficient information such that a reasonable person would expect that the broad consent would permit the types of research conducted;

(3) A description of the identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens that might be used in research, whether sharing of identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens might occur, and the types of institutions or researchers that might conduct research with the identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens;

(4) A description of the period of time that the identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens may be stored and maintained (which period of time could be indefinite), and a description of the period of time that the identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens may be used for research purposes (which period of time could be indefinite);

(5) Unless the subject or legally authorized representative will be provided details about specific research studies, a statement that they will not be informed of the details of any specific research studies that might be conducted using the subject's identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens, including the purposes of the research, and that they might have chosen not to consent to some of those specific research studies;

(6) Unless it is known that clinically relevant research results, including individual research results, will be disclosed to the subject in all circumstances, a statement that such results may not be disclosed to the subject; and

(7) An explanation of whom to contact for answers to questions about the subject's rights and about storage and use of the subject's identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens, and whom to contact in the event of a research-related harm.

(e) Waiver or alteration of consent in research involving public benefit and service programs conducted by or subject to the approval of state or local officials—(1) Waiver. An IRB may waive the requirement to obtain informed consent for research under paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of this section, provided the IRB satisfies the requirements of paragraph (e)(3) of this section. If an individual was asked to provide broad consent for the storage, maintenance, and secondary research use of identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens in accordance with the requirements at paragraph (d) of this section, and refused to consent, an IRB cannot waive consent for the storage, maintenance, or secondary research use of the identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens.

(2) Alteration. An IRB may approve a consent procedure that omits some, or alters some or all, of the elements of informed consent set forth in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section provided the IRB satisfies the requirements of paragraph (e)(3) of this section. An IRB may not omit or alter any of the requirements described in paragraph (a) of this section. If a broad consent procedure is used, an IRB may not omit or alter any of the elements required under paragraph (d) of this section.

(3) Requirements for waiver and alteration. In order for an IRB to waive or alter consent as described in this subsection, the IRB must find and document that:

(i) The research or demonstration project is to be conducted by or subject to the approval of state or local government officials and is designed to study, evaluate, or otherwise examine:

(A) Public benefit or service programs;

(B) Procedures for obtaining benefits or services under those programs;

(C) Possible changes in or alternatives to those programs or procedures; or

(D) Possible changes in methods or levels of payment for benefits or services under those programs; and

(ii) The research could not practicably be carried out without the waiver or alteration.

(f) General waiver or alteration of consent—(1) Waiver. An IRB may waive the requirement to obtain informed consent for research under paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of this section, provided the IRB satisfies the requirements of paragraph (f)(3) of this section. If an individual was asked to provide broad consent for the storage, maintenance, and secondary research use of identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens in accordance with the requirements at paragraph (d) of this section, and refused to consent, an IRB cannot waive consent for the storage, maintenance, or secondary research use of the identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens.

(2) Alteration. An IRB may approve a consent procedure that omits some, or alters some or all, of the elements of informed consent set forth in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section provided the IRB satisfies the requirements of paragraph (f)(3) of this section. An IRB may not omit or alter any of the requirements described in paragraph (a) of this section. If a broad consent procedure is used, an IRB may not omit or alter any of the elements required under paragraph (d) of this section.

(3) Requirements for waiver and alteration. In order for an IRB to waive or alter consent as described in this subsection, the IRB must find and document that:

(i) The research involves no more than minimal risk to the subjects;

(ii) The research could not practicably be carried out without the requested waiver or alteration;

(iii) If the research involves using identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens, the research could not practicably be carried out without using such information or biospecimens in an identifiable format;

(iv) The waiver or alteration will not adversely affect the rights and welfare of the subjects; and

(v) Whenever appropriate, the subjects or legally authorized representatives will be provided with additional pertinent information after participation.

(g) Screening, recruiting, or determining eligibility. An IRB may approve a research proposal in which an investigator will obtain information or biospecimens for the purpose of screening, recruiting, or determining the eligibility of prospective subjects without the informed consent of the prospective subject or the subject's legally authorized representative, if either of the following conditions are met:

(1) The investigator will obtain information through oral or written communication with the prospective subject or legally authorized representative, or

(2) The investigator will obtain identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens by accessing records or stored identifiable biospecimens.

(h) Posting of clinical trial consent form. (1) For each clinical trial conducted or supported by a Federal department or agency, one IRB-approved informed consent form used to enroll subjects must be posted by the awardee or the Federal department or agency component conducting the trial on a publicly available Federal Web site that will be established as a repository for such informed consent forms.

(2) If the Federal department or agency supporting or conducting the clinical trial determines that certain information should not be made publicly available on a Federal Web site (e.g. confidential commercial information), such Federal department or agency may permit or require redactions to the information posted.

(3) The informed consent form must be posted on the Federal Web site after the clinical trial is closed to recruitment, and no later than 60 days after the last study visit by any subject, as required by the protocol.

(i) Preemption. The informed consent requirements in this policy are not intended to preempt any applicable Federal, state, or local laws (including tribal laws passed by the official governing body of an American Indian or Alaska Native tribe) that require additional information to be disclosed in order for informed consent to be legally effective.

(j) Emergency medical care. Nothing in this policy is intended to limit the authority of a physician to provide emergency medical care, to the extent the physician is permitted to do so under applicable Federal, state, or local law (including tribal law passed by the official governing body of an American Indian or Alaska Native tribe).

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under Control Number 0990-0260)
§ 1028.117 Documentation of informed consent.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, informed consent shall be documented by the use of a written informed consent form approved by the IRB and signed (including in an electronic format) by the subject or the subject's legally authorized representative. A written copy shall be given to the person signing the informed consent form.

(b) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, the informed consent form may be either of the following:

(1) A written informed consent form that meets the requirements of § 1028.116. The investigator shall give either the subject or the subject's legally authorized representative adequate opportunity to read the informed consent form before it is signed; alternatively, this form may be read to the subject or the subject's legally authorized representative.

(2) A short form written informed consent form stating that the elements of informed consent required by § 1028.116 have been presented orally to the subject or the subject's legally authorized representative, and that the key information required by § 1028.116(a)(5)(i) was presented first to the subject, before other information, if any, was provided. The IRB shall approve a written summary of what is to be said to the subject or the legally authorized representative. When this method is used, there shall be a witness to the oral presentation. Only the short form itself is to be signed by the subject or the subject's legally authorized representative. However, the witness shall sign both the short form and a copy of the summary, and the person actually obtaining consent shall sign a copy of the summary. A copy of the summary shall be given to the subject or the subject's legally authorized representative, in addition to a copy of the short form.

(c)(1) An IRB may waive the requirement for the investigator to obtain a signed informed consent form for some or all subjects if it finds any of the following:

(i) That the only record linking the subject and the research would be the informed consent form and the principal risk would be potential harm resulting from a breach of confidentiality. Each subject (or legally authorized representative) will be asked whether the subject wants documentation linking the subject with the research, and the subject's wishes will govern;

(ii) That the research presents no more than minimal risk of harm to subjects and involves no procedures for which written consent is normally required outside of the research context; or

(iii) If the subjects or legally authorized representatives are members of a distinct cultural group or community in which signing forms is not the norm, that the research presents no more than minimal risk of harm to subjects and provided there is an appropriate alternative mechanism for documenting that informed consent was obtained.

(2) In cases in which the documentation requirement is waived, the IRB may require the investigator to provide subjects or legally authorized representatives with a written statement regarding the research.

§ 1028.118 Applications and proposals lacking definite plans for involvement of human subjects.

Certain types of applications for grants, cooperative agreements, or contracts are submitted to Federal departments or agencies with the knowledge that subjects may be involved within the period of support, but definite plans would not normally be set forth in the application or proposal. These include activities such as institutional type grants when selection of specific projects is the institution's responsibility; research training grants in which the activities involving subjects remain to be selected; and projects in which human subjects' involvement will depend upon completion of instruments, prior animal studies, or purification of compounds. Except for research waived under § 1028.101(i) or exempted under § 1028.104, no human subjects may be involved in any project supported by these awards until the project has been reviewed and approved by the IRB, as provided in this policy, and certification submitted, by the institution, to the Federal department or agency component supporting the research.

§ 1028.119 Research undertaken without the intention of involving human subjects.

Except for research waived under § 1028.101(i) or exempted under § 1028.104, in the event research is undertaken without the intention of involving human subjects, but it is later proposed to involve human subjects in the research, the research shall first be reviewed and approved by an IRB, as provided in this policy, a certification submitted by the institution to the Federal department or agency component supporting the research, and final approval given to the proposed change by the Federal department or agency component.

§ 1028.120 Evaluation and disposition of applications and proposals for research to be conducted or supported by a Federal department or agency.

(a) The department or agency head will evaluate all applications and proposals involving human subjects submitted to the Federal department or agency through such officers and employees of the Federal department or agency and such experts and consultants as the department or agency head determines to be appropriate. This evaluation will take into consideration the risks to the subjects, the adequacy of protection against these risks, the potential benefits of the research to the subjects and others, and the importance of the knowledge gained or to be gained.

(b) On the basis of this evaluation, the department or agency head may approve or disapprove the application or proposal, or enter into negotiations to develop an approvable one.

§ 1028.121 [Reserved]
§ 1028.122 Use of Federal funds.

Federal funds administered by a Federal department or agency may not be expended for research involving human subjects unless the requirements of this policy have been satisfied.

§ 1028.123 Early termination of research support: Evaluation of applications and proposals.

(a) The department or agency head may require that Federal department or agency support for any project be terminated or suspended in the manner prescribed in applicable program requirements, when the department or agency head finds an institution has materially failed to comply with the terms of this policy.

(b) In making decisions about supporting or approving applications or proposals covered by this policy the department or agency head may take into account, in addition to all other eligibility requirements and program criteria, factors such as whether the applicant has been subject to a termination or suspension under paragraph (a) of this section and whether the applicant or the person or persons who would direct or has/have directed the scientific and technical aspects of an activity has/have, in the judgment of the department or agency head, materially failed to discharge responsibility for the protection of the rights and welfare of human subjects (whether or not the research was subject to federal regulation).

§ 1028.124 Conditions

With respect to any research project or any class of research projects the department or agency head of either the conducting or the supporting Federal department or agency may impose additional conditions prior to or at the time of approval when in the judgment of the department or agency head additional conditions are necessary for the protection of human subjects.

Alberta E. Mills, Acting Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission.
[FR Doc. 2017-19737 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION 16 CFR Parts 1112 and 1229 [Docket No. CPSC-2015-0028] Safety Standard for Infant Bouncer Seats AGENCY:

Consumer Product Safety Commission.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Danny Keysar Child Product Safety Notification Act, section 104 of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (CPSIA), requires the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (Commission or CPSC) to promulgate consumer product safety standards for durable infant or toddler products. These standards are to be “substantially the same as” applicable voluntary standards or more stringent than the voluntary standard, if the Commission determines that more stringent requirements would further reduce the risk of injury associated with the product. The Commission is issuing this final rule establishing a safety standard for infant bouncer seats (bouncer seats) in response to the direction of section 104(b) of the CPSIA. Additionally, the Commission is finalizing an amendment to its regulations regarding third party conformity assessment bodies to include safety standard for bouncer seats in the list of notice of requirements (NORs) issued by the Commission.

DATES:

This rule will become effective March 19, 2018. The incorporation by reference of the publication listed in this rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of March 19, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Keysha Walker, Compliance Officer, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814; telephone: 301-504-6820; email: [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background and Statutory Authority

The CPSIA was enacted on August 14, 2008. Section 104(b) of the CPSIA requires the Commission to: (1) Examine and assess the effectiveness of voluntary consumer product safety standards for durable infant or toddler products, in consultation with representatives of consumer groups, juvenile product manufacturers, and independent child product engineers and experts; and (2) promulgate consumer product safety standards for durable infant and toddler products. Standards issued under section 104 are to be “substantially the same as” the applicable voluntary standards or more stringent than the voluntary standard, if the Commission determines that more stringent requirements would further reduce the risk of injury associated with the product.

The term “durable infant or toddler product” is defined in section 104(f)(1) of the CPSIA as “a durable product intended for use, or that may be reasonably expected to be used, by children under the age of 5 years,” and the statute specifies twelve categories of products that are included in the definition, including walkers, carriers and various types of children's chairs. When issuing a regulation governing product registration under section 104, the Commission determined that an “infant bouncer” falls within the definition of a “durable infant or toddler product.” 74 FR 68668 (Dec. 29, 2009); 16 CFR 1130.2(a)(15).

On October 19, 2015, the Commission issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) for infant bouncer seats. 80 FR 63168. The NPR proposed to incorporate by reference the 2015 version of the voluntary standard, ASTM F2167 Standard Consumer Safety Specification for Infant Bouncer Seats (ASTM F2167), as a mandatory consumer product safety rule with several modifications to the content, format, and placement of warning labels and instructions, to strengthen the standard.

In this document, the Commission is issuing a mandatory consumer product safety standard for bouncer seats. As required by section 104(b)(1)(A), the Commission consulted with manufacturers, retailers, trade organizations, laboratories, consumer advocacy groups, consultants, and the public to develop this rule, largely through the ASTM process. Based on revisions to the voluntary standard since the NPR published, the final rule incorporates by reference the most recent voluntary standard for infant bouncer seats, developed by ASTM International, ASTM F2167-17, with two modifications related to warning label content and placement. These modifications strengthen the standard by requiring a more stringent warning to caregivers to use the restraints, even if an infant falls asleep in the bouncer, and requires the fall hazard warning to be placed on the upper seat back of the bouncer seat, to ensure that caregivers read and heed the warning. The Commission's more stringent requirements are intended to further reduce the risk of injury to infants that fall from, and with, bouncer seats, especially bouncer seats that are placed on an elevated surface.

Additionally, the final rule amends the list of NORs issued by the Commission in 16 CFR part 1112 to include the standard for infant bouncer seats. Under section 14 of the CPSA, the Commission promulgated 16 CFR part 1112 to establish requirements for accreditation of third party conformity assessment bodies (or testing laboratories) to test for conformity with a children's product safety rule. Amending part 1112 adds an NOR for the infant bouncer seat standard to the list of children's product safety rules.

II. Product Description A. Definition of “Bouncer Seats”

Section 1.2 of ASTM F2167-17 defines an “infant bouncer seat” as: “a freestanding product intended to support an occupant in a reclined position to facilitate bouncing by the occupant, with the aid of a caregiver or by other means.” Additionally, section 1.2 states that infant bouncer seats are intended for “infants who have not developed the ability to sit up unassisted (approximately 0 to 6 months of age).”

Bouncer seats vary widely in style and complexity, but typically, bouncer seats consist of a cloth cover stretched over a wire or tubular frame. Wire frame bouncers have two designs. The forward bend design is constructed with the seating area supported from the front side of the product. The second wire frame design is a rear bend design. In the rear bend design, the seat is supported from the rear side of the product. Other bouncer designs are also currently available, including, but not limited to, products with individual wire legs, solid bases, and spring designs. These infant bouncer designs use different methods to support the seat and are intended for “bouncing,” as defined in ASTM F2167.

All bouncer seats support the child in an inclined position, and some brands have adjustable seat backs. Various bouncer seat models include a “soothing unit” that vibrates or bounces the chair, and may play music or other sounds. Most bouncer seats also feature an accessory bar with attached toys that are, or at some point will be, within the child's reach. Most of the bouncer seat models examined by Commission staff provide a 3-point restraint system, consisting of wide cloth crotch restraints and short adjustable waist straps with plastic buckles. Only two models of bouncer seats reviewed by CPSC for the NPR employed upper body restraints. Many bouncer seat brands also include an “infant insert,” intended for use to support smaller babies. Tabs C and D, Staff Briefing Package: Infant Bouncer Seats Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, dated September 30, 2015 (Staff NPR Briefing Package), available at: http://www.cpsc.gov/Global/Newsroom/FOIA/CommissionBriefingPackages/2015/ProposedRuleSafetyStandardforInfantBouncerSeatSeptember302.pdf.

B. Market Description

For the final rule, staff identified 23 firms supplying infant bouncer seats to the U.S. market, with several firms moving into or out of the market since the NPR was published. The 23 identified firms primarily specialize in the manufacture and/or distribution of children's products, including durable nursery products. Eight of the 23 known firms are domestic manufacturers and 8 are domestic importers. The remaining seven firms are foreign (four manufacturers, two importers, and one retailer).1 Tab C, Staff Briefing Package: Final Rule for Infant Bouncer Seats, dated August 23, 2017 (Staff Final Rule Briefing Package), available at: https://www.cpsc.gov/s3fs-public/Final-Rule-Safety-Standard-for-Infant-Bouncer-Seats-August-23-2017.pdf?ctmyMqMkYWQ1t3QN9DUXCDKnJQ5rKCX6.

1 Staff categorized each firm using information from Dun & Bradstreet and ReferenceUSAGov, as well as firm Web sites.

Staff expects that the infant bouncer seats of 14 of these firms already comply with ASTM F2167 because the firms either: (1) Have their bouncers certified by the Juvenile Products Manufacturers Association (JPMA) (five firms); (2) claim compliance with the voluntary standard (eight firms); or (3) have been tested to the ASTM standard by CPSC staff (one firm).2

2 JPMA typically allows six months for products in their certification program to shift to a new standard once it is published. Therefore, firms are likely already complying with ASTM F2167-16, which was published in May 2016. Firms are not expected to comply with the recently published ASTM F2167-17 until December 2017.

III. Incident Data

For the NPR, CPSC's Directorate for Epidemiology, Division of Hazard Analysis, described 277 reported incidents involving bouncer seats, including 11 fatalities and 51 injuries, occurring between January 1, 2006 and February 2, 2015. The incidents described in the NPR were based on reports involving victims 12 months old and younger in the Injury or Potential Injury Incident (IPII), In-Depth Investigation (INDP), and Death Certificates (DTHS) databases (collectively referred to as Consumer Product Safety Risk Management System data, or CPSRMS data). A detailed discussion of the incidents and hazard patterns developed for the NPR can be found in Tab A of the Staff NPR Briefing Package.

A. CPSRMS Data

For the final rule, CPSC staff reviewed bouncer seat incident reports in CPSRMS from February 2, 2015 through July 6, 2016. CPSC staff found 70 incident reports in addition to those discussed in the NPR, including one fatality and three injuries. The fatality involved a 4-month-old female who died after suffering a fractured skull injury when the infant bouncer she was seated in fell from a table. Two of the reported injuries were head contusions. A 5-month-old male sustained a head contusion when a bouncer seat bent backward to the floor. A 6-month-old male sustained a head contusion when a bouncer cover came off of the wire frame and the infant flipped forward, striking his head on the battery compartment. In another reported incident, the victim suffered minor leg burns from a hot metal bar under a bouncer cover. Tab A, Staff Final Rule Briefing Package.

Staff did not identify any hazards in the updated incident data that were not included in the hazard patterns described in the NPR (product design, structural integrity, toy bar-related, stability, chemical/electric hazards, restraints, hazardous environment), which specifically identified product design and structural integrity as the top two product-related hazards (in terms of frequency of occurrence). Staff found that product design and structural integrity continue to be the top two product-related hazards (in terms of frequency) for the updated CPSRMS data. Of the 70 new incident reports involving bouncer seats, 51 incident reports described issues with product design, and 13 incident reports described issues with structural integrity. Staff determined that almost all of the issues with product design were related to lopsided or low-riding bouncer frames. Data for the final rule can be found in Tab A of the Staff Final Rule Briefing Package.

B. NEISS Data

For the NPR, CPSC staff found 672 bouncer-related incidents, including two fatalities, reported in the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) records retrieved for bouncer incidents from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2013, involving children 12 months old and younger. Staff found that 385 cases, or an estimated 9,200 injuries, occurred in hazardous environments (counters, tables, and other elevated surfaces).

Staff updated information on bouncer-related incidents from the NEISS records for the final rule. From January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2015, staff found 202 additional NEISS records describing infant bouncer incidents. Staff's inspection of the updated NEISS data revealed that 100 cases, or an estimated 2,800 injuries, took place in hazardous environments. The remaining 102 cases, or an estimated 2,800 injuries, took place on the floor or an unknown location. Staff found no additional fatalities in the NEISS data during this time frame. Staff estimates that 4,700 (85%) bouncer injuries involved the head and face.

Estimated NEISS Bouncer Injuries, 2006-2015 [age 0-1] Year Cases Estimated injuries 2006 67 1,400 2007 66 1,700 2008 74 1,600 2009 86 2,200 2010 94 2,300 2011 121 3,400 2012 90 2,500 2013 74 2,100 2014 98 2,900 2015 104 2,700 2006-2015 877 22,800 Based on the annual estimates provided in the table, staff found a statistically significant upward trend (p-value of 0.006) in the estimated emergency department-treated injuries involving bouncers for victims under 1-year-old from 2006 to 2015. IV. Product Recalls

The NPR described two recalls of infant bouncer seats since January 2006, involving two different firms, one recall in April 2007 3 (involving breakage of a tubular steel frame) and another recall in July 2009 4 (involving small, sharp metal objects that could protrude through the bouncer fabric). No injuries were associated with either product at the time of the recall. See Tab E, Staff NPR Briefing Package. For the final rule, staff reports that no additional recalls involving bouncer seats have occurred.

3 CPSC link to recalled product: http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Recalls/2007/Infant-Bouncer-Seats-Recalled-Due-to-Frame-Failure/.

4 CPSC link to recalled product: http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Recalls/2009/BabySwede-LLC-Recalls-Bouncer-Chairs-Due-to-Laceration-Hazard/.

V. Overview and Assessment of ASTM F2167 A. Overview

The voluntary standard for infant bouncer seats, ASTM F2167, Standard Consumer Safety Specification for Infant Bouncer Seats, is intended to minimize the risk of injury or death to infants in bouncer seats associated with falls from elevated surfaces, product disassembly or collapse, stability, and suffocation. ASTM F2167 was first approved in December 2001, and the standard published in January 2002. Since then, ASTM has revised the standard 11 times. Tab C of the Staff NPR Briefing Package includes a description of these revisions through 2015.5

5 Prior to the NPR publishing in October 2015, ASTM F2167 was revised several times as part of the rulemaking consultation process. In February 2014 (ASTM F2167-14) the standard was revised to improve the sideward and rearward stability tests. Additionally in 2014, ASTM F2167-14a included changes to the stability test to make the ASTM standard more strict, to address tip-over incidents, and to add requirements and test procedures to address incidents involving battery leakage, corrosion, and overheating.

More recently, in May 2016, ASTM revised the standard to add specific developmental guidance for caregivers about when to stop using the bouncer, and ASTM removed a general requirement for banned toys or other articles because those requirements do not apply to infant bouncer seats. As discussed below, the standard was subsequently revised in June of 2017 to incorporate changes recommended by ASTM's Ad Hoc Task Group 6 concerning warning label formatting requirements, and to add a requirement that limits the maximum weight of an occupant in an infant bouncer seat. The June 2017 version of the voluntary standard also removed a requirement for manufacturers of bouncer seats to change the model number whenever the product underwent a significant structural or design modification. We agree with ASTM that although changing the model number represents a best practice, most ASTM standards do not include the statement, and such practice does not impact the safety of the product.

6 The Ad Hoc Task Group was formed by ASTM and consists of members of the various voluntary standards groups whose standards are affected by the durable nursery product rules. The purpose of the Ad Hoc Task Group is to harmonize the wording and warning label format of durable infant and toddler products. Ad Hoc Task Group recommendations for warning statements were originally published as a reference document titled, “Ad Hoc Wording—May 4, 2016,” as part of the F15 Committee Documents, and subsequently, the recommendations were revised and published in October 2016, with the title, “Ad Hoc Approved Wording, Revision A—October 17, 2016” (Ad Hoc Approved Wording).

B. Assessment of the Voluntary Standard

For the NPR, CPSC staff examined the relationship between the performance requirements in ASTM F2167-15 and each of the hazard patterns staff identified in the incident data for bouncer seats. Tab C, Staff NPR Briefing Package. Based on staff's assessment, the Commission issued the NPR proposing to incorporate ASTM F2167-15 with the following modifications to warnings content, placement, and format:

• Revised content of the warnings, markings, and instructions:

—Modify text in the warnings stating to use the restraints “even if baby is sleeping”; —change the text in the warnings to read, “stop using when baby starts trying to sit up”; and —change the developmental guidance in the instructions, if stated, to read: “from birth (or “0”) until baby starts trying to sit up.”

• Restricted the fall hazard label on the front surface of the bouncer to be adjacent to the area where the child's head would rest, and modified the visibility test to reflect this requirement.

• Specified a standard format (including black text on a white background, table design, bullet points, and black border) for the warnings on the product and in the instructions.

The most recent version of the voluntary standard for bouncer seats, ASTM F2167-17, was approved on June 1, 2017, and published in June 2017. ASTM F2167-17 includes modified and new performance and labeling requirements developed by ASTM in conjunction with stakeholders and CPSC staff on the ASTM subcommittee task group, to address the hazards associated with bouncer seats. ASTM F2167-17 addresses several of the hazards identified by the Commission in the NPR. Accordingly, after reviewing and considering comments received in response to the NPR, as well as the work of the Ad Hoc Task Group, the Commission incorporates by reference ASTM F2167-17, with two modifications that were identified in the NPR related to warning content and warning placement, as the mandatory safety standard for infant bouncer seats. Below we assess ASTM F2167-17 and explain how it differs from what the Commission proposed.

1. Content of the Warnings, Markings, and Instructions

The NPR proposed to incorporate by reference ASTM F2167-15, with modifications to warning, marking, and instruction requirements. ASTM F2167-15 advised caregivers: “Always use restraints. Adjust to fit snugly.” Based on the incident data that relate deaths to suffocation among unrestrained infants while they slept, and relate serious head injuries to unrestrained infants due to falls from bouncer seats that are placed on elevated surfaces and falls from bouncer seats that are being carried by caregivers, the Commission stated in the NPR that the voluntary standard was inadequate to address the risk of injury to infants from falls out of bouncer seats, or the risk of suffocation among unrestrained infants who are sleeping. In the NPR, the Commission proposed warning language stating: “Adjust to fit snugly, even if baby is sleeping.” Tab D, Staff NPR Briefing Package.

The newest version of the voluntary standard, ASTM F2167-17, still does not require a warning statement that caregivers should use the restraints, even if an infant is asleep. We disagree with this approach. We note that some NPR commenters were concerned by the addition of language to the product warnings regarding sleep because such language may suggest that bouncer seats are intended to be used for long-term, unattended, sleep. However, CPSC staff advises that young infants, such as those who are intended to use bouncer seats, spend more time asleep than awake.7 Infants spending more than brief periods in a bouncer seat will fall asleep on occasion (and caregivers will place infants to sleep in bouncer seats under some circumstances), just as infants will fall asleep in strollers, swings, and car-seat carriers. It may be counterintuitive, and therefore unlikely to occur to consumers, that products made for infants' use, especially those that have features intended to sooth and comfort infants, would be unsafe places for infants to sleep. In fact, despite claims that bouncer seats are not intended for children to sleep in, CPSC staff found that some manufacturers' marketing suggests that bouncers are intended for sleep as well as play. Moreover, incident data and Health Sciences' assessment demonstrate that the severity of injury from a fall from a bouncer seat increases for a child who is unrestrained. Accordingly, in the final rule, the Commission requires that the fall hazard warning state that caregivers should use the restraints, even if baby falls asleep.

7 For example, see the American Academy of Pediatrics Web site, http://www.healthychildren.org/English/ages-stages/baby/sleep/Pages/default.aspx.

Based on staff's recommendation and the work of the Ad Hoc Task Group, the final rule uses the phrase “falls asleep” instead of the phrase “is sleeping” that the Commission had proposed in the NPR. This change aligns with wording approved by the Ad Hoc Task Group, which is “Never leave child unattended, even if child falls asleep.” The Ad Hoc Task Group intends for this warning to be used on products for infants who are likely to fall asleep in the product, but which are not intended for periods of unattended sleep (i.e. bouncers, swings, infant rockers, and handheld carriers).8 The Commission notes that the final rule does not preclude manufacturers from including an additional statement indicating that bouncers are not intended for long term sleep. Accordingly, the required fall and suffocation warning label text regarding use of restraints for the final rule is:

8 During the April 2017 ASTM meetings, several Ad Hoc Task Group members requested the removal of this sentence from the Ad Hoc recommendations because no subcommittee had adopted the sentence. In the discussions, some manufacturers stated that these products are not appropriate for sleep, stating that the language “even if baby falls asleep,” may mislead caregivers. The Ad Hoc Group balloted the removal of the sentence in June 2017; however, the ballot received multiple negative votes and did not pass.

• Always use restraints and adjust to fit snugly, even if baby falls asleep.

ASTM F2167-17 includes the other modifications the Commission had proposed for warning statement requirements. Specifically, sections 8.5.2.1 and 9.2.1 Fig. 11 of ASTM F2167-17 requires text in the warnings to state: “stop using when baby starts trying to sit up.” ASTM F2167-17 requires additional text in the suffocation hazard warning label to limit the maximum weight for an occupant in an infant bouncer seat. The rationale for ASTM's change is based on surveillance of the marketplace, which demonstrated that some manufacturers have weight limits that do not correlate to the developmental milestones contemplated in the current warnings. Section 8.5.2.1 of ASTM F2167-17 requires text in the warnings to instruct caregivers to: “STOP using bouncer when baby starts trying to sit up or has reached [insert manufacturer's recommended maximum weight, not to exceed 20 lb], whichever comes first.”

2. Warning Label Placement and Visibility Test

The NPR proposed a modification to ASTM F2167-15's requirement for label placement. ASTM F2167-15 required that the fall hazard label be placed on the front surface of the bouncer seat back so that it is visible when a newborn CAMI dummy is placed in the bouncer seat. In the NPR, the Commission assessed this provision of the voluntary standard and found that it did not adequately address the risk of injury to infants falling from bouncer seats placed on elevated surfaces, a foreseeable misuse of infant bouncer seats. Tab D, Staff NPR Briefing Package. To strengthen the standard and further reduce the risk of injury, the NPR proposed that the fall hazard warning label be on the front surface of the bouncer seat, adjacent to where the child's head would rest, and the NPR also modified the visibility test. ASTM F2167-17 retains the fall hazard warning placement and corresponding visibility test from ASTM F2167-15. Thus, the current voluntary standard still does not address the Commission's concern about the visibility of the fall hazard warning.

NPR Commenters expressed concern that some products were designed with insufficient space in the area adjacent to the child's head to accommodate the necessary warning labels. Commenters were also concerned about the repeatability of the visibility test proposed in the NPR. We note, however, that staff's research on the seat back space, including models with narrow seat backs, did not corroborate the commenters' concerns. Nevertheless, to enhance test repeatability and to address the comments regarding insufficient seat back space for warning labels, the final rule allows a larger area for warning label placement than proposed in the NPR and clarifies the corresponding visibility test.

The visibility test in the final rule is based on ASTM F2167-17. Using the CAMI dummy, as shown in Figure 1 below, the allowable area for warning label placement starts from a dotted line that crosses the junctions of underarm and both sides of the torso of the CAMI dummy.

ER18SE17.000 This observable line expands the seat back space allowed for warning labels and clarifies the precision of the visibility test, both of which address commenter concerns. 3. Warning Label Format

The NPR proposed modifications to the requirements in ASTM F2167-15 regarding the format of warning labels noting that ASTM F2167-15 did not provide for a consistent warning label format across infant bouncer seats. Staff evaluated the warnings format in the voluntary standard and recommended that the Commission establish minimum requirements for presenting the hazard information that are consistent with best practices to attract and maintain attention, as well as aid reading and comprehension. Tab D, Staff NPR Briefing Package. Accordingly, the NPR proposed to specify a standard format (including black text on a white background, table design, bullet points, and black border) for the warnings on bouncer seats and in the instructions.

Since the NPR published in 2015, ASTM's Ad Hoc Task Group issued recommendations regarding warnings intended to apply across juvenile products. These recommendations, based on ANSI Z535.4, American National Standard for Product Safety Signs and Labels, have been incorporated into ASTM F2167-17. The Commission notes that Human Factors staff regularly cites ANSI Z535.4 as a baseline in developing warning materials, including those proposed in the bouncer seat NPR. The approved Ad Hoc Task Group recommendations are very similar to the ANSI Z535.4, with modifications to make the recommendations more stringent. The recommendations provide noticeable and consistent warning labels on infant bouncer seats and across juvenile products. Accordingly, for the final rule, the Commission incorporates by reference ASTM F2167-17, without any modifications to the formatting provisions.

VI. Response to Comments

CPSC received six comments in response to the NPR, including a joint letter submitted by four consumer advocacy groups. Three commenters supported the changes proposed in the NPR, and the remaining commenters expressed concern over the Commission's proposed modifications. We summarize and respond to the commenters below.

A. Warning Label Location

Comment 1: One commenter stated that the proposed requirement for the fall hazard warning label to be adjacent to an infant's head would necessitate a wider seat back to accommodate a warning label in multiple languages, which is desirable for international sales. According to the same commenter, the ASTM F15.21 Subcommittee had already evaluated this location and concluded that other locations above and below the infant's head were considered to be just as visible as the locations adjacent to an infant's head. A second commenter stated that the proposed fall hazard label visibility test procedure is not specific and can be misinterpreted by test labs. This commenter suggested using the test protocol in the current ASTM standard that uses the CAMI newborn dummy.

Response 1: Based on the incident data and research, the final rule requires that the fall hazard warning label be placed near the child's face. This location allows caregivers to notice the label while making eye contact with the infant, and potentially creates mental images of the consequence (“skull fracture”) of not complying with the instructions because the warning label would be placed next to the body part at risk. Tab D, Staff NPR Briefing Package.

Commenters claim that the area on the infant bouncer adjacent to an infant's head could be severely limited in some cases due to the design of the seat back and allowance needed for stitching tolerances. CPSC staff's research did not corroborate this claim. Tab D, Staff NPR Briefing Package. Accordingly, the NPR, 80 FR at 63179-80, invited commenters to provide information on costs and design changes that would be required if the label were required to be next to an infant's head. Staff reports that during the ASTM Ad Hoc Task Group meetings held in January and February 2016, manufacturers provided several examples of juvenile products, including infant bouncer seats, to demonstrate difficulties associated with warning label placement in proposed locations. However, NPR commenters provided neither cost estimates, nor specific comments, other than stating that the location would require a wider seat back and would limit representing multiple languages.

To resolve concerns about the amount of space for warning label placement and address the Commission's concern about an effective warning label, the final rule states the test procedure language in ASTM F2167-17, but clarifies the allowable area for the fall hazard warning label. The fall hazard warning label must be visible when placed above an imaginary horizontal line that crosses through the junctions of underarm and side of the torso (armpits) on both left and right of the CAMI, and not obscured by any part of the dummy. A warning label located at or around the infant's shoulders can address the visibility and caregiver motivational concerns expressed in the Human Factors staff memorandum for the NPR (Tab D), and also provide additional surface area to accommodate the recommended warning label.

B. Warning Label Format

Comment 2: Two commenters recommended against the proposed formatting requirements. Commenters specifically highlighted the following proposed warning formatting requirements:

• A heavy black border around the label,

• Delineating message panels with solid lines,

• Black text on white message panel,

• Bullet points preceding precautionary statements,

• Choosing a background color for the signal word panel based on a best contrast against the product material, and

• Using non-condensed style font.

Commenters stated that, in general, ASTM standards provide flexibility to manufacturers to pick colors and formatting features that are most appropriate for the product. One commenter recommended delaying the publication of the final rule for any and all warnings requirements until the warnings format and content revisions proposed in the NPR can be reviewed by ASTM Ad Hoc Task Group, balloted through the ASTM process, and then implemented into F2167. The same commenter also indicated that the formatting requirements in the bouncer NPR and several other NPRs are inconsistent with each other.

Response 2: Human Factors staff at CPSC employs the ANSI Z535.4, American National Standard for Product Safety Signs and Labels as a baseline to develop warning materials. Since the NPR was published, the ASTM Ad Hoc Task Group met and made recommendations for warning label formatting across juvenile products. The ASTM Ad Hoc Task Group's recommendations are based on ANSI Z535.4 and are more stringent than the ANSI Z535 series. ASTM 2167-17 now incorporates recommendations made by the Ad Hoc Task Group. Accordingly, the final rule incorporates by reference ASTM 2167-17 without any modifications to warning label format.

C. Warning Label Content

Comment 3: Two commenters recommended against the proposed addition of “even if baby is sleeping” to the end of the precautionary statement: “Always use restraints. Adjust to fit snugly.” One commenter believes that this statement implies that sleeping in a bouncer is acceptable and may encourage caregivers to use the product for extended periods of sleep. The second commenter believes that this statement contradicts the warning to never leave children unattended.

Response 3: Incident data associated with bouncer seats demonstrate that unrestrained infants suffer serious head injuries from falls and get into compromised positions that may result in suffocation. Tab A, Staff NPR Briefing Package; Tab A, Staff Final Rule Briefing Package. Young infants will sleep in bouncers as they spend more time asleep than awake. Tab D, Staff NPR Briefing Package. Some bouncers in the market include references to calming and soothing features of a bouncer, as well as appropriateness for short periods of sleep in a bouncer, such as “Your child can also sleep for short periods of time in the bouncer if he or she is content doing so.” Based on incident data, the final rule requires that the warning statement reference sleep to reflect this foreseeable product use scenario and to address the risk of injury from falls.

In October 2016, the ASTM Ad Hoc Task Group approved a recommended warning to address products likely to be used for short-term sleep.9 The Commission agrees with the Ad Hoc Task Group's language and has modified the warning in the final rule to use the phrase “even if child falls asleep” to align with the Ad Hoc Task Group's language. Manufacturers who produce bouncers in which infants should not be allowed to sleep may add language to their warnings statements alerting caregivers to this issue.

9 The recommended wording is as follows: “Products likely to be used for infants who are sleeping (i.e., bouncers, swings, infant rockers, handheld carriers) that are not intended for periods of unattended sleep, would benefit from this warning about unattended use. Never leave child unattended, even if child falls asleep.

Comment 4: One commenter recommended that the ASTM subcommittee reach a consensus on the need for the additional proposed language: “Stop using bouncer when baby starts trying to sit up.”

Response 4: At the January 12, 2016 ASTM meeting, the F15.18 subcommittee on Infant Bouncer Seats reviewed and agreed with the Commission's proposed language on developmental guidance. ASTM balloted and approved the proposed language, and such language has been included in ASTM F2167 since the 2016 version of the standard.

D. Other Warning Label Issues

Comment 5: Two commenters recommended that the warning label be attached on the product using embroidery or stamping to increase its permanency.

Response 5: The ASTM standard does not require a certain type of attachment for labels but requires the labels to be tested per section 7.8 to determine the labels' permanency. A similar permanency test procedure is used in other ASTM standards. No data were provided by the commenter, and the Commission has no information suggesting that these requirements are ineffective. Accordingly, the Commission incorporates by reference ASTM F2167-17, without any modification to section 7.8.

Comment 6: Three commenters recommended using pictures to clarify warning messages.

Response 6: The Commission acknowledges that well-designed graphics can be useful to increase the noticeability of the warnings as they help capture a user's attention. Pictograms are also helpful for users with limited or no English literacy. However, the design of effective graphics can be difficult. To avoid confusing consumers, a warning pictogram should be developed with an empirical study and well tested on the target audience. Although the Commission may take action in the future if it believes graphic symbols are needed to reduce the risk of injury associated with bouncer seats, the rule permits, but does not mandate, such supporting graphics.

VII. Incorporation by Reference

Section 1229.2(a) of the final rule provides that infant bouncer seats must comply with applicable sections of ASTM F2167-17. The OFR has regulations concerning incorporation by reference. 1 CFR part 51. These regulations require that, for a final rule, agencies must discuss in the preamble to the rule the way in which materials that the agency incorporates by reference are reasonably available to interested persons, and how interested parties can obtain the materials. Additionally, the preamble to the rule must summarize the material. 1 CFR 51.5(b).

In accordance with the OFR's requirements, the discussion in section VIII of this preamble summarizes the required provisions of ASTM F2167-17. Interested persons may purchase a copy of ASTM F2167-17 from ASTM, either through ASTM's Web site, or by mail at the address provided in the rule. A copy of the standard may also be inspected at the CPSC's Office of the Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, as discussed above. Note that the Commission and ASTM arranged for commenters to have “read only” access to ASTM F2167-15 during the NPR's comment period.

VIII. Description of the Final Rule

Section 1229.2(a) of the final rule for infant bouncer seats incorporates by reference ASTM F2167-17 with two modifications, as stated in § 1229.2(b), related to the content and placement of warnings. Section 1229.2(a) includes the following key provisions summarized below: scope, terminology, general requirements, performance requirements, test methods, marking and labeling, and instructional literature. As described below, § 1229.2(b) includes modifications to test methods (§ 1229.2(b)(1)), marking and labeling (§ 1229.2(b)(2) and (3)), and instructional literature (§ 1229.2(b)(4)).

Scope. Section 1 of ASTM F2167-17 states the scope of the standard, detailing what constitutes an “infant bouncer seat.” As stated in section II.A of this preamble, the Scope section defines an “infant bouncer seat” as “a freestanding product intended to support an occupant in a reclined position to facilitate bouncing by the occupant, with the aid of a caregiver or by other means.” ASTM F2167-17 states that infant bouncer seats are intended for “infants who have not developed the ability to sit up unassisted (approximately 0 to 6 months of age).”

Terminology. Section 3 of ASTM F2167-17 provides definitions of terms specific to this standard.

General Requirements. Section 5 of ASTM F2167-17 addresses numerous hazards with several general requirements, most of which are also found in the other ASTM juvenile product standards. Several requirements reference an existing CPSC standard. The following general requirements apply to bouncer seats. Where the ASTM standard relies on a CPSC mandatory standard, the mandatory standard is cited in parentheses next to the requirement:

• Hazardous sharp points and edges (16 CFR 1500.48 and 1500.49);

• Small parts (16 CFR part 1501);

• Lead in paint (16 CFR part 1303);

• Wood parts;

• Latching and locking mechanisms;

• Scissoring, shearing, and pinching;

• Openings;

• Exposed coil springs;

• Protective components;

• Permanency of labels and warnings; and

• Toys (ASTM F963).

Performance Requirements and Test Methods. Sections 6 and 7 of ASTM F2167-17 contain performance requirements specific to bouncer seats, as well as test methods that must be used to assess conformity with such requirements. Accordingly, the final rule includes performance requirements for the following:

• Restraints;

• Stability (forward, sideward, and rearward);

• Slip Resistance

• Structural Integrity;

• Dynamic and Static Load;

• Disassembly/Collapse;

• Drop Test;

• Toy Bar Attachment Integrity; and

• Battery Compartment.

Additionally, section 7 of ASTM F2167-17 includes test procedures to ensure the permanency of labels and warnings, and a fall hazard visibility test. The test procedure in § 1229.2(b)(1) of the final rule replaces the fall hazard visibility test in section 7.11.3.1 of ASTM F2167-17, as described in section V.B.2 of this preamble.

Marking and Labeling. Section 8 of ASTM F2167-17 requires products to be marked or labeled with manufacturing information and relevant product warnings. Warning label requirements for bouncer seats in section 8.4.5 of ASTM F2167-17 require two groups of warning statements, a fall hazard warning and a suffocation warning. ASTM F2167-17 includes warning language and formatting requirements for both falls and suffocation warnings. Section 8.4.7.1 requires the fall hazard warning to be placed on the front surface of the infant bouncer seat back, so that it complies with the visibility requirement in section 7.11.

Section 1229.2(b)(2) of the final rule replaces the content of the fall hazard warning in section 8.5.1.1 of ASTM F2167-17. Section 1229.3(b)(3) of the final rule replaces the content of the suffocation hazard warning in sections 8.5.2.1 and 8.5.3 in ASTM F2167-17. Changes to warning content and the visibility test for the placement of the fall hazard warning are outlined in section V.B.1-2 of this preamble.

Instructional Literature. Section 9 of ASTM F2167-17 requires that instructions be provided with bouncer seats and be easy to read and understand. Additionally, the section contains requirements relating to instructional literature contents, including warnings.

Section 1229.2(b)(4) of the final rule replaces the content of sections 9.2.1 and 9.2.2 of ASTM F2167-17. These sections contain example warning labels or references to example warning labels. The content of the example warning labels in § 1229.2(b)(4) reflects changes to the content of the fall hazard warning and suffocation hazard warning in § 1229.2(b)(2) and (3) of the final rule. Changes to the instructional literature that relate to warnings content are outlined in section V.B.1-2 of this preamble.

IX. Effective Date

The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) generally requires that the effective date of a rule be at least 30 days after publication of the final rule. 5 U.S.C. 553(d). CPSC generally considers 6 months to be sufficient time for suppliers of durable infant and toddler products to come into compliance with a new standard under section 104 of the CPSIA. Six months is also the period that the Juvenile Products Manufacturers Association (JPMA) typically allows for products in the JPMA certification program to transition to a new standard once that standard is published. The Commission proposed a 6-month effective date in the NPR for infant bouncer seats and we received no comments on the proposed effective date. Accordingly, the final rule for bouncer seats, as well as the amendment to part 1112, has a 6-month effective date.

X. Regulatory Flexibility Act A. Introduction

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, requires that agencies review a proposed rule and a final rule for the rule's potential economic impact on small entities, including small businesses. Section 604 of the RFA generally requires that agencies prepare a final regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA) when promulgating final rules, unless the head of the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Staff prepared a FRFA that is available at Tab C of the Staff Final Rule Briefing Package. We provide a summary of the FRFA below.

The final rule is unlikely to have a significant economic impact on the five domestic manufacturers of infant bouncer seats. Of the six small importers, a significant economic impact cannot be ruled out for four of the importers, either as a result of the final rule requirements or the resulting third party testing costs. Therefore, the Commission cannot rule out a significant economic impact for four of the 11 firms (36 percent) operating in the U.S. market for bouncers.

B. The Product

An infant bouncer seat is defined in ASTM F2167-17, Standard Consumer Safety Specification for Infant Bouncer Seats, as “a freestanding product intended to support an occupant in a reclined position to facilitate bouncing by the occupant, with the aid of a caregiver or by other means.” These products vary widely in price; they can be purchased for as little as $20, but can also easily cost more than $200.

C. The Market for Infant Bouncer Seats

For the FRFA, the Commission identified 23 firms supplying infant bouncer seats to the U.S. market, with several firms moving into or out of the market since the NPR. These firms primarily specialize in the manufacture and/or distribution of children's products, including durable nursery products. Eight of the 23 known firms are domestic manufacturers and eight are domestic importers. The remaining seven firms are foreign (4 manufacturers, 2 importers, and 1 retailer).10 We expect that the infant bouncer seats of 14 of these firms already comply with ASTM F2167 because the firms either: (1) Have their bouncers certified by JPMA (five firms); (2) claim compliance with the voluntary standard (eight firms); or (3) have been tested to the ASTM standard by CPSC staff (one firm).11

10 Staff categorized each firm using information from Dun & Bradstreet and ReferenceUSAGov, as well as firm Web sites.

11 JPMA typically allows six months for products in their certification program to become compliant with a new voluntary standard once it is published. Therefore, firms are likely already complying with ASTM F2167-16, which was published in May 2016. They are not expected to comply with the recently published ASTM F2167-17 until December 2017.

D. Impact on Small Businesses

The Commission is aware of approximately 23 firms currently marketing infant bouncer seats in the United States, 16 of which are domestic. Under U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) guidelines, a manufacturer of infant bouncer seats is categorized as small if it has 500 or fewer employees, and importers and wholesalers are considered small if they have 100 or fewer employees. We have limited our analysis to domestic firms because SBA guidelines and definitions pertain to U.S.-based entities. Based on these guidelines, the Commission determined that about 11 of the 23 firms are small—five domestic manufacturers and six domestic importers. Additional unknown small domestic infant bouncer seat suppliers may be operating in the U.S. market.

1. Small Manufacturers

The economic impact of the final rule for infant bouncer seats should be small for the five small domestic manufacturers. Each firm has an established history of compliance with the ASTM standard for infant bouncers and is therefore expected to be compliant with ASTM F2167-17, the version of the voluntary standard upon which the final rule is based, by the time the mandatory standard becomes final.

None of these firms includes more than four languages in their warnings and redesign is not expected. Based upon staff's inspection of their products, we expect products to have more than sufficient space for the required warning labels under the modified warning label for the final rule without the products seeming cluttered.

Under section 14 of the CPSA, once the new infant bouncer seat requirements become effective, all manufacturers will be subject to the third party testing and certification requirements under the CPSA and the Testing and Labeling Pertaining to Product Certification rule (16 CFR part 1107) (1107 rule). Third party testing will include any physical and mechanical test requirements specified in the final infant bouncer seats rule. Manufacturers and importers should already be conducting required lead testing for bouncer seats.

Third party testing costs are in addition to the direct costs of meeting the infant bouncer seats standard. The Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) prepared for the NPR concluded that we could not rule out a significant economic impact, given that we do not know specifically how much the third party requirement adds to testing costs or precisely how many models are needed to meet the “high degree of assurance” standard but that it was unlikely to be economically significant for most small manufacturers (i.e., testing costs would be less than 1 percent of gross revenue). Given that these firms are already testing to the voluntary standard and the Commission received no public comments about third party testing, the Commission believes that it is unlikely that third party testing would have a significant economic impact on any of the five small manufacturers.

2. Small Importers a. Small Importers With Compliant Infant Bouncer Seats

As noted in the IRFA, imported bouncers tend to be produced to meet the requirements for several trading partners simultaneously, including their different labeling requirements. Producers for international markets typically address labeling requirements for their various trading partners by simply providing a warning that covers all required safety issues in multiple languages. Specificity regarding warning label location impacts the practicability of replicating the warning label in multiple languages. This could mean that foreign producers will need to design a product for the U.S. market or reduce the number of languages used for warnings on U.S.-bound bouncer seats.

The final rule provides additional space for warning label placement than that proposed in the NPR. With this additional space, reducing on-product warning languages should be a more viable alternative for firms than it was under the NPR proposal. Firms would not need to reduce the number of languages for their on-product warnings for the final rule as significantly as that required in the NPR. The additional space addresses the location requirement in the final rule, while ensuring that the appearance of bouncers remains comparable to firms' competitor products (for which one to three languages is typical).

Three small importers of infant bouncer seats are currently in compliance with the voluntary standard; these firms likely would continue compliance as new versions of the voluntary standard are published. One importer is unlikely to experience a significant economic impact, even if the importer opted to redesign its bouncers to accommodate more than eight warning label languages. The cost estimate to redesign an infant bouncer (based on information from several firms) is between $200,000 and $300,000, which is less than 1 percent of this firm's revenue. The remaining two small importers of compliant bouncer seats might experience significant economic costs, based on the same comparison (i.e., $200,000 to $300,000 could represent more than 1 percent of their annual revenue). Although the Commission does not expect that these firms would require space for warning labels in more than eight languages, we cannot rule out a significant economic impact for one of these two firms, given an extremely low revenue level compared to estimated costs for redesign. The second firm appears to have the option of exiting the bouncer market without experiencing a significant impact.

b. Small Importers With Noncompliant Infant Bouncer Seats

Three firms import bouncers that do not comply with the voluntary standard. The bouncers for these firms will require changes to come into compliance with the voluntary standard as well as modifications to meet the warning label requirements in the final rule. In the absence of information on precisely what changes would be required to bring the bouncer seats supplied by all three firms into compliance with the final rule (as well as information on sales revenue for all three firms), the Commission cannot rule out a significant economic impact for any of these firms.

The magnitude of the economic impact on the three firms with noncompliant infant bouncer seats will depend upon the cost of the changes required and the degree to which their supplying firms pass on any increases in production costs associated with changes to the product needed to meet the mandatory standard (a redesign is estimated to cost between $200,000 to $300,000). Two of the firms are directly tied to their foreign suppliers and therefore, finding an alternate supply source would not be a viable alternative. However, given this close relationship, it seems likely that their foreign suppliers would have an incentive to work with their U.S. subsidiaries to maintain an American market presence. One of those two firms likely would only avoid a significant economic impact if their supplier absorbed 100 percent of the cost of a redesign. The third firm imports and wholesales a wide variety of children's products. We do not know, however, how much of the firm's revenue is due to bouncer sales and cannot determine what impact discontinuing bouncer sales might have on the third firm should the firm be unable to find a supplier of bouncers that comply with the standard.

Based on the additional space provided in the final rule for placement of the fall hazard warning label, two of these firms should not require modifications to meet the requirement in the final rule (although they would have required modifications under the NPR).

c. Third Party Testing Costs for Small Importers

As with manufacturers, all importers will be subject to third-party testing and certification requirements, and consequently, will be subject to costs similar to those for manufacturers if their supplying foreign firm(s) does not perform third party testing. Half of the bouncer seat importers (3 of 6) are already testing their products to verify compliance with the ASTM standard, and any costs would be limited to the incremental costs associated with third party testing over the current testing regime.

The Commission was able to obtain revenue data for one of the small importers with noncompliant bouncers. For that importer, third party testing costs, considered alone and apart from any additional performance requirements due to the final rule, would not exceed one percent of gross revenue unless around 12 units per model required testing to provide the “high degree of assurance” required by 16 CFR part 1107. The Commission has no basis for estimating the size of the impact for the remaining two importers of noncompliant bouncers.

E. Summary of Impacts

The Commission is aware of 11 small firms, five domestic manufacturers and six domestic importers, currently marketing infant bouncer seats in the United States. With regards to the five domestic manufacturers, the Commission considers it unlikely that testing costs would have a significant impact on any of these firms. Of the six small importers, a significant economic impact cannot be ruled out for four of the importers either as a result of the final rule requirements or the resulting third party testing costs. Therefore, the Commission cannot rule out a significant economic impact for four of the 11 firms (36 percent) operating in the U.S. market for bouncers.

F. Alternatives

One of the alternatives to reduce the impact on small entities discussed in the NPR was to adopt the voluntary standard with all of the modifications to the on-product warning labels, except for the location specificity (i.e., next to the child's head). Based on comments received, the requirements regarding on-product warning label placement have been modified in the final rule (i.e., up from the child's armpits on either side). This modification provides additional room and will reduce the economic impact of the warning label location specificity on small suppliers. The Commission could further reduce the economic impact on small entities by eliminating the location requirement for the fall hazard warning entirely. However, this would reduce the effectiveness of the fall hazard warning label. The location for the fall hazard warning “allows caregivers to notice the label while making eye contact with the infant, and potentially creates mental images of the consequence (“skull fracture”) of not complying with the instructions . . .” Tab D, Staff NPR Briefing Package; Tab B, Staff Final Rule Briefing Package.

The Commission considered two additional alternatives discussed in the NPR that might minimize the economic impact on small entities: (1) Adopt ASTM F2167-17 with no modifications; and (2) allow a later effective date.

Section 104 of the CPSIA requires that the Commission promulgate a standard that is either substantially the same as the voluntary standard or more stringent. Therefore, adopting ASTM F2167-17 with no modifications is the least stringent rule allowed by law. This alternative would reduce the impact on all of the known small businesses supplying infant bouncers to the U.S. market. If it were adopted, it should eliminate any economic impact related to warning label changes, but firms would continue to be affected by third party testing requirements. However, adopting ASTM F2167-17 without modification would not adequately address the fall hazard scenario identified in the incident data and would reduce the effectiveness of the fall hazard warning label.

Finally, the Commission could reduce the final rule's impact on small businesses by setting a later effective date. A later effective date would reduce the economic impact on firms in two ways. Firms would be less likely to experience a lapse in production/importation, which could result if they are unable to comply and third party test within the required timeframe. Also, firms could spread costs over a longer time period, thereby reducing their annual costs, as well as the present value of their total costs. However, the Commission received no comments asserting that firms would not have sufficient time to comply with the proposed 6 month effective date. Accordingly, the Commission declines to extend the effective date of the final rule.

G. Small Business Impacts of the Accreditation Requirements for Testing Laboratories

In accordance with section 14 of the CPSA, all children's products that are subject to a children's product safety rule must be tested by a CPSC-accepted third party conformity assessment body (i.e., testing laboratory) for compliance with applicable children's product safety rules. Testing laboratories that want to conduct this testing must meet the NOR pertaining to third party conformity testing. NORs have been codified for existing rules at 16 CFR part 1112. Consequently, the Commission finalizes an amendment to 16 CFR part 1112 that establishes an NOR for those testing laboratories that want to test for compliance with the bouncers final rule. This section assesses the impact of the amendment on small laboratories.

A FRFA was conducted as part of the promulgation of the original 1112 rule (78 FR 15836, 15855-58) as required by the RFA. Briefly, the FRFA concluded that the accreditation requirements would not have a significant adverse impact on a substantial number of small laboratories because no requirements were imposed on laboratories that did not intend to provide third party testing services. The only laboratories that were expected to provide such services were those that anticipated receiving sufficient revenue from the mandated testing to justify accepting the requirements as a business decision.

Based on similar reasoning, amending the rule to include the NOR for the bouncer standard will not have a significant adverse impact on small laboratories. Moreover, based upon the number of laboratories in the United States that have applied for CPSC acceptance of the accreditation to test for conformance to other juvenile product standards, we expect that only a few laboratories will seek CPSC acceptance of their accreditation to test for conformance with the infant bouncer seat standard. Most of these laboratories will have already been accredited to test for conformance to other juvenile product standards, and the only costs to them would be the cost of adding the bouncer standard to their scope of accreditation, a cost that test laboratories have indicated is extremely low when they are already accredited for other section 104 rules. As a consequence, the Commission certifies that the NOR for the infant bouncer seat standard will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.

XI. Environmental Considerations

The Commission's regulations address whether the agency is required to prepare an environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement. Under these regulations, a rule that has “little or no potential for affecting the human environment,” is categorically exempt from this requirement. 16 CFR 1021.5(c)(1). The final rule for bouncer seats falls within the categorical exemption.

XII. Paperwork Reduction Act

The final rule for infant bouncer seats contains information collection requirements that are subject to public comment and review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The preamble to the proposed rule (80 FR at 63181-82) discussed the information collection burden of the proposed rule and specifically requested comments on the accuracy of our estimates. OMB has assigned control number 3041-0174 to this information collection. We did not receive any comment regarding the information collection burden of the proposal. However, the final rule makes modifications regarding the information collection burden because the number of estimated manufacturers subject to the information collection burden is now estimated at 23 manufacturers rather than the 22 manufacturers initially estimated in the proposed rule.

Accordingly, the estimated burden of this collection of information is modified as follows:

Table 1—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden 16 CFR Section Number of
  • respondents
  • Frequency of responses Total annual responses Hours per
  • response
  • Total burden hours
    1229 23 4 92 1 92

    Our estimate is based on the following:

    Section 8.1 of ASTM F2167-17 requires that all infant bouncer seats and their retail packaging be permanently marked or labeled as follows: The manufacturer, distributor, or seller name, place of business (city, state, mailing address, including zip code), and telephone number; and a code mark or other means that identifies the date (month and year as a minimum) of manufacture.

    CPSC is aware of 23 firms that supply bouncer seats in the U.S. market. For PRA purposes, we assume that all 23 firms use labels on their products and on their packaging already. All firms will need to make some modifications to their existing labels. We estimate that the time required to make these modifications is about 1 hour per model. Each of the 23 firms supplies an average of four different models of bouncer seats. Therefore, we estimate the burden hours associated with labels to be 92 hours annually (1 hour × 23 firms × 4 models per firm = 92 hours annually).

    We estimate the hourly compensation for the time required to create and update labels is $33.58 (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Employer Costs for Employee Compensation,” March 2017, Table 9, total compensation for all sales and office workers in goods-producing private industries: http://www.bls.gov/ncs/). Therefore, we estimate the annual cost to industry associated with the labeling requirements in the final rule to be approximately $3,089 ($33.58 per hour × 92 hours = $3,089.36). This collection of information does not require operating, maintenance, or capital costs.

    In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)), we have submitted the information collection requirements of this final rule to the OMB.

    XIII. 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 requirement 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 104(b) of the CPSIA refers to the rules to be issued under that section as “consumer product safety rules.” Therefore, the preemption provision of section 26(a) of the CPSA applies to this final rule issued under section 104.

    XIV. Amendment to 16 CFR Part 1112 To Include NOR for Bouncer Seat Standard

    The CPSA establishes certain requirements for product certification and testing. Products subject to a consumer product safety rule under the CPSA, or to a similar rule, ban, standard or regulation under any other act enforced by the Commission, must be certified as complying with all applicable CPSC-enforced requirements. 15 U.S.C. 2063(a). 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. Id. 2063(a)(2). The Commission must publish an 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). The Safety Standard for Infant Bouncer Seats, to be codified at 16 CFR part 1229, is a children's product safety rule that requires the issuance of an NOR.

    The Commission published a final rule, Requirements Pertaining to Third-Party Conformity Assessment Bodies, 78 FR 15836 (March 12, 2013), which is codified at 16 CFR part 1112 (referred to here as part 1112). Part 1112 became effective on June 10, 2013 and establishes requirements for accreditation of third-party conformity assessment bodies (or laboratories) to test for conformance with a children's product safety rule in accordance with section 14(a)(2) of the CPSA. Part 1112 also codifies a list of all of the NORs that the CPSC had published at the time part 1112 was issued. All NORs issued after the Commission published part 1112, such as the standard for bouncer seats, require the Commission to amend part 1112. Accordingly, the Commission is now amending part 1112 to include the standard for infant bouncer seats in the list of other children's product safety rules for which the CPSC has issued NORs.

    Laboratories applying for acceptance as a CPSC-accepted third-party conformity assessment body to test to the new standard for infant bouncer seats would be required to meet the third-party conformity assessment body accreditation requirements in 16 CFR part 1112, Requirements Pertaining to Third-Party Conformity Assessment Bodies. When a laboratory meets the requirements as a CPSC-accepted third-party conformity assessment body, the laboratory can apply to the CPSC to have 16 CFR part 1229, Safety Standard for Infant Bouncer Seats, included in its scope of accreditation of CPSC safety rules listed for the laboratory on the CPSC Web site at: www.cpsc.gov/labsearch.

    As required by the RFA, staff conducted a FRFA when the Commission issued the part 1112 rule (78 FR 15836, 15855-58). Briefly, the FRFA concluded that the accreditation requirements would not have a significant adverse impact on a substantial number of small test laboratories because no requirements were imposed on test laboratories that did not intend to provide third-party testing services. The only test laboratories that were expected to provide such services were those that anticipated receiving sufficient revenue from the mandated testing to justify accepting the requirements as a business decision. Moreover, a test laboratory would only choose to provide such services if it anticipated receiving revenues sufficient to cover the costs of the requirements.

    Based on similar reasoning, amending 16 CFR part 1112 to include the NOR for the infant bouncer seats standard will not have a significant adverse impact on small test laboratories. Moreover, based upon the number of test laboratories in the United States that have applied for CPSC acceptance of accreditation to test for conformance to other mandatory juvenile product standards, we expect that only a few test laboratories will seek CPSC acceptance of their accreditation to test for conformance with the infant bouncer seats standard. Most of these test laboratories will have already been accredited to test for conformity to other mandatory juvenile product standards, and the only costs to them would be the cost of adding the infant bouncer seats standard to their scope of accreditation. For these reasons, the Commission certifies that the NOR amending 16 CFR part 1112 to include the infant bouncer seats standard will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    List of Subjects 16 CFR Part 1112

    Administrative practice and procedure, Audit, Consumer protection, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Third party conformity assessment body.

    16 CFR Part 1229

    Bouncer seats, Chairs, Consumer protection, Imports, Incorporation by reference, Infants and children, Labeling, Law enforcement, Seats, and Toys.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Commission amends title 16 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

    PART 1112—REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO THIRD PARTY CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT BODIES 1. The authority citation for part 1112 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    15 U.S.C. 2063; Pub. L. 110-314, section 3, 122 Stat. 3016, 3017 (2008).

    2. Amend § 1112.15 by adding paragraph (b)(42) to read as follows:
    § 1112.15 When can a third party conformity assessment body apply for CPSC acceptance for a particular CPSC rule and/or test method?

    (b) * * *

    (42) 16 CFR part 1229, Safety Standard for Infant Bouncer Seats.

    3. Add part 1229 to read as follows: PART 1229—SAFETY STANDARD FOR INFANT BOUNCER SEATS Sec. 1229.1 Scope. 1229.2 Requirements for infant bouncer seats. Authority:

    Sec. 104, Pub. L. 110-314, 122 Stat. 3016 (15 U.S.C. 2056a).

    § 1229.1 Scope.

    This part establishes a consumer product safety standard for infant bouncer seats.

    § 1229.2 Requirements for infant bouncer seats.

    (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, each infant bouncer seat must comply with all applicable provisions of ASTM F2167-17, Standard Consumer Safety Specification for Infant Bouncer Seats, approved on June 1, 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 ASTM International, 100 Bar Harbor Drive, P.O. Box 0700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428; http://www.astm.org/cpsc.htm. 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: www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    (b) Comply with ASTM F2167-17 with the following additions or exclusions:

    (1) Instead of complying with section 7.11.3.1 of ASTM F2167-17, comply with the following:

    (i) 7.11.3.1 Visibility With CAMI Dummy Restrained in Seat—While standing in front of the product with the Newborn CAMI dummy installed, verify that the required warnings are visible and placed above an imaginary horizontal line that crosses through the junctions of under arm and side of the torso armpits on both left and right and not obscured by any part of the dummy (as shown in paragraph (b)(1)(ii), “Fig. 10”).

    (ii) Fig. 10: CAMI Dummy Restrained in Seat; Allowable area for warning label placement starts from the dotted line that crosses the junctions of underarm and both sides of the torso.

    ER18SE17.001

    (2) In section 8.5.1.1 of ASTM F2167-17, replace the warning statement “ALWAYS use restraints. Adjust to fit snugly” with “ALWAYS use restraints and adjust to fit snugly, even if baby falls asleep.”

    (3) In section 8.5.2.1 of ASTM F2167-17, replace the warning statement “ALWAYS use restraints. Adjust to fit snugly” with “ALWAYS use restraints and adjust to fit snugly, even if baby falls asleep.”

    (4) In section 8.5.3 of ASTM F2167-17, replace the reference to “Figs. 10 and 11” with “Figs. 11 and 12.”

    (5) In section 9.2.1 of ASTM F2167-17:

    (i) Replace the reference to “Fig. 12” with “Fig. 13.”

    (ii) Replace Fig. 10 with paragraph (b)(5)(iii), “Fig. 11”.

    (iii) Fig. 11: Fall Hazard Warning.

    ER18SE17.002

    (iv) Replace Fig. 11 with paragraph (b)(5)(v), “Fig. 12”.

    (v) Fig. 12: Suffocation Hazard Warning.

    ER18SE17.003

    (vi) Replace Fig. 12 with paragraph (b)(5)(vii), “Fig. 13”.

    (vii) Fig. 13: Instruction Warning Statements.

    ER18SE17.004

    (6) In section 9.2.2 of ASTM F2167-17, replace the reference to “Fig. 12” with “Fig. 13.”

    Alberta E. Mills, Acting Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19255 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Parts 510, 520, 522, 524, and 558 [Docket No. FDA-2017-N-0002] New Animal Drugs; Approval of New Animal Drug Applications; Change of Sponsor's Address AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Final rule; technical amendments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is amending the animal drug regulations to reflect application-related actions for a new animal drug application (NADA) and abbreviated new animal drug applications (ANADAs) during March and April 2017. FDA is also informing the public of the availability of summaries of the basis of approval and of environmental review documents, where applicable. The animal drug regulations are also being amended to reflect a change of a sponsor's address and to make technical amendments to improve the accuracy of the regulations.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective September 18, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    George K. Haibel, Center for Veterinary Medicine (HFV-6), Food and Drug Administration, 7500 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855, 240-402-5689, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Approval Actions

    FDA is amending the animal drug regulations to reflect approval actions for a NADA and ANADAs during March and April 2017, as listed in table 1. In addition, FDA is informing the public of the availability, where applicable, of documentation of environmental review required under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and, for actions requiring review of safety or effectiveness data, summaries of the basis of approval (FOI Summaries) under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). These public documents may be seen in the Dockets Management Staff Office (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. Persons with access to the internet may obtain these documents at the CVM FOIA Electronic Reading Room: https://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/CentersOffices/OfficeofFoods/CVM/CVMFOIAElectronicReadingRoom/default.htm. Marketing exclusivity and patent information may be accessed in FDA's publication, Approved Animal Drug Products Online (Green Book) at: https://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/Products/ApprovedAnimalDrugProducts/default.htm.

    Table 1—Original and Supplemental NADAs and ANADAs Approved During March and April 2017 Approval date File No. Sponsor Product name Species Effect of the action Public documents April 24, 2017 141-269 Intervet, Inc., 2 Giralda Farms, Madison, NJ 07940 REVALOR-XH (trenbolone acetate and estradiol extended-release implant) Cattle Supplemental approval of a new implant for increased rate of weight gain and improved feed efficiency for up to 200 days after implantation in beef heifers fed in confinement for slaughter FOI Summary, EA/FONSI.1 April 19, 2017 200-593 Accord Healthcare, Inc., 1009 Slater Rd., Suite 210-B, Durham, NC 27703 Carprofen Injection Dogs Original approval as a generic copy of NADA 141-199 FOI Summary. April 28, 2017 200-595 Norbrook Laboratories, Ltd., Station Works, Newry BT35 6JP, Northern Ireland CARPRIEVE (carprofen) Chewable Tablets Dogs Original approval as a generic copy of NADA 141-111 FOI Summary. 1 The Agency has carefully considered an environmental assessment (EA) of the potential environmental impact of this action and has made a finding of no significant impact (FONSI). II. Technical Amendments

    Pharmgate LLC, 1015 Ashes Dr., suite 102, Wilmington, NC 28405, has informed FDA that it has changed its address to 1800 Sir Tyler Dr., Wilmington, NC 28405. Accordingly, we are amending § 510.600(c) to reflect this change.

    We are making several technical amendments in part 558, which was amended on December 27, 2016 (81 FR 94991), and February 24, 2017 (82 FR 11510), as part of the FDA Center for Veterinary Medicine's (CVM's) Judicious Use Initiative. We are also making several technical amendments to the regulations for dosage form drugs. These actions are being taken to improve the accuracy of the regulations.

    III. Legal Authority

    This final rule is issued under section 512(i) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 360b(i)), which requires Federal Register publication of “notice[s] . . . effective as a regulation,” of the conditions of use of approved new animal drugs. This rule sets forth technical amendments to the regulations to codify recent actions on approved new animal drug applications and corrections to improve the accuracy of the regulations, and as such does not impose any burden on regulated entities.

    Although denominated a rule pursuant to the FD&C Act, this document does not meet the definition of “rule” in 5 U.S.C. 804(3)(A) because it is a “rule of particular applicability.” Therefore, it is not subject to the congressional review requirements in 5 U.S.C. 801-808. Likewise, this is not a rule subject to Executive Order 12866, which defines a rule as “an agency statement of general applicability and future effect, which the agency intends to have the force and effect of law, that is designed to implement, interpret, or prescribe law or policy or to describe the procedure or practice requirements of an agency.”

    List of Subjects 21 CFR Part 510

    Administrative practice and procedure, Animal drugs, Labeling, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    21 CFR Parts 520, 522, and 524

    Animal drugs.

    21 CFR Part 558

    Animal drugs, Animal feeds.

    Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs and redelegated to the Center for Veterinary Medicine, 21 CFR parts 510, 520, 522, 524, and 558 are amended as follows:

    PART 510—NEW ANIMAL DRUGS 1. The authority citation for part 510 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352, 353, 360b, 371, 379e.

    2. In § 510.600, in the table in paragraph (c)(1), revise the entry for “Pharmgate LLC”; and in the table in paragraph (c)(2), revise the entry for “069254” to read as follows:
    § 510.600 Names, addresses, and drug labeler codes of sponsors of approved applications.

    (c) * * *

    (1) * * *

    Firm name and address Drug
  • labeler code
  • *    *    *    *    * Pharmgate LLC, 1800 Sir Tyler Dr., Wilmington, NC 28405 069254 *    *    *    *    *

    (2) * * *

    Drug
  • labeler code
  • Firm name and address
    *    *    *    *    * 069254 Pharmgate LLC, 1800 Sir Tyler Dr., Wilmington, NC 28405 *    *    *    *    *
    PART 520—ORAL DOSAGE FORM NEW ANIMAL DRUGS 3. The authority citation for part 520 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    21 U.S.C. 360b.

    § 520.88g [Amended]
    4. In § 520.88g, in paragraphs (c)(1)(ii) and (c)(2)(ii), in the first sentence, remove “nonbeta-lactamase” and in its place add “non-beta-lactamase”. 5. In § 520.304, remove paragraph (b)(3) and revise paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) to read as follows:
    § 520.304 Carprofen.

    (b) * * *

    (1) Nos. 054771, 026637, 055529, and 062250 for use of products described in paragraph (a) as in paragraph (d) of this section.

    (2) No. 000859 for use of product described in paragraph (a)(1) as in paragraph (d) of this section.

    PART 522—IMPLANTATION OR INJECTABLE DOSAGE FORM NEW ANIMAL DRUGS 6. The authority citation for part 522 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    21 U.S.C. 360b.

    7. In § 522.304, revise paragraph (b) to read as follows:
    § 522.304 Carprofen.

    (b) Sponsors. See Nos. 016729, 026637, 054771, and 055529 in § 510.600(c) of this chapter.

    8. In § 522.970, revise paragraph (b)(1); remove paragraphs (b)(3), (e)(2)(ii)(B), and (e)(2)(iii); and add two sentences after the italic heading of paragraph (e)(2)(ii), to read as follows:
    § 522.970 Flunixin.

    (b) * * *

    (1) See Nos. 000061, 000859, 055529, 057561, and 061623 for use as in paragraph (e) of this section.

    (e) * * *

    (2) * * *

    (ii) Limitations. Approved only for intravenous administration in cattle. Intramuscular administration has resulted in violative residues in the edible tissues of cattle sent to slaughter. * * *

    9. In § 522.1002, revise paragraph (b)(1) to read as follows:
    § 522.1002 Follicle stimulating hormone.

    (b)(1) Specifications—(i) Single pack. Each package contains 2 vials. One vial contains 700 international units (IU) porcine-pituitary-derived follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) equivalent to 400 milligrams NIH-FSH-P1, as a dry powder. The other vial contains 20 milliliters (mL) of bacteriostatic sodium chloride injection. When constituted, each milliliter of solution contains 35 IU FSH.

    (ii) Dual pack. Each package contains 2 vials. Each vial contains 700 international units (IU) porcine-pituitary-derived FSH equivalent to 400 milligrams NIH-FSH-P1, as a dry powder. Constitute with 20 mL bacteriostatic sodium chloride injection, using strict aseptic technique. When constituted, each milliliter of solution contains 35 IU FSH.

    10. In § 522.1660a, revise the first sentence of paragraph (e)(1)(ii) to read as follows:
    § 522.1660a Oxytetracycline solution, 200 milligrams/milliliter.

    (e) * * *

    (1) * * *

    (ii) Limitations. Exceeding the highest recommended level of drug per pound of bodyweight per day, administering more than the recommended number of treatments, and/or exceeding 10 mL intramuscularly or subcutaneously per injection site in adult beef and dairy cattle may result in antibiotic residues beyond the withdrawal time. * * *

    11. In § 522.2477, revise paragraph (b)(2) and the first sentence in paragraphs (d)(1)(iii), (d)(2)(iii), (d)(3)(iii), and (d)(4)(iii); and add paragraph (d)(5) to read as follows:
    § 522.2477 Trenbolone acetate and estradiol.

    (b) * * *

    (2) No. 000061 for use as in paragraphs (d)(1)(i)(A), (d)(1)(i)(C), (d)(1)(i)(D), (d)(1)(i)(G), (d)(1)(ii), (d)(1)(iii), (d)(2)(i)(A), (d)(2)(i)(C), (d)(2)(i)(D), (d)(2)(ii), (d)(2)(iii), (d)(3)(i)(A), (d)(3)(ii), (d)(3)(iii), (d)(4), and (d)(5) of this section.

    (d) * * *

    (1) * * *

    (iii) Limitations. Administer implant subcutaneously in the ear only. * * *

    (2) * * *

    (iii) Limitations. Administer implant subcutaneously in the ear only. * * *

    (3) * * *

    (iii) Limitations. Administer implant subcutaneously in the ear only. * * *

    (4) * * *

    (iii) Limitations. Administer implant subcutaneously in the ear only. * * *

    (5) Beef heifers fed in confinement for slaughter—(i) Amount. Each extended-release implant contains 200 mg trenbolone acetate and 20 mg estradiol (one implant consisting of 6 coated and 4 uncoated pellets, each pellet containing 20 mg trenbolone acetate and 2 mg estradiol).

    (ii) Indications for use. For increased rate of weight gain and improved feed efficiency for up to 200 days after implantation.

    (iii) Limitations. Administer implant subcutaneously in the ear only. Do not use in lactating dairy cows or in animals intended for subsequent breeding. Use in these cattle may cause drug residues in milk and/or in calves born to these cows. Do not use in calves to be processed for veal. A withdrawal period has not been established for this product in pre-ruminating calves. Effectiveness and animal safety in veal calves have not been established. Not approved for repeated implantation (reimplantation) with this or any other cattle ear implant during the production phase(s) identified on labeling (beef heifers fed in confinement for slaughter) unless otherwise indicated on labeling because safety and effectiveness have not been evaluated.

    PART 524—OPHTHALMIC AND TOPICAL DOSAGE FORM NEW ANIMAL DRUGS 12. The authority citation for part 524 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    21 U.S.C. 360b.

    13. In § 524.998, add paragraph (c)(2) to read as follows:
    § 524.998 Fluralaner.

    (c) * * *

    (2) Cats—(i) Amount. Administer topically as a single dose every 12 weeks according to the label dosage schedule to provide a minimum dose of 18.2 mg/lb (40 mg/kg) body weight. May be administered every 8 weeks in case of potential exposure to D. variabilis ticks.

    (ii) Indications for use. Kills adult fleas; for the treatment and prevention of flea infestations (C. felis) and the treatment and control of I. scapularis (black-legged tick) infestations for 12 weeks in cats and kittens 6 months of age and older, and weighing 2.6 lb or greater; for the treatment and control of D. variabilis (American dog tick) infestations for 8 weeks in cats and kittens 6 months of age and older, and weighing 2.6 lb or greater.

    (iii) Limitations. Federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian.

    PART 558—NEW ANIMAL DRUGS FOR USE IN ANIMAL FEEDS 14. The authority citation for part 558 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    21 U.S.C. 354, 360b, 360ccc, 360ccc-1, 371.

    15. In § 558.4, in paragraph (d), in the “Category II” table, revise the row entries for “Neomycin” and “Oxytetracycline” to read as follows:
    § 558.4 Requirement of a medicated feed mill license.

    (d) * * *

    Category II Drug Assay limits percent Type A 1 Type B maximum
  • (100x)
  • Assay limits percent Type B/C 2
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * Neomycin 80-120 20 g/lb (4.4%) 70-125 Oxytetracycline 80-120 20 g/lb (4.4%) 65-135 *         *         *         *         *         *         * 1 Percent of labeled amount. 2 Values given represent ranges for either Type B or Type C medicated feeds. For those drugs that have two range limit, the first set is for a Type B medicated feed and the second set is for a Type C medicated feed. These values (ranges) have been assigned in order to provide for the possibility of dilution of a Type B medicated feed with lower assay limits to make a Type C medicated feed.
    § 558.128 [Amended]
    16. In § 558.128, in paragraphs (e)(4)(iii) and (xii) and (e)(5)(ii) and (iii), in the “Sponsor” column, add “069254” after “054771”; in paragraphs (e)(4)(xi) and (xiii), in the “Limitations” column, remove the third sentence “Withdraw 24 hours prior to slaughter.”; and in paragraph (e)(6)(v), remove “Sponsor. See No. 054771” and in its place add “Sponsors. See Nos. 054771 and 069254”.
    § 558.625 [Amended]
    17. Amend § 558.625 as follows: a. In paragraphs (e)(1)(vii) and (ix), in the “Tylosin grams/ton” column, remove “40 to 100” and in its place add “40 or 100”; b. In paragraph (e)(2)(ii), in the “Limitations” column, add “See §§ 558.311(d) and 558.342(d) in this chapter.” after the last sentence; c. In paragraph (e)(2)(iii), in the “Limitations ” column, add “See § 558.342(d) in this chapter.” after the last sentence; d. In paragraph (e)(2)(vi), in the “Limitations” column, remove “See § 558.355(d) in this chapter” and in its place add “See §§ 558.311(d) and 558.355(d) in this chapter.”; e. In paragraph (e)(2)(vii), in the “Limitations” column, remove “See § 558.355(d) in this chapter” and in its place add “See §§ 558.342(d) and 558.355(d) in this chapter.”; f. In paragraphs (e)(2)(viii), (ix), and (x), in the “Limitations” column, remove “See § 558.355(d) in this chapter” and in its place add “See §§ 558.355(d) and 558.500(d) in this chapter.” g. In paragraph (e)(2)(xi) in the “Limitations” column, remove “See § 558.355(d) in this chapter.” and in its place add “See §§ 558.342(d), 558.355(d), and 558.500(d) in this chapter.”; h. In paragraphs (e)(2)(xii) and (xiii), in the “Limitations” column, remove “See § 558.355(d) in this chapter.” and in its place add “See §§ 558.355(d) and 558.665(d) in this chapter.”; and i. In paragraphs (e)(2)(xiv) and (xv), in the “Limitations” column, remove “See § 558.355(d) in this chapter.” and in its place add “See §§ 558.342(d), 558.355(d) and 558.665(d) in this chapter.” Dated: September 7, 2017. Anna K. Abram, Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Planning, Legislation, and Analysis.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19602 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 100 [Docket No. USCG-2017-0864] RIN 1625-AA08 Regattas and Marine Parades; Great Lakes Annual Marine Events AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of enforcement of regulation.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard will enforce special local regulations for the Cannonade cannon fire event on Lake St. Clair on October 21, 2017 to provide for the safety of life on navigable waterways during this event. During the enforcement periods, the Coast Guard will enforce restrictions upon, and control movement of, vessels in a specified area immediately prior to, during, and after this event.

    DATES:

    The regulations in 33 CFR 100.917 will be enforced from 1:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. on October 21, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this document, call or email Tracy Girard, Prevention Department, telephone (313)568-9564, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Coast Guard will enforce the following special local regulations listed in 33 CFR part 100, Safety of Life on Navigable Waters, on the following dates and times:

    (1) § 100.917 The Old Club Cannonade, Harsens Island, MI. This special local regulation will be enforced from 1:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. on October 21, 2017.

    Special Local Regulations

    In accordance with § 100.901, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within these regulated areas is prohibited unless authorized by the Coast Guard patrol commander (PATCOM). The PATCOM may restrict vessel operation within the regulated area to vessels having particular operating characteristics.

    The PATCOM may direct the anchoring, mooring, or movement of any vessel within this regulated area. A succession of sharp, short signals by whistle or horn from vessels patrolling the area under the direction of the PATCOM shall serve as a signal to stop. Vessels so signaled shall stop and shall comply with the orders of the PATCOM. Failure to do so may result in expulsion from the area, a Notice of Violation for failure to comply, or both.

    If it is deemed necessary for the protection of life and property, the PATCOM may terminate the marine event or the operation of any vessel within the regulated area.

    In accordance with the general regulations in § 100.35 of this part, the Coast Guard will patrol the regatta area under the direction of a designated Coast Guard Patrol Commander. The PATCOM may be contacted on Channel 16 (156.8 MHz) by the call sign “Coast Guard Patrol Commander.”

    The “on-scene representative” of the Captain of the Port Detroit is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer who has been designated by the Captain of the Port Detroit to act on his behalf. The on-scene representative of the Captain of the Port Detroit will be aboard either a Coast Guard or Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel. The Captain of the Port Detroit or his designated on scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.

    The rules in this section shall not apply to vessels participating in the event or to government vessels patrolling the regulated area in the performance of their assigned duties.

    This document is issued under authority of 33 CFR 100.35 and 5 U.S.C. 552(a). If the Captain of the Port determines that this special local regulation need not be enforced for the full duration stated in this document, he may suspend such enforcement and notify the public of the suspension via a Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

    Dated: September 11, 2017. Jeffrey W. Novak, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Detroit.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19741 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG-2017-0799] Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Sacramento River, Sacramento, CA 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 Tower Drawbridge across the Sacramento River, mile 59.0, at Sacramento, CA. The deviation is necessary to allow the community to participate in the Farm-to-Fork Dinner event. This deviation allows the bridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position during the deviation period.

    DATES:

    This deviation is effective from 1 p.m. through 10 p.m. on September 24, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this deviation, USCG-2017-0799, 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 Carl T. Hausner, Chief, Bridge Section, Eleventh Coast Guard District; telephone 510-437-3516; email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The California Department of Transportation has requested a temporary change to the operation of the Tower Drawbridge over the Sacramento River, mile 59.0, at Sacramento, CA. The drawbridge navigation span provides a vertical clearance of 30 feet above Mean High Water in the closed-to-navigation position. The draw operates as required by 33 CFR 117.189(a). Navigation on the waterway is commercial and recreational.

    The drawspan will be secured in the closed-to-navigation position from 1 p.m. through 10 p.m. on September 24, 2017, to allow the community to participate in the Farm-to-Fork Dinner event. This temporary deviation has been coordinated with the waterway users. No objections to the proposed temporary deviation were raised.

    Vessels able to pass through the bridge in the closed position may do so at anytime. In the event of an emergency the draw can open on signal if at least two hours notice is given to the bridge operator. There are no immediate alternate routes for vessels to pass. The Coast Guard will also 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 regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: September 13, 2017. Carl T. Hausner, District Bridge Chief, Eleventh Coast Guard District.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19754 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG-2017-0832] Safety Zone; Recurring Annual Event Held in Coast Guard Sector Boston Captain of the Port Zone AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of enforcement of regulation.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard will enforce one safety zone within the Captain of the Port Boston zone on September 17, 2017. This action is necessary to ensure the safety of vessels, spectators, and participants from hazards associated with swim event. During the enforcement period, no person or vessel, except for the safety vessels assisting with the events, may enter the safety zones without permission of the Captain of the Port (COTP) or their designated on-scene representative.

    DATES:

    The regulation in 33 CFR 165.118 will be enforced for the safety zone identified in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below on September 17, 2017, from 8:50 a.m. to 9:50 a.m.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions about this notice of enforcement, call or email Mark Cutter, Sector Boston Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 617-223-4000, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Coast Guard will enforce the safety zone listed in Table 1 from 33 CFR 165.118 on the specified dates and times specified:

    Table 1 From 33 CFR 165.118 Name Location Date Time 9.7 Boston Harbor Sharkfest Swim All waters of Boston Inner Harbor, Piers Park East Boston to Fan Pier, South Boston, MA within the following points (NAD 83): 42°21.7′ N, 071°02.1′ W; 42°21.8′ N, 071°02.4′ W; 42°21.3′ N, 071°02.9′ W; 42°21.3′ N, 071°02.3′ W September 17, 2017 8:50 a.m. to 9:50 a.m.

    This notice of enforcement is issued under authority of 33 CFR 165.118 and 5 U.S.C. 552(a). During the enforcement period, persons and vessels are prohibited from entering into, transiting through, mooring, or anchoring within the safety zone unless they receive permission from the COTP or designated representative. In addition to this notice of enforcement in the Federal Register, the Coast Guard plans to provide mariners with advanced notification of this enforcement period via the Local Notice to Mariners.

    Dated: September 12, 2017. B.W. Kelly, Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting, Captain of the Port Boston.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19752 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0208; FRL-9967-84-Region 4] Air Plan Approval; Alabama: Infrastructure Requirements for the 2012 PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final action to approve portions of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) submission, submitted by the State of Alabama, through the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM), for inclusion into the Alabama SIP, on December 9, 2015, to demonstrate that the State meets the infrastructure requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) for the 2012 annual fine particulate matter (PM2.5) national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The CAA requires that each state adopt and submit a SIP for the implementation, maintenance and enforcement of each NAAQS promulgated by EPA, which is commonly referred to as an “infrastructure SIP submission.” ADEM certified that the Alabama SIP contains provisions that ensure the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS is implemented, enforced, and maintained in Alabama. EPA has determined that portions of Alabama's SIP satisfy certain required infrastructure elements for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS.

    DATES:

    This rule will be effective October 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0208. All documents in the docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Tiereny Bell, Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Ms. Bell can be reached via electronic mail at [email protected] or via telephone at (404) 562-9088.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background and Overview

    On December 14, 2012, EPA promulgated a revised primary annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The standard was strengthened from 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3) to 12.0 μg/m3. See 78 FR 3086 (January 15, 2013). Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) of the CAA, states are required to submit SIPs meeting the applicable requirements of section 110(a)(2) within three years after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS or within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe. Section 110(a)(2) requires states to address basic SIP elements such as requirements for monitoring, basic program requirements and legal authority that are designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. States were required to submit such SIPs for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS to EPA no later than December 9, 2015.1

    1 In these infrastructure SIP submissions States generally certify evidence of compliance with sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA through a combination of state regulations and statutes, some of which have been incorporated into the federally-approved SIP. In addition, certain federally-approved, non-SIP regulations may also be appropriate for demonstrating compliance with sections 110(a)(1) and (2). Throughout this rulemaking, unless otherwise indicated, the term “ADEM Administrative Code (Admin. Code r).” indicates that the cited regulation has either been approved, or submitted for approval into Alabama's federally-approved SIP. The term “Alabama Code” (Ala. Code) indicates cited Alabama state statutes, which are not a part of the SIP unless otherwise indicated.

    In a proposed rulemaking published on June 29, 2017 (82 FR 29448), EPA proposed to approve portions of Alabama's December 9, 2015, SIP submission for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The details of Alabama's submission and the rationale for EPA's actions for this final rule are explained in the June 29, 2017, proposed rulemaking. Comments on the proposed rulemaking were due on or before July 31, 2017. EPA received no adverse comments.

    II. Final Action

    EPA is taking final action to approve Alabama's infrastructure submission submitted on December 9, 2015, for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS for the infrastructure SIP requirements, with the exception of the interstate transport requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) (prongs 1 and 2) and visibility of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 4), and the state board requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii). EPA notes that the Agency is not approving any specific rule, but rather approving that Alabama's already approved SIP meets certain CAA requirements. With respect to the interstate transport provisions pertaining to contribution to nonattainment or interference with maintenance in other states of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) (prongs 1 and 2) and visibility of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 4), and the state board requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii). EPA will consider these requirements in relation to Alabama's 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS infrastructure submission in a separate rulemaking. EPA is taking final action to approve all other elements of Alabama's infrastructure SIP submissions for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS because the submission is consistent with section 110 of the CAA.

    III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by November 17, 2017. 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 sec

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: September 5, 2017. Onis “Trey” Glenn III, Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

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

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Subpart B—Alabama 2. In § 52.50, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding the entry “110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS” at the end of the table to read as follows:
    § 52.50 Identification of plan.

    (e) * * *

    EPA Approved Alabama Non-Regulatory Provisions Name of nonregulatory SIP provision Applicable geographic or nonattainment area State submittal date/effective date EPA approval date Explanation *         *         *         *         *         *         * 110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS Alabama 12/9/2015 9/18/2017, [insert Federal Register citation] With the exception of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs 1, 2 and 4) and the state board requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii).
    [FR Doc. 2017-19699 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R04-OAR-2017-0014; FRL-9967-83-Region 4] Air Plan Approval; KY; Removal of Stage II Gasoline Vapor Recovery Program AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving changes to the Kentucky State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the Commonwealth of Kentucky, through the Kentucky Energy and Environmental Cabinet, on November 10, 2016, for the Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control District (District). This SIP revision removes Stage II vapor control requirements for new and upgraded gasoline dispensing facilities, and allows for the decommissioning of existing Stage II equipment in Jefferson County, Kentucky. EPA determined that Kentucky's November 10, 2016, SIP revision is approvable because it is consistent with the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).

    DATES:

    This rule will be effective October 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2017-0014. All documents in the docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information may not be publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding federal holidays.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kelly Sheckler, Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, Region 4, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Ms. Sheckler's telephone number is (404) 562-9222. She can also be reached via electronic mail at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    On March 4, 1993, the Commonwealth of Kentucky submitted a SIP revision to address the Stage II requirements 1 for Jefferson County, Kentucky.2 EPA approved that SIP revision, which contained changes to the Jefferson County portion of Kentucky SIP at Regulation 6.40, Standards of Performance for Gasoline Transfer to Motor Vehicle (Stage II Vapor Recovery and Control Systems), in a document published on March 6, 1996 (61 FR 8873). On November 10, 2016, the Commonwealth of Kentucky submitted a SIP revision for Regulation 6.40, Standards of Performance for Gasoline Transfer to Motor Vehicle (Stage II Vapor Recovery and Control Systems). In this action, EPA is approving Louisville's request to revise the Stage II requirements in the Louisville Kentucky Area. Specifically, it seeks to remove the Stage II requirements in Jefferson County, Kentucky, and to add requirements for decommissioning the stations. EPA published a proposed rulemaking on July 3, 2017, to approve this SIP revision. The details of Kentucky's submittal and the rationale for EPA's action are explained in the proposed rulemaking. See 82 FR 30809. The comment period for this proposed rulemaking closed on August 2, 2017. EPA did not receive any comments, adverse or otherwise, during the public comment period.

    1 Stage II is a system designed to capture displaced vapors that emerge from inside a vehicle's fuel tank, when gasoline is dispensed into the tank. There are two basic types of Stage II systems, the balance type and the vacuum assist type.

    2 On November 6, 1991, EPA designated and classified Jefferson County in Kentucky as a moderate nonattainment area for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. See 56 FR 56694. The “moderate” classification triggered various statutory requirements for the Area, including the requirement pursuant to section 182(b)(3) of the CAA to require all owners and operators of gasoline dispensing systems to install and operate Stage II. EPA redesignated the Louisville portion of the Area to attainment for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, effective July 31, 2002. See 67 FR 49600.

    II. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of Jefferson County portion of Kentucky, regulation 6.40, Standards of Performance for Gasoline Transfer to Motor Vehicle (Stage II Vapor Recovery and Control Systems), effective November 10, 2016, which removes Stage II vapor control requirements for new and upgraded gasoline dispensing facilities in Jefferson County, Kentucky. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials generally available through www.regulations.gov and/or at the EPA Region 4 Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more information).

    Therefore, these materials have been approved by EPA for inclusion in the SIP, have been incorporated by reference by EPA into that plan, are fully federally-enforceable under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the final rulemaking of EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by reference by the Director of the Federal Register in the next update to the SIP compilation.3

    3 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).

    III. Final Action

    EPA is taking final action to approve the November 10, 2016, revision to the Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky SIP, Regulation 6.40, Standards of Performance for Gasoline Transfer to Motor Vehicle (Stage II Vapor Recovery and Control Systems), submitted by the Commonwealth of Kentucky. This action removes Stage II vapor control requirements for new and upgraded gasoline dispensing facilities, and allows for the decommissioning of existing Stage II equipment. EPA has determined that Kentucky's November 10, 2016, SIP revision related to the Louisville's Stage II rules is consistent with the CAA and EPA's regulations and guidance related to removal of Stage II requirements from the SIP and that these changes will not interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment or any other applicable requirement of the CAA, and therefore satisfy section 110(l).

    IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by November 17, 2017. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: September 7, 2017. Onis “Trey” Glenn, III, Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

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

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Subpart S—Kentucky 2. Section 52.920(c), Table 2, is amended under “Reg 6—Standards of Performance for Existing Affected Facilities” by revising the entry for “6.40” to read as follows:
    § 52.920 Identification of plan.

    (c) * * *

    Table 2—EPA Approved Jefferson County Regulations for Kentucky Reg Title/subject EPA
  • approval date
  • Federal Register notice District
  • effective date
  • Explanation
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * Reg 6—Standards of Performance for Existing Affected Facilities *         *         *         *         *         *         * 6.40 Standards of Performance for Gasoline Transfer to Motor Vehicles (Stage II Vapor Recovery and Control System) 9/18/2017 [Insert citation of publication] 11/10/2016 *         *         *         *         *         *         *
    [FR Doc. 2017-19697 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 55 [OAR-2004-0091; FRL-9962-56-Region 9] Outer Continental Shelf Air Regulations; Consistency Update for California AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing the updates of the Outer Continental Shelf (“OCS”) Air Regulations proposed in the Federal Register on June 17, 2016 and December 12, 2016. Requirements applying to OCS sources located within 25 miles of States' seaward boundaries must be updated periodically to remain consistent with the requirements of the corresponding onshore area (“COA”), as mandated by section 328(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990 (“the Act”). The portions of the OCS air regulations that are being updated pertain to the requirements for OCS sources for which the Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District (“Santa Barbara County APCD”) and Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (“Ventura County APCD”) are the designated COA. The intended effect of approving the OCS requirements for the Santa Barbara County APCD and Ventura County APCD is to regulate emissions from OCS sources in accordance with the requirements onshore. The changes to the existing requirements discussed in this document will be incorporated by reference into the Code of Federal Regulations and listed in the appendix to the OCS air regulations.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective on October 18, 2017. The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of October 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    EPA has established docket number OAR-2004-0091 for this action. The index to the docket is available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material), and some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Christine Vineyard, Air Division (Air-4), U.S. EPA Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, (415) 947-4125, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Throughout this document, the terms “we,” “us,” or “our” refer to U.S. EPA.

    Organization of this document: The following outline is provided to aid in locating information in this preamble.

    I. Proposed Action II. Public Comments and EPA Responses III. EPA Action IV. Incorporation by Reference V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Proposed Action

    On June 17, 2016 (81 FR 39607) and December 12, 2016 (81 FR 39607), EPA proposed to incorporate various Santa Barbara County APCD and Ventura County APCD air pollution control requirements into the OCS Air Regulations at 40 CFR part 55. We are incorporating these requirements in response to the submittal of these rules by the Districts. EPA has evaluated the proposed requirements to ensure that they are rationally related to the attainment or maintenance of federal or state ambient air quality standards or Part C of title I of the Act, that they are not designed expressly to prevent exploration and development of the OCS and that they are applicable to OCS sources. 40 CFR 55.1. EPA has also evaluated the rules to ensure that they are not arbitrary or capricious. 40 CFR 55.12(e).

    Section 328(a) of the Act requires that EPA establish requirements to control air pollution from OCS sources located within 25 miles of states' seaward boundaries that are the same as onshore requirements. To comply with this statutory mandate, EPA must incorporate applicable onshore rules into part 55 as they exist onshore. This limits EPA's flexibility in deciding which requirements will be incorporated into part 55 and prevents EPA from making substantive changes to the requirements it incorporates. As a result, EPA may be incorporating rules into part 55 that do not conform to all of EPA's state implementation plan (SIP) guidance or certain requirements of the Act. Consistency updates may result in the inclusion of state or local rules or regulations into part 55, even though the same rules may ultimately be disapproved for inclusion as part of the SIP. Inclusion in the OCS rule does not imply that a rule meets the requirements of the Act for SIP approval, nor does it imply that the rule will be approved by EPA for inclusion in the SIP.

    II. Public Comments and EPA Responses

    EPA's proposed actions provided 30-day public comment periods. During these periods, we received no comments on the proposed actions.

    III. EPA Action

    No comments were submitted. Therefore, as authorized in section 328(a)(1) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7627, the EPA is taking final action to incorporate the proposed changes into 40 CFR part 55. Section 328(a) of the Act requires that EPA establish requirements to control air pollution from OCS sources located within 25 miles of states' seaward boundaries that are the same as onshore requirements. To comply with this statutory mandate, EPA must incorporate applicable onshore rules into Part 55 as they exist onshore.

    IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Santa Barbara County APCD and Ventura County APCD requirements described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 55 set forth below. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region IX Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more information).

    V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to establish requirements to control air pollution from OCS sources located within 25 miles of States' seaward boundaries that are the same as onshore air control requirements. To comply with this statutory mandate, EPA must incorporate applicable onshore rules into part 55 as they exist onshore. 42 U.S.C. 7627(a)(1); 40 CFR 55.12. Thus, in promulgating OCS consistency updates, EPA's role is to maintain consistency between OCS regulations and the regulations of onshore areas, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this action simply updates the existing OCS requirements to make them consistent with requirements onshore, without the exercise of any policy discretion by EPA. For that reason, this action:

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

    • 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 (Publ. L. 104-4);

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

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

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

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

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

    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 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, nor does it impose substantial direct compliance costs on tribal governments, nor preempt tribal law.

    Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., 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. OMB has approved the information collection requirements contained in 40 CFR part 55 and, by extension, this update to the rules, and has assigned OMB control number 2060-0249. Notice of OMB's approval of EPA Information Collection Request (“ICR”) No. 1601.07 was published in the Federal Register on February 17, 2009 (74 FR 7432). The approval expires January 31, 2012. As EPA previously indicated (70 FR 65897-65898 (November 1, 2005)), the annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for collection of information under 40 CFR part 55 is estimated to average 549 hours per response, using the definition of burden provided in 44 U.S.C. 3502(2).

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

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by November 17, 2017. 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 55

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Nitrogen oxides, Outer continental shelf, Ozone, Particulate matter, Permits, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.

    Dated: April 20, 2017. Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

    Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 55, is amended as follows:

    PART 55—OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF AIR REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 55 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    Section 328 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.) as amended by Public Law 101-549.

    2. Section 55.14 is amended by revising paragraphs (e)(3)(ii)(F) and (H) to read as follows:
    § 55.14 Requirements that apply to OCS sources located within 25 miles of States' seaward boundaries, by State.

    (e) * * *

    (3) * * *

    (ii) * * *

    (F) Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District Requirements Applicable to OCS Sources, April 2017.

    (H) Ventura County Air Pollution Control District Requirements Applicable to OCS Sources, parts 1 and 2, April 2017.

    3. Appendix A to part 55 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(6) and (8) under the heading “California” to read as follows: Appendix A to Part 55—Listing of State and Local Requirements Incorporated by Reference Into Part 55, by State California

    (b) * * *

    (6) The following requirements are contained in Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District Requirements Applicable to OCS Sources, April 2017:

    Rule 102 Definitions (Revised 08/25/16) Rule 103 Severability (Adopted 10/23/78) Rule 105 Applicability (Revised 08/25/16) Rule 107 Emergencies (Adopted 04/19/01) Rule 201 Permits Required (Revised06/19/08) Rule 202 Exemptions to Rule 201 (Revised 08/25/16) Rule 203 Transfer (Revised 04/17/97) Rule 204 Applications (Revised 08/25/16) Rule 205 Standards for Granting Permits (Revised 04/17/97) Rule 206 Conditional Approval of Authority to Construct or Permit to Operate (Revised 10/15/91) Rule 207 Denial of Application (Adopted 10/23/78) Rule 210 Fees (Revised 03/17/05) Rule 212 Emission Statements (Adopted10/20/92) Rule 301 Circumvention (Adopted10/23/78) Rule 302 Visible Emissions (Revised6/1981) Rule 303 Nuisance (Adopted 10/23/78) Rule 304 Particulate Matter-Northern Zone (Adopted 10/23/78) Rule 305 Particulate Matter Concentration-Southern Zone (Adopted 10/23/78) Rule 306 Dust and Fumes-Northern Zone (Adopted 10/23/78) Rule 307 Particulate Matter Emission Weight Rate-Southern Zone (Adopted 10/23/78) Rule 308 Incinerator Burning (Adopted10/23/78) Rule 309 Specific Contaminants (Adopted 10/23/78) Rule 310 Odorous Organic Sulfides (Adopted 10/23/78) Rule 311 Sulfur Content of Fuels (Adopted 10/23/78) Rule 312 Open Fires (Adopted 10/02/90) Rule 316 Storage and Transfer of Gasoline (Revised 01/15/09) Rule 317 Organic Solvents (Adopted10/23/78) Rule 318 Vacuum Producing Devices or Systems-Southern Zone (Adopted10/23/78) Rule 321 Solvent Cleaning Operations (Revised 06/21/12) Rule 322 Metal Surface Coating Thinner and Reducer (Adopted 10/23/78) Rule 323 Architectural Coatings (Revised 11/15/01) Rule 323.1 Architectural Coatings (Adopted 06/19/14, Effective 01/01/15) Rule 324 Disposal and Evaporation of Solvents (Adopted 10/23/78) Rule 325 Crude Oil Production and Separation (Revised 07/19/01) Rule 326 Storage of Reactive Organic Compound Liquids (Revised 01/18/01) Rule 327 Organic Liquid Cargo Tank Vessel Loading (Revised 12/16/85) Rule 328 Continuous Emission Monitoring (Adopted 10/23/78) Rule 330 Surface Coating of Metal Parts and Products (Revised 06/21/12) Rule 331 Fugitive Emissions Inspection and Maintenance (Revised 12/10/91) Rule 332 Petroleum Refinery Vacuum Producing Systems, Wastewater Separators and Process Turnarounds (Adopted 06/11/79) Rule 333 Control of Emissions from Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (Adopted 06/19/08) Rule 342 Control of Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX) from Boilers, Steam Generators and Process Heaters) (Revised 04/17/97) Rule 343 Petroleum Storage Tank Degassing (Adopted 12/14/93) Rule 344 Petroleum Sumps, Pits, and Well Cellars (Adopted 11/10/94) Rule 346 Loading of Organic Liquid Cargo Vessels (Revised 01/18/01) Rule 349 Polyester Resin Operations (Revised 06/21/12) Rule 352 Natural Gas-Fired Fan-Type Central Furnaces and Residential Water Heaters (Revised 10/20/11) Rule 353 Adhesives and Sealants (Revised 06/21/12) Rule 359 Flares and Thermal Oxidizers (Adopted 06/28/94) Rule 360 Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers (Adopted 10/17/02) Rule 361 Small Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters (Adopted 01/17/08) Rule 370 Potential to Emit—Limitations for Part 70 Sources (Revised 01/20/11) Rule 505 Breakdown Conditions Sections A.,B.1, and D. only (Adopted 10/23/78) Rule 603 Emergency Episode Plans (Adopted 06/15/81) Rule 702 General Conformity (Adopted 10/20/94) Rule 801 New Source Review—Definitions and General Requirements (Revised 08/25/16) Rule 802 New Source Review (Revised 08/25/16) Rule 804 Emission Offsets (Revised 08/25/16) Rule 805 Air Quality Impact Analysis, Modeling, Monitoring, and Air Quality Increment Consumption (Revised 08/25/16) Rule 806 Emission Reduction Credits (Revised 08/25/16) Rule 808 New Source Review for Major Sources of Hazardous Air Pollutants (Adopted 05/20/99) Rule 809 Federal Minor Source New Source Review (Revised 08/25/16) Rule 810 Federal Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) (Revised 06/20/13) Rule 1301 Part 70 Operating Permits—General Information (Revised 08/25/16) Rule 1302 Part 70 Operating Permits—Permit Application (Adopted 11/09/93) Rule 1303 Part 70 Operating Permits—Permits (Revised 01/18/01) Rule 1304 Part 70 Operating Permits—Issuance, Renewal, Modification and Reopening (Revised 01/18/01) Rule 1305 Part 70 Operating Permits—Enforcement (Adopted 11/09/93)

    (8) The following requirements are contained in Ventura County Air Pollution Control District Requirements Applicable to OCS Sources, parts 1 and 2, April 2017:

    Rule 2 Definitions (Revised 04/12/11) Rule 5 Effective Date (Revised 04/13/04) Rule 6 Severability (Revised 11/21/78) Rule 7 Boundaries (Adopted 06/14/77) Rule 10 Permits Required (Revised 04/13/04) Rule 11 Definition for Regulation II (Amended 03/14/06) Rule 12 Applications for Permits (Adopted 06/13/95) Rule 13 Action on Applications for an Authority To Construct (Adopted 06/13/95) Rule 14 Action on Applications for a Permit To Operate (Adopted 06/13/95) Rule 15.1 Sampling and Testing Facilities (Adopted 10/12/93) Rule 16 BACT Certification (Adopted 06/13/95) Rule 19 Posting of Permits (Revised 05/23/72) Rule 20 Transfer of Permit (Revised 05/23/72) Rule 23 Exemptions From Permits (Revised 11/12/13) Rule 24 Source Recordkeeping, Reporting, and Emission Statements (Revised 09/15/92) Rule 26 New Source Review—General (Amended 03/14/06) Rule 26.1 New Source Review—Definitions (Revised 11/14/06) Rule 26.2 New Source Review—Requirements (Revised 03/14/06) Rule 26.3 New Source Review—Exemptions (Revised 3/14/06) Rule 26.6 New Source Review—Calculations (Revised 3/14/06) Rule 26.8 New Source Review—Permit To Operate (Adopted 10/22/91) Rule 26.11 New Source Review—ERC Evaluation at Time of Use (Adopted 05/14/02) Rule 26.12 Federal Major Modifications (Adopted 06/27/06) Rule 26.13 New Source Review—Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) (Revised 11/10/15) Rule 28 Revocation of Permits (Revised 07/18/72) Rule 29 Conditions on Permits (Revised 03/14/06) Rule 30 Permit Renewal (Revised 04/13/04) Rule 32 Breakdown Conditions: Emergency Variances, A., B.1., and D. only. (Revised 02/20/79) Rule 33 Part 70 Permits-General (Revised 04/12/11) Rule 33.1 Part 70 Permits—Definitions (Revised 04/12/11) Rule 33.2 Part 70 Permits—Application Contents (Revised 04/10/01) Rule 33.3 Part 70 Permits—Permit Content (Revised 09/12/06) Rule 33.4 Part 70 Permits—Operational Flexibility (Revised 04/10/01) Rule 33.5 Part 70 Permits—Timeframes for Applications, Review and Issuance (Adopted 10/12/93) Rule 33.6 Part 70 Permits—Permit Term and Permit Reissuance (Adopted 10/12/93) Rule 33.7 Part 70 Permits—Notification (Revised 04/10/01) Rule 33.8 Part 70 Permits—Reopening of Permits (Adopted 10/12/93) Rule 33.9 Part 70 Permits—Compliance Provisions (Revised 04/10/01) Rule 33.10 Part 70 Permits—General Part 70 Permits (Adopted 10/12/93) Rule 34 Acid Deposition Control (Adopted 03/14/95) Rule 35 Elective Emission Limits (Revised 04/12/11) Rule 36 New Source Review—Hazardous Air Pollutants (Adopted 10/06/98) Rule 42 Permit Fees (Revised 04/12/16) Rule 44 Exemption Evaluation Fee (Revised 04/08/08) Rule 45 Plan Fees (Adopted 06/19/90) Rule 45.2 Asbestos Removal Fees (Revised 08/04/92) Rule 47 Source Test, Emission Monitor, and Call-Back Fees (Adopted 06/22/99) Rule 50 Opacity (Revised 04/13/04) Rule 52 Particulate Matter—Concentration (Grain Loading)(Revised 04/13/04) Rule 53 Particulate Matter—Process Weight (Revised 04/13/04) Rule 54 Sulfur Compounds (Revised 01/14/14) Rule 56 Open Burning (Revised 11/11/03) Rule 57 Incinerators (Revised 01/11/05) Rule 57.1  Particulate Matter Emissions From Fuel Burning Equipment (Adopted 01/11/05) Rule 62.7  Asbestos-Demolition and Renovation (Adopted 06/16/92, Effective 09/01/92) Rule 63  Separation and Combination of Emissions (Revised 11/21/78) Rule 64  Sulfur Content of Fuels (Revised 04/13/99) Rule 68  Carbon Monoxide (Revised 04/13/04) Rule 71  Crude Oil and Reactive Organic Compound Liquids (Revised 12/13/94) Rule 71.1  Crude Oil Production and Separation (Revised 06/16/92) Rule 71.2  Storage of Reactive Organic Compound Liquids (Revised 09/26/89) Rule 71.3  Transfer of Reactive Organic Compound Liquids (Revised 06/16/92) Rule 71.4  Petroleum Sumps, Pits, Ponds, and Well Cellars (Revised 06/08/93) Rule 71.5  Glycol Dehydrators (Adopted 12/13/94) Rule 72  New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) (Revised 09/9/08) Rule 73  National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS) (Revised 09/9/08) Rule 74  Specific Source Standards (Adopted 07/06/76) Rule 74.1  Abrasive Blasting (Revised 11/12/91) Rule 74.2  Architectural Coatings (Revised 01/12/10) Rule 74.6  Surface Cleaning and Degreasing (Revised 11/11/03—effective 07/01/04) Rule 74.6.1  Batch Loaded Vapor Degreasers (Adopted 11/11/03—effective 07/01/04) Rule 74.7  Fugitive Emissions of Reactive Organic Compounds at Petroleum Refineries and Chemical Plants (Revised 10/10/95) Rule 74.8  Refinery Vacuum Producing Systems, Waste-Water Separators and Process Turnarounds (Revised 07/05/83) Rule 74.9  Stationary Internal Combustion Engines (Revised 11/08/05) Rule 74.10  Components at Crude Oil Production Facilities and Natural Gas Production and Processing Facilities (Revised 03/10/98) Rule 74.11  Natural Gas-Fired Residential Water Heaters—Control of NOX (Revised 05/11/10) Rule 74.11.1  Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers (Revised 09/11/12) Rule 74.12  Surface Coating of Metal Parts and Products (Revised 04/08/08) Rule 74.15  Boilers, Steam Generators and Process Heaters (5 MMBTUs and greater) (Revised 11/08/94) Rule 74.15.1  Boilers, Steam Generators and Process Heaters (1 to 5 MMBTUs) (Revised 06/23/15) Rule 74.16  Oil Field Drilling Operations (Adopted 01/08/91) Rule 74.20  Adhesives and Sealants (Revised 09/11/12) Rule 74.23  Stationary Gas Turbines (Revised 1/08/02) Rule 74.24  Marine Coating Operations (Revised 09/11/12) Rule 74.24.1  Pleasure Craft Coating and Commercial Boatyard Operations (Revised 01/08/02) Rule 74.26  Crude Oil Storage Tank Degassing Operations (Adopted 11/08/94) Rule 74.27  Gasoline and ROC Liquid Storage Tank Degassing Operations (Adopted 11/08/94) Rule 74.28  Asphalt Roofing Operations (Adopted 05/10/94) Rule 74.30  Wood Products Coatings (Revised 06/27/06) Rule 74.31  Metal Working Fluids and Direct-Contact Lubricants (Adopted 11/12/13) Rule 75  Circumvention (Revised 11/27/78) Rule 101  Sampling and Testing Facilities (Revised 05/23/72) Rule 102  Source Tests (Revised 04/13/04) Rule 103  Continuous Monitoring Systems (Revised 02/09/99) Rule 154  Stage 1 Episode Actions (Adopted 09/17/91) Rule 155  Stage 2 Episode Actions (Adopted 09/17/91) Rule 156  Stage 3 Episode Actions (Adopted 09/17/91) Rule 158  Source Abatement Plans (Adopted 09/17/91) Rule 159  Traffic Abatement Procedures (Adopted 09/17/91) Rule 220  General Conformity (Adopted 05/09/95) Rule 230  Notice to Comply (Revised 9/9/08)
    [FR Doc. 2017-19704 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 423 [EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0819; FRL-9967-90-OW] RIN 2040-AF76 Postponement of Certain Compliance Dates for the Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    Under the Clean Water Act (“CWA”), The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) intends to conduct a rulemaking to potentially revise certain best available technology economically achievable (“BAT”) effluent limitations and pretreatment standards for existing sources (“PSES”) for the steam electric power generating point source category, which were published in the Federal Register on November 3, 2015. EPA is, accordingly, postponing the associated compliance dates in the 2015 Rule. In particular, EPA is postponing the earliest compliance dates for the new, more stringent, BAT effluent limitations and PSES for flue gas desulfurization (“FGD”) wastewater and bottom ash transport water in the 2015 Rule for a period of two years. At this time, EPA does not intend to conduct a rulemaking that would potentially revise the new, more stringent BAT effluent limitations and pretreatment standards in the 2015 Rule for fly ash transport water, flue gas mercury control wastewater, and gasification wastewater, or any of the other requirements in the 2015 Rule. As such, EPA is not changing the compliance dates for the BAT limitations and PSES established by the 2015 Rule for these wastestreams. EPA's action to postpone certain compliance dates in the 2015 Rule is intended to preserve the status quo for FGD wastewater and bottom ash transport water until EPA completes its next rulemaking concerning those wastestreams, and it thus does not otherwise amend the effluent limitations guidelines and standards for the steam electric power generating point source category.

    DATES:

    The final rule is effective September 18, 2017. In accordance with 40 CFR part 23, this regulation shall be considered issued for purposes of judicial review at 1 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on October 2, 2017. Under section 509(b)(1) of the CWA, judicial review of this regulation can be had only by filing a petition for review in the U.S. Court of Appeals within 120 days after the regulation is considered issued for purposes of judicial review. Under section 509(b)(2), the requirements in this regulation may not be challenged later in civil or criminal proceedings brought by EPA to enforce these requirements.

    ADDRESSES:

    The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-OW-2009-0819. 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, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available electronically through https://www.regulations.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ronald Jordan, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Engineering and Analysis Division; telephone number: (202) 566-1003; email address: [email protected] Electronic copies of this document and related materials are available on EPA's Web site at https://www.epa.gov/eg/steam-electric-power-generatingeffluent-guidelines-2015-final-rule. Copies of this final rule are also available at http://www.regulations.gov.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    On November 3, 2015, the EPA published a final rule amending 40 CFR part 423, the effluent limitations guidelines and standards for the steam electric power generating point source category, under Sections 301, 304, 306, 307, 308, 402, and 501 of the CWA (33 U.S.C. 1311, 1314, 1316, 1317, 1318, 1342, and 1361). The amendments addressed limitations and standards on various wastestreams at steam electric power plants: FGD wastewater, bottom ash transport water, fly ash transport water, flue gas mercury control wastewater, gasification wastewater, and combustion residual leachate. Collectively, this rulemaking is known as the “Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category,” or “2015 Rule.” For further information on the 2015 Rule, see 80 FR 67838 (November 3, 2015).

    EPA received seven petitions for review of the 2015 Rule. The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation issued an order on December 8, 2015, consolidating all of the petitions in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, Southwestern Electric Power Co., et al. v. EPA, No. 15-60821.

    In a letter dated March 24, 2017, the Utility Water Act Group (“UWAG”) 1 submitted a petition for reconsideration of the 2015 Rule which requested that EPA suspend the Rule's approaching deadlines. UWAG supplemented its petition with additional information in a letter dated April 13, 2017. In a letter dated April 5, 2017, the Small Business Administration (“SBA”) Office of Advocacy sent EPA a second petition for reconsideration of the 2015 Rule, which expressly supports UWAG's petition and raises issues that SBA considers to be pertinent to small businesses. The petitions raise wide-ranging objections to the Rule.2 Among other things, the UWAG petition points to new data which they believe show that plants burning subbituminous and bituminous coal cannot comply with the 2015 Rule's limitations and standards for FGD wastewater and questions EPA's characterization of bottom ash transport water. UWAG also requested that EPA suspend or delay the “rule's fast-approaching compliance deadlines while EPA works to reconsider and revise, as appropriate, the substantive requirements of the current rule.”

    1 According to the petition, UWAG is a voluntary, ad hoc, unincorporated group of 163 individual energy companies and three national trade associations of energy companies: Edison Electric Institute, the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, and the American Public Power Association.

    2 A copy of each petition and the supplemental information is included in the docket for this rule, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0819.

    In an April 12, 2017 letter to those who submitted the reconsideration petitions, the Administrator announced his decision to reconsider the 2015 Rule. See DCN SE06612. As explained in that letter, after considering the objections raised in the reconsideration petitions, the Administrator determined that it is appropriate and in the public interest to reconsider the Rule. On April 14, 2017, EPA requested that the Fifth Circuit hold the case in abeyance while the Agency undertook reconsideration. On April 24, 2017, the Fifth Circuit granted the motion and placed the case in abeyance.

    On June 6, 2017 (82 FR 26017), EPA proposed to postpone the compliance dates for the new, more stringent, BAT effluent limitations and PSES in the 2015 Rule for each of the following wastestreams: FGD wastewater, bottom ash transport water, fly ash transport water, flue gas mercury control wastewater, and gasification wastewater, while reconsideration of the 2015 Rule was underway. EPA explained that this postponement would preserve the regulatory status quo with respect to wastestreams subject to the 2015 Rule's new, and more stringent, limitations and standards during reconsideration and that postponement of compliance dates is intended to prevent the unnecessary expenditure of resources until EPA finalizes any rulemaking as a result of its reconsideration of the 2015 Rule. EPA also solicited comments on whether this postponement should be for a specified period of time, for example, two years.

    On August 11, 2017, EPA sent a second letter to those who had requested reconsideration of the 2015 Rule, announcing the Administrator's decision to conduct a new rulemaking to potentially revise the new, more stringent BAT limitations and PSES in the 2015 Rule that apply to two wastestreams: FGD wastewater and bottom ash transport water. See DCN SE06670. On August 14, 2017, EPA filed a motion to govern further proceedings in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which explained that EPA intends to conduct further rulemaking to potentially revise the new, more stringent BAT/PSES requirements in the 2015 Rule applicable to FGD wastewater and bottom ash transport water, and requested, in part, that the Court sever and hold in abeyance all judicial proceedings concerning portions of the 2015 Rule related to those particular requirements. On August 22, 2017, the Court granted EPA's motion.

    In an earlier action, EPA administratively postponed certain compliance dates that had not yet passed in part of the 2015 Rule pursuant to Section 705 of the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. 705, which states that “[w]hen an agency finds that justice so requires, it may postpone the effective date of action taken by it pending judicial review.” 82 FR 19005 (April 25, 2017). EPA had postponed the compliance dates as a temporary measure pursuant to Section 705 to preserve the status quo while the litigation in the Fifth Circuit was pending and EPA's reconsideration was underway. Because EPA has decided to conduct further rulemaking to potentially revise the new, more stringent BAT limitations and PSES in the 2015 Rule applicable to two specific wastestreams (FGD wastewater and bottom ash transport water), and it is today finalizing a rule which postpones the associated compliance dates in the 2015 Rule pending its next rulemaking, there is no longer any need for the Agency to maintain its prior action pursuant to Section 705 of the APA. EPA, hereby, withdraws that action.

    II. Summary of Comments Received

    EPA received thousands of written comments on the proposed rule to postpone certain compliance dates in the 2015 Rule. EPA also held a public hearing on July 31, 2017. The comments on the proposed rule generally fall into one of four categories: (1) Support for postponement of compliance dates; (2) opposition to the postponement of compliance dates; (3) comments on the substantive requirements of the 2015 Rule (which are outside the scope of this action, which concerns postponing certain compliance dates only); and (4) comments on the length of time that EPA should postpone the compliance dates.

    Commenters that support the postponement rule generally assert that the postponement is appropriate to prevent industry from spending “unnecessary resources” until EPA completes its reconsideration of the 2015 Rule. Many commenters who support a postponement in compliance dates state that, given the substantial costs required to implement technology required to comply with the 2015 Rule, as well as the time needed for designing and optimizing treatment systems, certainty in the discharge requirements is needed and postponement of compliance dates allows for that. In addition, commenters argue that the Agency has both the authority and the responsibility to postpone the 2015 Rule until it completes any rulemaking following its reconsideration process.

    Comments on the length of the postponement generally assert that EPA should postpone the compliance dates for a minimum of two years, until EPA has taken final action on any rule revisions, or some time period beyond when EPA has taken final action on any rule revisions.

    Commenters that oppose the postponement rule generally assert that (1) the technology bases underlying the 2015 Rule are widely available and affordable now, many steam electric plants have already installed or are in the process of implementing these technologies, and postponing the compliance dates would hinder technology development; (2) any postponement allows power plants to continue to discharge pollutants that are harmful to public health and the environment, and the forgone public health and environmental benefits during any postponement outweigh the costs to industry; and (3) EPA lacks authority to postpone the compliance dates.

    III. Rationale for Finalizing a Postponement of Compliance Dates

    In light of new information not contained in the record for the 2015 Rule and the inherent discretion the Agency has to reconsider past policy decisions consistent with the CWA and other applicable law, EPA intends to conduct a new rulemaking regarding the appropriate technology bases and associated limits for the BAT/PSES requirements applicable to FGD wastewater and bottom ash transport water discharged from steam electric power plants. Given this, and after carefully considering comments received on the proposed rule, EPA finds it appropriate to postpone the earliest compliance dates for the new, more stringent, BAT effluent limitations and PSES applicable to FGD wastewater and bottom ash transport water in the 2015 Rule until it completes the new rulemaking. This maintains the 2015 Rule as a whole at this time, with the only change being to postpone specific compliance deadlines for two wastestreams. Thus, the earliest compliance dates for plants to meet the new, more stringent FGD wastewater and bottom ash wastewater limitations and standards in the 2015 Rule, which were to be determined by the permitting authority as a date “as soon as possible beginning November 1, 2018 . . .”, are now to be determined by the permitting authority as a date “as soon as possible beginning November 1, 2020 . . . .” EPA is not changing the “no later than” date of December 31, 2023, because EPA is not aware that the 2023 date is an immediate driver for expenditures by plants (petitioners had requested relief from the “fast-approaching compliance deadlines” in the 2015 Rule), and EPA plans to take up the appropriate compliance period in its next rulemaking. In order to be absolutely clear about what is being postponed, the final rule includes more precise regulatory text to implement the rule than was included in the proposed rule.

    Agencies have inherent authority to reconsider past decisions and to revise, replace or repeal a decision to the extent permitted by law and supported by a reasoned explanation. FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 556 U.S. 502, 515 (2009); Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass'n v. State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co., 463 U.S. 29, 42 (1983). See also Nat'l Ass'n of Home Builders v. EPA, 682 F.3d 1032, 1038 & 1043 (D.C. Cir. 2012). Particularly relevant here, the CWA expressly authorizes EPA to revise effluent limitations and standards. 33 U.S.C. 1311(d), 1314(b), (g)(1), (m)(1)(A), 1317(b)(2). Moreover, in doing so, Section 304(b)(2)(B) of the CWA directs EPA to consider several factors, including “other factors as the Administrator deems appropriate,” and the Agency is afforded considerable discretion in deciding how much weight to give each factor. See, e.g., Weyerhaeuser Co. v. Costle, 590 F.2d 1011, 1045 (D.C. Cir. 1978). In this case, where EPA has decided to undertake a new rulemaking, which may result in substantive changes to the 2015 Rule, that is an appropriate factor to consider and one that warrants the postponement of compliance dates for the new, more stringent BAT and PSES requirements for two wastestreams in the 2015 Rule, until such a rulemaking is complete (i.e., EPA issues any final rule that substantively revises the 2015 Rule or EPA decides not to issue such a final rule). This will prevent the potentially needless expenditure of resources during a rulemaking that may ultimately change the 2015 Rule in these respects.

    As mentioned, some commenters stated that the record for the 2015 Rule demonstrates that the technologies underlying the new, more stringent requirements for FGD wastewater and bottom ash transport water are widely available and affordable. Notwithstanding statements in the 2015 Rule record, certain parties have raised serious concerns about the availability and affordability of the technology basis for the FGD wastewater and bottom ash transport water requirements in the 2015 Rule, and the Administrator wishes to take some time to carefully review these requirements in light of those concerns and ensure any such requirements are technologically available and economically achievable within the meaning of the statute. EPA has discretion in determining technological availability and economic achievability and is not constrained by the CWA to make the same policy decision as the former Administration, so long as its decision is reasonable. As explained above, the Agency may reconsider past policy decisions consistent with the Clean Water Act and other applicable law. The Agency may also reconsider technical determinations in light of new information submitted to the Agency that was not in the record for the 2015 Rule. EPA intends to fully evaluate all of the issues raised in the petitions, including concerns about: Cost and impacts to steam electric facilities, public availability of information on which the rule is based, lack of data for plants that burn certain types of coal, and validity of certain pollutant data used in EPA's 2015 Rule analysis. For example, petitioners raised concerns about the numerical BAT limitations and PSES applicable to FGD wastewater in the 2015 Rule. They assert that there are differences among coal types that affect the performance and costs of biological treatment and that EPA did not have data to demonstrate the performance of biological treatment on all coal types. To resolve this concern, following the rulemaking, industry collected (and continues to collect) additional data on the performance of biological treatment for different coal types. As another example, petitioners raised questions about the inclusion and validity of certain data due, in part, to what they assert are flaws in data acceptance criteria, obsolete analytical methods, and the treatment of non-detect analytical results, which petitioners believed resulted in an overestimation of pollutant loadings for bottom ash transport water. EPA agrees that these are important issues that warrant further consideration in conjunction with the statutory factors for determining BAT for these wastestreams. EPA thus intends to re-evaluate these and other concerns raised in the petitions in the next rulemaking. EPA acknowledges that postponement of certain of the 2015 Rule's compliance dates may be disruptive to vendors and treatment technology suppliers. EPA, however, must also consider the substantial investments required by the steam electric power industry to comply with the BAT limitations and PSES,3 and that certainty regarding the limitations and standards deserves prominent consideration by the Agency when these limitations and standards may change. As UWAG pointed out in its April 13, 2017 letter, “a rule of this magnitude and complexity requires substantial time to come into compliance for multiple wastestreams. Detailed studies and planning, followed by large capital expenditures and subsequent installation and testing, are time-consuming.” Companies have been evaluating their compliance options and are reaching the point at which they will be committing funds, incurring costs, or commencing construction to install technologies.

    3 In the 2015 Rule, EPA estimated the total annualized pre-tax compliance costs for the FGD and bottom ash requirements to be $486.8 million. See DCN SE05978.

    As part of the 2015 Rule, EPA estimated the costs associated with compliance with the 2015 Rule's new requirements. For all applicable wastestreams, EPA assessed the operations and treatment system components, identified equipment and process changes that the plant would likely make to meet the 2015 Rule, and estimated the cost to implement those changes. This includes, among other things, the capital costs of installing the technology (based on estimates of the technology selected as representing the level of control) and the operation and maintenance costs of operating the technology. See Technical Development Document (“TDD”), pp. 9-1 through 9-52. EPA estimated that the total post-tax annualized compliance costs would be $339.6 million/year. See Regulatory Impact Analysis (“RIA”), Table 3-2 (Option D).4

    4 EPA analyzed both pre-tax and post-tax costs. Pre-tax costs provide insight on the total expenditures as initially incurred by the plants. Post-tax costs are a more meaningful measure of compliance impact on privately owned for-profit plants, and incorporate approximate capital depreciation and other relevant tax treatments in the analysis. RIA, p. 3-6.

    The 2015 rulemaking record also describes evaluation of the initial capital costs that regulated parties would incur in the near term (if a stay were not in place) to meet the 2015 Rule's effluent limitations and standards. For the purpose of analysis, in the RIA, EPA assumed that all capital costs are incurred concurrently with technology installation according to discharge permit renewal schedules, but EPA realizes that feasibility studies and planning may need to be completed in advance of that date. Specifically, plants would incur engineering design costs, costs to acquire equipment, freight shipping costs to transport equipment from manufacturers to the installation site, costs for actions to prepare the site (such as installing concrete foundations and buildings for the new equipment), and construction expenses associated with connecting electrical and piping systems to new equipment. See TDD, p. 9-3. EPA estimated post-tax annualized capital costs of $204.4 million/year. See RIA, Table 3-2 (Option D). Although there is a wide degree of variability among the costs particular plants would expend, EPA estimates that the average post-tax annualized capital compliance costs for a plant would be approximately $1.5 million/year. See TDD, Table 9-19 (plants with compliance costs); RIA, Table 3-2 (Option D). To the extent that these costs are associated with the 2015 Rule requirements for FGD wastewater and bottom ash transport water, and in the event that EPA revises these requirements in a future rulemaking, these are costs that would be incurred for activities that ultimately might not be necessary. In that case, this would reflect costs incurred by facilities and potentially passed on to utility rate payers that ultimately did not need to be spent.

    In light of these imminent planning and capital expenditures that facilities incurring costs under the 2015 Rule would need to undertake in order to meet the earliest compliance deadlines for the new, more stringent limitations and standards in the 2015 Rule, and the fact that the Agency is conducting a new rulemaking regarding the appropriate technology bases and associated limits for BAT limitations and PSES applicable to FGD wastewater and bottom ash transport water, the Agency views it as appropriate to postpone the earliest compliance dates that have not yet passed for these wastestreams in 2015 Rule. This will preserve the regulatory status quo with respect to requirements for FGD wastewater and bottom ash transport water until the new rulemaking is complete.

    Some commenters also express concerns that postponement of compliance dates would hinder technology advancements. EPA's experience does not support this concern. The record for the 2015 Rule demonstrates that technology advancements were not hindered during that rulemaking. Rather, as explained in the preamble to the final 2015 Rule, vendors continued to improve existing technologies and to develop new technologies during the rulemaking leading up to the 2015 Rule.

    EPA acknowledges that postponement of the compliance dates could lead to a delay in the accrual of some of the benefits attributable to the 2015 Rule. The 2015 Rule required that steam electric power plants would comply with the new, more stringent requirements no later than 2023, with plants expected to implement new control technologies over a five-year compliance period of 2019-2023 according to their permit renewal schedule. In the record for the 2015 Rule, EPA estimated the value of certain benefits linked to reduced pollutant discharges that could be monetized for the period 2019 through 2042. Based on the 2015 Rule data and methodology, and depending on the inclusion of the Clean Power Plan, EPA estimates that foregone annualized benefits for a two-year delay would be between $26.6 million and $33.6 million.5 EPA similarly estimates that plants would experience annualized cost savings of between $27.5 million and $36.8 million as a result of a two-year delay. See DCN SE06668 for additional details, including calculations of the foregone benefits and cost savings. EPA understands that these estimates have uncertainty due to, for example, the possibility of unexpected implementation approaches, and thus that the actual cost savings could have been somewhat higher or lower than estimated. Similarly, due to data and analysis limitations, the forgone monetized benefits are likely underestimated. These estimates, however, are consistent with and reflect the best data and analysis available at the time of the 2015 Rule.

    5 The calculations are based on the benefits and costs estimated for the 2015 Rule, which were detailed in the “Benefit and Cost Analysis for the Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category” (BCA) and “Regulatory Impact Analysis for the Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category” (RIA) reports.

    EPA notes that, as explained earlier, there is uncertainty as to the FGD wastewater and bottom ash transport water BAT/PSES requirements while EPA conducts a new rulemaking. If EPA did not postpone the compliance dates, industry would likely incur costs as it prepares to comply with the 2015 Rule, irrespective of what EPA ultimately determines to be BAT/PSES for FGD wastewater and bottom ash transport water. By contrast, under the 2015 Rule, even if permits were written today, the earliest those permits would have required compliance with the limitations and standards at issue are “as soon as possible beginning November 1, 2018.” So, while some companies would have to plan to comply and spend money right away, the benefits would not begin to accrue until 2018, at the earliest. Also, these benefits may not be lost if a permitting authority requires similar effluent limitations where necessary to meet applicable water quality standards, under CWA section 301(b)(1)(C). EPA has carefully weighed the concerns about potentially foregone benefits with the consideration of the costs that could needlessly be incurred should the requirements be changed, as well as the overall uncertainty and potential confusion that would be caused by imposing the 2015 Rule requirements while simultaneously undertaking rulemaking that may change those requirements. On balance, EPA has concluded the more reasonable approach is to postpone the compliance dates in the 2015 Rule.

    Thus, EPA agrees with commenters who argue that it should postpone the new, more stringent BAT/PSES requirements for FGD wastewater and bottom ash transport water in the 2015 Rule until it completes a new rulemaking on these wastestreams. After reflecting on the time it typically takes the Agency to propose and finalize revised effluent limitations guidelines and standards, and in light the characteristics of this industry and the anticipated scope of the next rulemaking, EPA projects it will take approximately three years to propose and finalize a new rule (Fall 2020). See DCN SE06667. Consequently, EPA is postponing the earliest compliance dates for the new, more stringent, BAT effluent limitations and PSES for FGD wastewater and bottom ash transport water for a period of two years (November 1, 2020).6 To the extent that commenters believe a postponement under this rule should last beyond the time it takes EPA to complete its new rulemaking, such comments are appropriately considered as part of, and in light of, that new rulemaking and not this action. As explained, this rule is intended only as a relatively short-term measure until EPA completes the next rulemaking, and EPA anticipates that the next rulemaking will necessarily address compliance dates in some fashion. Although EPA proposed to postpone the compliance dates for the new, more stringent requirements applicable to fly ash transport water, gasification wastewater, and flue gas mercury control (FGMC) wastewater, in addition to the requirements for FGD wastewater and bottom ash transport water, this final rule does not postpone those former compliance dates. Commenters stated that EPA has no basis to postpone compliance dates for requirements that parties have not expressly argued should be reconsidered, such as those for fly ash transport water and FGMC wastewater. EPA agrees that the final rule should postpone only those requirements that the Agency plans to potentially revise in the next rulemaking. Because EPA is not conducting a new rulemaking concerning any of the other issues addressed by the 2015 Rule, including requirements for fly ash transport water, gasification wastewater, and FGMC wastewater, EPA is not changing the compliance dates for these wastestreams or any of the other compliance dates for the requirements in that Rule. The record for the 2015 Rule demonstrates that changes associated with converting a fly ash system are unrelated from an engineering perspective to conversions/upgrades for bottom ash transport water and FGD treatment systems. Converting a fly ash system requires installing a silo to capture the dry fly ash, which is subsequently transported offsite to beneficial reuse markets (e.g., cement plants) or landfilled. Bottom ash is handled separately, regardless of whether it is wet or dry. The same is true for FGD wastes. EPA recognizes however, that from a financing and long-term planning perspective, there are advantages to a facility in knowing the full suite of requirements it will need to comply with over a longer term planning horizon.

    6 If EPA does not complete a new rulemaking by November, 2020, it plans to further postpone the compliance dates such that the earliest compliance date is not prior to completion of a new rulemaking.

    Some facilities commented that they may need to know what the ultimate requirements will be for bottom ash transport water and FGD wastewater to assist them in considering alternatives for meeting the requirements for the other waste streams (fly ash transport water and FGMC wastewater) for which EPA is not postponing the earliest compliance dates. EPA notes that there continues to be discretion under the 2015 Rule for permitting authorities to consider: Time needed to “expeditiously plan (including time to raise capital), design, procure, and install equipment” to comply with the rule; changes being made at the plant to comply with several other rules; and “other factors as appropriate” in determining exactly when, within a specified compliance period, the 2015 Rule's new, more stringent limitations apply to any given plant. See 40 CFR 423.11(t).

    In light of the compliance date postponements being finalized today, in determining the “as soon as possible date,” EPA believes it would be reasonable for permitting authorities to consider the need for a facility to make integrated planning decisions regarding compliance with the requirements for all of the wastestreams currently subject to new, more stringent requirements in the 2015 Rule, as well as the other rules identified in § 423.11(t) to the extent that a facility demonstrates such a need. This could include harmonizing schedules to the extent provided for under the 2015 Rule 7 for meeting the 2015 Rule requirements for fly ash transport water and FGMC wastewater to allow time for a facility to have certainty regarding what their ultimate requirements will be under the steam electric ELGs, as well as the requirements under the other rules listed in § 423.11(t).

    7 For any final effluent limitation that is specified to become applicable after November 1, 2018, the specified date must be as soon as possible, but in no case later than December 31, 2023.

    This rule is effective immediately upon publication. Section 553(d) of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(d), provides that publication of a substantive rule must be made no less than 30 days before its effective date, subject to several exceptions. Section 553(d)(1) establishes an exception for “a substantive rule which grants or recognizes an exemption or relieves a restriction.” The exception in Section 553(d)(1) reflects the purpose of the 30-day notice requirement, which is to give affected entities time to prepare for the effective date of a rule or to take any other action which the issuance of a rule may prompt. This rule fits within Section 553(d)(1) because it postpones certain requirements on steam electric power plants to control their pollutant discharges by two years, and as a result, it relieves a restriction on regulated entities for that period.

    IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review; and, Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is a significant regulatory action that was submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. Any changes made in response to OMB recommendations have been documented in the docket.

    B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Costs

    This action is considered an Executive Order 13771 deregulatory action. Details on the estimated cost savings of this final rule can be found in EPA's analysis of the potential costs and benefits associated with this action.

    C. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This final rule does not involve any information collection activities subject to the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

    D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. In making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no net burden or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small entities subject to the rule. This action maintains the 2015 Rule as a whole at this time, with the only change being to postpone specific compliance deadlines for two wastestreams. As described above, EPA estimates that steam electric plants, including some small entities, would experience annualized cost savings of $27.5 million as a result of this two-year delay. We have therefore concluded that this action will relieve regulatory burden for some directly regulated small entities.

    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100 million or more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments.

    F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). It will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

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

    This action does not have Tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

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

    This final rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) because EPA previously determined that the environmental health risks or safety risks addressed by the requirements EPA is finalizing do not present a disproportionate risk to children.

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

    This action is not a “significant energy action” because it is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution or use of energy.

    J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards that would require Agency consideration under NTTAA section 12(d), 15 U.S.C. 272 note.

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

    This is a final rule to delay action, and it does not change the requirements of the effluent limitations guidelines and standards published in 2015. While the postponement in compliance dates could delay the protection the 2015 Rule would afford to all communities, including those impacted disproportionately by the pollutants in certain wastewater discharges, this action would not change any impacts of the 2015 Rule upon implementation. The EPA therefore believes it is more appropriate to consider the impact on minority and low-income populations in the context of possible substantive changes as part of any future rulemaking.

    L. Congressional Review Act

    This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. This action is a not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 423

    Environmental protection, Electric power generation, Power plants, Waste treatment and disposal, Water pollution control.

    Dated: September 12, 2017. E. Scott Pruitt, Administrator.

    For reasons stated in the preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR part 423 as set forth below:

    PART 423—STEAM ELECTRIC POWER GENERATING POINT SOURCE CATEGORY 1. The authority citation for part 423 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    Secs. 101; 301; 304(b), (c), (e), and (g); 306; 307; 308 and 501, Clean Water Act (Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, as amended; 33 U.S.C. 1251; 1311; 1314(b), (c), (e), and (g); 1316; 1317; 1318 and 1361).

    2. Amend § 423.11 by revising paragraph (t) introductory text to read as follows:
    § 423.11 Specialized definitions.

    (t) The phrase “as soon as possible” means November 1, 2018 (except for purposes of § 423.13(g)(1)(i) and (k)(1)(i), and § 423.16(e) and (g), in which case it means November 1, 2020), unless the permitting authority establishes a later date, after receiving information from the discharger, which reflects a consideration of the following factors:

    § 423.13 [Amended]
    3. Amend § 423.13 paragraphs (g)(1)(i) and (k)(1)(i) by removing the text “November 1, 2018” and adding the text “November 1, 2020” in its place.
    § 423.16 [Amended]
    4. Amend § 423.16 paragraphs (e) two times, and (g) by removing the text “November 1, 2018” and adding the text “November 1, 2020” in its place.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19821 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 635 [Docket No. 170602535-7835-01] RIN 0648-XF480 Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; Adjustments to 2017 Northern Albacore Tuna Quota, 2017 North and South Atlantic Swordfish Quotas, and 2017 Atlantic Bluefin Tuna Reserve Category Quota AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Temporary final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS adjusts the northern albacore tuna annual baseline quota for 2017 with available underharvest of the 2016 adjusted U.S. northern albacore quota. NMFS also adjusts the North and South Atlantic swordfish baseline quotas for 2017 based on available underharvest from the 2016 adjusted U.S. quotas and international quota transfers. NMFS also augments the 2017 Atlantic bluefin tuna Reserve category quota with available underharvest of the 2016 adjusted U.S. bluefin tuna quota. This action is necessary to implement binding recommendations of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), as required by the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act (ATCA), and to achieve domestic management objectives under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act).

    DATES:

    Effective September 18, 2017, through December 31, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Supporting documents such as Environmental Assessments and Fishery Management Plans and their Amendments described below may be downloaded from the HMS Web site at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hms/. These documents also are available upon request from Sarah McLaughlin, Steve Durkee, or Gray Redding at the telephone numbers below.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sarah McLaughlin, 978-281-9260, Steve Durkee, 202-670-6637, or Gray Redding, 301-427-8503.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Regulations implemented under the authority of the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act (ATCA; 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq.) and the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act; 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.) governing the harvest of northern albacore, swordfish, and bluefin tuna by persons and vessels subject to U.S. jurisdiction are found at 50 CFR part 635. Section 635.27(e) describes the northern albacore annual quota recommended by ICCAT and the annual northern albacore quota adjustment process. Section 635.27(c) describes the quota adjustment process for both North and South Atlantic swordfish. Section 635.27(a) subdivides the ICCAT-recommended U.S. bluefin tuna quota among the various domestic fishing categories, per the allocations established in the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan (2006 Consolidated HMS FMP) (71 FR 58058, October 2, 2006), as amended by Amendment 7 to the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP (Amendment 7) (79 FR 71510, December 2, 2014), and describes the annual bluefin tuna quota adjustment process. NMFS is required under ATCA and the Magnuson-Stevens Act to provide U.S. fishing vessels with a reasonable opportunity to harvest the ICCAT-recommended quotas.

    The northern albacore quota implementation and quota adjustment processes, along with the bluefin tuna quota adjustment process, were previously analyzed in Amendment 7, which published in August 2014 and included a Final Environmental Impact Statement, Final Regulatory Impact Review (RIR), Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA), and Final Social Impact Statement. ICCAT conducted another bluefin tuna stock assessment update in 2014, and, after considering the scientific advice in the stock assessment, adopted a recommendation regarding western Atlantic bluefin tuna management that increases the U.S. bluefin tuna quota for 2015 and 2016 (ICCAT Recommendation 14-05). NMFS published a final rule to implement that baseline annual U.S. bluefin tuna quota on August 28, 2015 (80 FR 52198), and prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA), RIR, and FRFA for that action. ICCAT Recommendation 16-08 extended the U.S. bluefin tuna allocation established in Recommendation 14-05 through 2017.

    The North Atlantic swordfish quota adjustment process was previously analyzed in the EA, RIR, and FRFA that were prepared for the 2012 Swordfish Quota Adjustment Rule (July 31, 2012; 77 FR 45273). The South Atlantic swordfish quota adjustment process was previously analyzed in the EA, RIR, and FRFA that were prepared for the 2007 Swordfish Quota Specification Final Rule (October 5, 2007; 72 FR 56929). In the 2016 North and South Atlantic Swordfish Quotas Adjustment Final Rule (July 26, 2016, 81 FR 48719), after taking public comment on the issue, NMFS announced its intent to no longer issue proposed and final specifications/rules for North and South Atlantic swordfish quotas adjustments in cases where the quota adjustment follows previously codified and analyzed formulas. Therefore, beginning this year, NMFS is instead issuing a temporary final rule to adjust the quota, in a similar process to northern albacore and bluefin tuna quota adjustments. NMFS will continue to undertake notice and comment rulemaking when adopting new quotas, quota formulas, or otherwise altering conservation and management measures.

    Note that weight information for northern albacore and bluefin tuna below is shown in metric tons (mt) whole weight (ww), and both dressed weight (dw) and ww is shown for swordfish.

    Northern Albacore Annual Quota and Adjustment Process

    Since 1998, ICCAT has adopted recommendations regarding the northern albacore fishery. The current ICCAT northern albacore recommendation (Recommendation 16-06) includes a total allowable catch (TAC) at 28,000 metric tons (mt) for 2017 and specific recommendations regarding the northern albacore conservation and management. The U.S. baseline quota for 2017 is 527 mt, annually. The baseline quota of 527 mt is codified at § 635.27(e) and will remain in effect until changed. For example, Recommendation 16-06 specifies that the quota for 2019 and 2020 will be 564.6 mt. It also specifies that if, in any year, the combined contracting parties' landings exceed the TAC, the Commission will re‐evaluate the Recommendation and recommend further conservation measures, as appropriate.

    Amendment 7 established the process by which NMFS adjusts the U.S. annual northern albacore quota for allowable underharvest, if any, in the previous year. NMFS makes such adjustments consistent with ICCAT limits and when complete catch information for the prior year is available and finalized. The maximum underharvest that a Contracting Party may carry forward from one year to the next is 25 percent of its initial catch quota, which equals 131.75 mt for the United States.

    Adjustment of the 2017 Northern Albacore Quota

    For 2016, the adjusted quota was 658.75 mt (527 mt plus 131.75 mt of 2015 underharvest carried forward to 2016). The total 2016 northern albacore catch was 249.60 mt, which is 409.15 mt less than the 2016 adjusted quota. Thus, the underharvest for 2016 is 409.15 mt, 131.75 mt of which may be carried forward to the 2017 fishing year. Thus, the adjusted 2017 northern albacore quota is 527 mt plus 131.75 mt, totaling 658.75 mt.

    North and South Atlantic Swordfish Annual Quota and Adjustment Process North Atlantic Swordfish

    At the 2016 ICCAT annual meeting, Recommendation 16-03 maintained the North Atlantic swordfish TAC of 10,301 mt dw (13,700 mt ww) through 2017. Of this TAC, the United States' baseline quota is 2,937.6 mt dw (3,907 mt ww) per year. ICCAT Recommendation 16-03 also includes an 18.8 mt dw (25 mt ww) annual quota transfer from the United States to Mauritania and limits underharvest carryover to 15 percent of a Contracting Party's baseline quota. Therefore, the United States may carry over a maximum of 440.6 mt dw (586.0 mt ww) of underharvest from 2016 to 2017. This final rule adjusts the U.S. baseline quota for the 2017 fishing year to account for the annual quota transfer to Mauritania and the 2016 underharvest.

    The 2017 North Atlantic swordfish baseline quota is 2,937.6 mt dw (3,907 mt ww). The total 2016 North Atlantic swordfish catch and dead discards totaled 1,144.4 mt dw, which is 2,215 mt dw less than the 2016 adjusted quota of 3,359.4 mt dw. Thus, the North Atlantic swordfish underharvest for 2016 was 2,215 mt dw, and NMFS is carrying forward 440.6 mt dw, the maximum carryover allowed under Recommendation 16-03. The 2,937.6 mt dw baseline quota is reduced by the 18.8 mt dw annual quota transfer to Mauritania and increased by the underharvest carryover of 440.6 mt dw, resulting in a final adjusted North Atlantic swordfish quota for the 2017 fishing year of 3,359.4 mt dw (2,937.6−18.8 + 440.6 = 3,359.4 mt dw). From that adjusted quota, 50 mt dw will be allocated to the reserve category for inseason adjustments and research, and 300 mt dw will be allocated to the incidental category, which includes recreational landings and landings by incidental swordfish permit holders, in accordance with regulations at 50 CFR 635.27(c)(1)(i). This would result in an allocation of 3,009.4 mt dw (3,359.4−50−300 = 3,009.4 mt dw) for the directed category, which would be split equally between two seasons in 2017 (January through June, and July through December) (Table 1).

    South Atlantic Swordfish

    In 2016, ICCAT Recommendation 16-04 maintained the South Atlantic swordfish TAC at 11,278.2 mt dw (15,000 mt ww) through 2017. Of this, the United States receives 75.2 mt dw (100 mt ww). Recommendation 16-04 limits the amount of South Atlantic swordfish underharvest that can be carried forward from one year to the next, and the United States may carry forward up to 100 percent of its baseline quota (75.2 mt dw). Recommendation 16-04 also included a total of 75.2 mt dw (100 mt ww) of quota transfers from the United States to other countries. These transfers were 37.6 mt dw (50 mt ww) to Namibia, 18.8 mt dw (25 mt ww) to Côte d'Ivoire, and 18.8 mt dw (25 mt ww) to Belize.

    U.S. fishermen landed no South Atlantic swordfish in 2016. The adjusted 2016 South Atlantic swordfish quota was 75.1 mt dw due to nominal landings in previous years. Therefore, 75.1 mt dw of underharvest is available to carry over to 2017. NMFS is carrying forward 75.1 mt dw to be added to the 75.2 mt dw baseline quota. The quota is then reduced by the 75.2 mt dw of annual international quota transfers outlined above, resulting in an adjusted South Atlantic swordfish quota of 75.1 mt dw for the 2017 fishing year (Table 1).

    Table 1—2017 North and South Atlantic Swordfish Quotas 2016 2017 North Atlantic Swordfish Quota (mt dw) Baseline Quota 2,937.6 2,937.6 International Quota Transfer (−)18.8 (to Mauritania) (−)18.8 (to Mauritania) Total Underharvest from Previous Year 2,181.6 2,215.0 Underharvest Carryover from Previous Year + (+) 440.6 (+) 440.6 Adjusted Quota 3,359.4 3,359.4 Quota Allocation: Directed Category 3,009.4 3,009.4 Incidental Category 300 300 Reserve Category 50 50 South Atlantic Swordfish Quota (mt dw) Baseline Quota 75.2 75.2 International Quota Transfers* (−)75.2 (−)75.2 Total Underharvest from Previous Year 75.1 75.1 Underharvest Carryover from Previous Year + 75.1 75.1 Adjusted quota 75.1 75.1 + Allowable underharvest carryover is capped at 15 percent of the baseline quota allocation for the North Atlantic and 75.2 dw (100 mt ww) for the South Atlantic. * Under Recommendation 16-04, the United States transfers 75.2 mt dw (100 mt ww) annually to Namibia (37.6 mt dw, 50 mt ww), Côte d'Ivoire (18.8 mt dw, 25 mt ww), and Belize (18.8 mt dw, 25 mt ww). Bluefin Tuna Annual Quota and Adjustment Process

    Pursuant to Amendment 7, NMFS augments the Reserve category quota to the extent that underharvest from the prior year's adjusted U.S. bluefin tuna quota is available. NMFS makes such adjustments consistent with ICCAT limits and when complete catch information for the prior year is available and finalized. Consistent with the bluefin tuna quota regulations, NMFS may allocate any portion of the Reserve category quota for inseason or annual adjustments to any fishing category quota pursuant to regulatory determination criteria described at § 635.27(a)(8), or for scientific research.

    NMFS implemented ICCAT Recommendation 14-05 in the bluefin tuna quota final rule in August 2015 (80 FR 52198, August 28, 2015). That rulemaking implemented Recommendation 14-05, which included a western bluefin tuna TAC of 2,000 mt (for 2015 and 2016) and the recommended annual U.S. baseline quota of 1,058.79 mt. The total annual U.S. quota, including the 25 mt to account for bycatch related to pelagic longline fisheries in the Northeast Distant gear restricted area (NED) is 1,083.79 mt. Any underharvest of a CPC's total quota in a given year may be carried forward to the next year but is limited to 10 percent of the CPC's initial quota allocation (for the United States, its baseline quota plus 25 mt for the NED). ICCAT Recommendation 16-08 extended these provisions through 2017. The baseline annual U.S. bluefin tuna quota of 1,058.79 mt is codified at § 635.27(a) and will remain in effect until changed (for instance, if a new ICCAT western bluefin tuna TAC recommendation is adopted).

    Adjustment of the 2016 Bluefin Tuna Reserve Category Quota

    The total 2016 bluefin tuna catch was 1,025.10 mt. This total catch includes landings and dead discards. The total catch of 1,025.10 mt is 167.07 mt less than the 2016 adjusted quota of 1,083.79 mt. Per ICCAT Recommendation 16-08, only 10 percent of the total 2016 U.S. quota, or 108.38 mt, of that underharvest may be carried forward to the 2017 fishing year, resulting in a 2017 adjusted quota of 1,192.17 mt (baseline quota of 1,083.79 mt + underharvest carryover of 108.38 mt). The codified Reserve category quota is 24.8 mt. Consistent with the process established in Amendment 7, NMFS augments the Reserve category quota with 108.38 mt in this action. Effective February 28, 2017, NMFS adjusted the Reserve category quota for 2017 to 118 mt by reallocating 138.2 mt of Purse Seine quota to the Reserve category (based on 2016 catch by Purse Seine category participants) and also transferring 45 mt of Reserve category quota to the Longline category (82 FR 12296, March 2, 2017). Effective March 2, 2017, NMFS transferred 40 mt from the Reserve to the General category (82 FR 12747, March 7, 2017). Additionally, effective August 11, 2017, NMFS transferred an additional 30 mt from the Reserve to the Harpoon category (82 FR 38853, August 16, 2017). Thus, as of the effective date of this action (September 18, 2017), the adjusted 2017 Reserve category quota would be 156.38 mt (24.8 + 138.2−45−40−30 + 108.38).

    Classification

    The Assistant Administrator for NMFS (AA) has determined that this temporary final rule is consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS FMP and its amendments, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, ATCA, and other applicable law.

    Pursuant to section 553(b)(B) of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)), the AA finds that it would be unnecessary and contrary to the public interest to provide prior notice of, and an opportunity for public comment on, this action for the reasons described below.

    NMFS solicited and accepted public comment on the northern albacore quota implementation and quota adjustment processes, along with the bluefin tuna quota adjustment process, as part of the Amendment 7 rulemaking. Public comments on these provisions in response to the proposed Amendment 7 rule were generally supportive and were addressed in the Response to Comments section of the Amendment 7 final rule. (See comments 18, 19, and 105 at 79 FR 71530-71531 and 71553). Similarly, in the past, North and South Atlantic swordfish quota adjustments were performed through an annual notice and comment rulemaking process. In the 2016 North and South Atlantic Swordfish Quota Adjustment Rule (81 FR 48719, July 26, 2016), NMFS announced the intent to no longer issue proposed and final specifications/rules for North and South Atlantic swordfish quota adjustments in cases where the quota adjustment simply follows previously codified and analyzed formulas. Public comments on this process change were generally supportive. Beginning this year, NMFS will instead issue a temporary final rule to adjust the quota. NMFS will continue to undertake notice and comment rulemaking if adopting new quotas, quota formulas, or otherwise altering conservation and management measures for North and South Atlantic swordfish.

    This action applies the formulas which the public received notice of in the earlier actions (Amendment 7 and the 2016 North and South Atlantic Swordfish Quota Adjustment Rule), using the best available data regarding 2016 catch and underharvest and calculating allowable underharvest consistent with ICCAT recommendations. The rulemakings for Amendment 7 and the 2016 North and South Atlantic Swordfish Quota Adjustment Rule specifically provided prior notice of, and accepted public comment on, these formulaic quota adjustment processes and the manner in which they occur. The application of this formula in this action does not have discretionary aspects requiring additional agency consideration and thus it would be unnecessarily duplicative to accept public comment for this action.

    There is good cause under U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to waive the 30-day delay in effective date and to make the rule effective upon publication in the Federal Register. The fisheries for northern albacore, North and South Atlantic swordfish, and bluefin tuna began on January 1, 2017. NMFS monitors northern albacore, North and South Atlantic swordfish, and bluefin tuna annual catch and measures the annual catch data against the applicable available quotas. Delaying the effective date of these quota adjustments would complicate the management of the northern albacore, North and South Atlantic swordfish, and bluefin tuna fisheries, all of which rely on management flexibility to respond quickly to fishery conditions to ensure that fishermen have a reasonable opportunity to catch the available quotas. For example, under the northern albacore fishery closure regulations, NMFS must close the fishery when the annual fishery quota is reached. Closure of the fishery based only on the baseline (codified) quota versus the adjusted northern albacore quota could preclude the fishery from harvesting northern albacore that are legally available consistent with the ICCAT recommendations and the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP, as amended. Adjusting the North and South Atlantic swordfish quota allows the United States to comply with the ICCAT allowance to carry over quota underharvest and the obligation of international quota transfers. Adjusting the bluefin tuna Reserve category as soon as possible provides NMFS the flexibility to transfer quota from the Reserve to other fishing categories inseason after considering the regulatory determination criteria, including fishery conditions at the time of the transfer. The amount of quota currently in the Reserve category is relatively low, and NMFS may need to transfer quota soon in order to reduce the likelihood of fishery closure during the September or subsequent subquota time periods. NMFS could not appropriately adjust the annual quotas for 2017 sooner because the data needed to make the determination did not become available until August, and additional time was needed for agency analysis and consideration of the data.

    Additionally, to prevent confusion and potential overharvests, these adjustments should be in place as soon as possible in order to allow the impacted sectors to benefit from any subsequent quota adjustments to the fishing categories, give them a reasonable opportunity to catch available quota, and provide them the opportunity for planning operations accordingly.

    This action is being taken under § 635.27(e) and § 635.27(a)(10), and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

    This action does not contain a collection-of-information requirement for purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act.

    Because prior notice and opportunity for public comment are not required for this rule by 5 U.S.C. 553, or any other law, the analytical requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., are inapplicable.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 971 et seq. and 1801 et seq.

    Dated: September 13, 2017. Samuel D. Rauch, III, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19777 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 679 [Docket No. 161020985-7181-02] RIN 0648-XF654 Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Reallocation of Pacific Cod in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area; Correction AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Temporary rule; reallocations; correction.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS is correcting a temporary rule that reallocated Pacific cod from vessels using jig gear and catcher vessels greater than or equal to 60 feet (18.3 meters) length overall (LOA) using hook-and-line gear to catcher vessels less than 60 feet (18.3 meters) LOA using hook-and-line or pot gear in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands management area. The amount reallocated from vessels using jig gear was incorrect.

    DATES:

    Effective September 18, 2017 through 2400 hours, Alaska local time (A.l.t) December 31, 2017, and is applicable beginning August 30, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Obren Davis, 907-586-7228.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Need for Correction

    NMFS published the reallocation of Pacific cod on September 5, 2017 (82 FR 41899). The document contains incorrect amounts of Pacific cod to be transferred to catcher vessels less than 60 feet LOA using hook-and-line or pot gear from vessels using jig gear. These corrections will not affect the fishing operations. These corrections are necessary to provide the correct information about the amount of the Pacific cod transferred from vessels using jig gear and eliminate potential avoid confusion by fishery participants.

    Correction

    In the Federal Register of September 5, 2017, (82 FR 41899) in FR Doc. 2017-18733, on page 41900, column 1, paragraph 2, sentences 1 and 2 are corrected to read as follows:

    “The Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS, (Regional Administrator) has determined that jig vessels will not be able to harvest 1,186 mt of the remaining 2017 Pacific cod TAC allocated to those vessels under § 679.20(a)(7)(ii)(A)(1). Therefore, in accordance with § 679.20(a)(7)(iii)(A), NMFS apportions 1,186 mt of Pacific cod to the annual amount specified for catcher vessels less than 60 feet LOA using hook-and-line or pot gear.”

    Classification

    The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA (AA), finds good cause to waive the requirement to provide prior notice and opportunity for public comment pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest. This actions corrects an error that attributed the total amount of Pacific cod being transferred to catcher vessels less than 60 feet LOA using hook-and-line or pot gear from multiple sectors (1,612 mt), rather than the amount of Pacific cod being reallocated from vessels using jig gear (1,186 mt). This correction does not change operating practices in the fisheries. Corrections should be made as soon as possible to avoid confusion for participants in the fisheries.

    The AA also finds good cause to waive the 30-day delay in the effective date of this action under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). This finding is based upon the reasons provided above for waiver of prior notice and opportunity for public comment.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: September 12, 2017. Emily H. Menashes, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19628 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    82 179 Monday, September 18, 2017 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service 7 CFR Part 927 [Doc. No. AMS-SC-17-0045; SC17-927-1 PR] Pears Grown in Oregon and Washington; Increased Assessment Rate for Processed Pears AGENCY:

    Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This proposed rule would implement a recommendation from the Processed Pear Committee (Committee) to increase the assessment rate established for the 2017-2018 and subsequent fiscal periods from $7.00 to $8.00 per ton of “summer/fall” pears for canning. The Committee locally administers the marketing order and is comprised of growers, handlers, and processors of processed pears grown in Oregon and Washington. Assessments upon processed pear handlers are used by the Committee to fund reasonable and necessary expenses of the marketing order. The fiscal period begins July 1 and ends June 30. The assessment rate would remain in effect indefinitely unless modified, suspended or terminated.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received by October 3, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments concerning this proposed rule. Comments must be sent to the Docket Clerk, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Fax: (202) 720-8938; or internet: http://www.regulations.gov. Comments should reference the document number and the date and page number of this issue of the Federal Register and will be made available for public inspection in the Office of the Docket Clerk during regular business hours, or can be viewed at: http://www.regulations.gov. All comments submitted in response to this proposed rule will be included in the record and will be made available to the public. Please be advised that the identity of the individuals or entities submitting the comments will be made public on the internet at the address provided above.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Teresa Hutchinson or Gary Olson, Northwest Marketing Field Office, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA; Telephone: (503) 326-2724, Fax: (503) 326-7440, or Email: [email protected] or [email protected]

    Small businesses may request information on complying with this regulation by contacting Richard Lower, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Telephone: (202) 720-2491, Fax: (202) 720-8938, or Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This proposed rule is issued under Marketing Order No. 927, as amended (7 CFR part 927), regulating the handling of pears grown in Oregon and Washington, hereinafter referred to as the “order.” The order is effective under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), hereinafter referred to as the “Act.”

    The Department of Agriculture (USDA) is issuing this proposed rule in conformance with Executive Orders 13563, and 13175.

    This proposed rule does not meet the definition of a significant regulatory action contained in section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, and is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Additionally, because this proposed rule does not meet the definition of a significant regulatory action, it does not trigger the requirements contained in Executive Order 13771. See OMB's Memorandum titled, “Interim Guidance Implementing Section 2 of the Executive Order of January 30, 2017, titled, `Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs' ” (February 2, 2017).

    This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. Under the order now in effect, Oregon and Washington pear handlers are subject to assessments. Funds to administer the order are derived from such assessments. It is intended that the assessment rate, as proposed herein, would be applicable to all assessable “summer/fall” pears for canning beginning July 1, 2017, and continue until amended, suspended, or terminated.

    The Act provides that administrative proceedings must be exhausted before parties may file suit in court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any handler subject to an order may file with USDA a petition stating that the order, any provision of the order, or any obligation imposed in connection with the order is not in accordance with law and request a modification of the order or to be exempted therefrom. Such handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on the petition. After the hearing, USDA would rule on the petition. The Act provides that the district court of the United States in any district in which the handler is an inhabitant, or has his or her principal place of business, has jurisdiction to review USDA's ruling on the petition, provided an action is filed not later than 20 days after the date of the entry of the ruling.

    This proposed rule would increase the assessment rate established for the Committee for the 2017-2018 and subsequent fiscal periods from $7.00 to $8.00 per ton for “summer/fall” pears for canning handled under the order. The assessment rate for “winter” and “other” pears for processing would remain unchanged at zero.

    The order provides authority for the Committee, with the approval of USDA, to formulate an annual budget of expenses and collect assessments from handlers to administer the program. The members of the Committee are growers, handlers, and processors of Oregon and Washington processed pears. They are familiar with the Committee's needs, and with the costs for goods and services in their local area, and are thus in a position to formulate an appropriate budget and assessment rate. The assessment rate is formulated and discussed in a public meeting. Thus, all directly affected persons have an opportunity to participate and provide input.

    For the 2012-2013 and subsequent fiscal periods, the Committee recommended, and the USDA approved, the following three base rates of assessment: (a) $7.00 per ton for any or all varieties or subvarieties of pears for canning classified as “summer/fall”, excluding pears for other methods of processing; (b) $0.00 per ton for any or all varieties or subvarieties of pears for processing classified as “winter”; and (c) $0.00 per ton for any or all varieties or subvarieties of pears for processing classified as “other”. The assessment on “summer/fall” pears applies only to pears for canning and excludes pears for other methods of processing defined in § 927.15, as pears for concentrate, freezing, dehydrating, pressing, or in any other way to convert pears into a processed product. This rate continues in effect from fiscal period to fiscal period unless modified, suspended, or terminated by USDA upon recommendation and information submitted by the Committee or other information available to USDA.

    The Committee met on May 31, 2017, and unanimously recommended expenditures of $800,150 for the 2017-2018 fiscal period. In comparison, the previous fiscal period's budgeted expenditures were $855,268. The Committee also unanimously recommended an assessment rate of $8.00 per ton for “summer/fall” pears for canning. The recommended assessment rate of $8.00 is $1.00 higher than the rate currently in effect.

    The major expenditures recommended by the Committee for the 2017-2018 fiscal period include $605,606 for promotion and paid advertising, $147,694 for research, $25,000 for administration, and $21,850 for Committee expenses. In comparison, major expenditures for the 2016-2017 fiscal period included $682,130 for promotion and paid advertising, $127,288 for research, $25,000 for administration, and $20,850 for Committee expenses.

    Committee members estimate the 2017-2018 crop to be 100,000 tons, which would be less than the 2016-2017 production of 103,000 tons by 3,000 tons. Pear production tends to fluctuate due to the effects of weather, pollination, and tree health. Because of the anticipated smaller crop, the Committee recommended to both lower budgeted expenses and increase the assessment rate for “summer/fall” pears in order to align assessment income with expenses.

    The Committee's recommended assessment rate was derived by dividing the 2017-2018 anticipated expenses by the expected shipments of “summer/fall” pears for canning, while also taking into account interest income and the Committee's monetary reserve. Shipments of “summer/fall” pears for canning for 2017-2018 are estimated at 100,000 tons, which should provide $800,000 (100,000 tons × $8.00 per ton) in assessment income. The projected revenue from handler assessments, together with funds from interest income, would be adequate to cover the 2017-2018 budgeted expenses of $800,150.

    Section 927.42(a) of the order authorizes the Committee to carry over excess funds into subsequent fiscal periods as a reserve, provided that funds do not exceed approximately one year's operational expenses. The Committee expects its monetary reserve, which was estimated to be $544,990 at the end of the 2016-2017 fiscal period, to remain unchanged during the 2017-2018 fiscal period. That amount would be within the provisions of the order and would provide the Committee with greater ability to absorb fluctuations in assessment income and expenses into the future.

    The proposed assessment rate would continue in effect indefinitely unless modified, suspended, or terminated by USDA upon recommendation and information submitted by the Committee or other available information.

    Although this assessment rate would be in effect for an indefinite period, the Committee will continue to meet prior to or during each fiscal period to recommend a budget of expenses and consider recommendations for modification of the assessment rate. The dates and times of Committee meetings are available from the Committee or USDA. Committee meetings are open to the public and interested persons may express their views at these meetings. USDA would evaluate Committee recommendations and other available information to determine whether modification of the assessment rate is needed. Further rulemaking would be undertaken as necessary. The Committee's 2017-2018 budget, and those for subsequent fiscal periods, would be reviewed and, as appropriate, approved by USDA.

    Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    Pursuant to requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) has considered the economic impact of this proposed rule on small entities. Accordingly, AMS has prepared this initial regulatory flexibility analysis.

    The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of businesses subject to such actions in order that small businesses will not be unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders issued pursuant to the Act, and the rules issued thereunder, are unique in that they are brought about through group action of essentially small entities acting on their own behalf.

    There are approximately 1,200 growers of processed pears in the regulated production area and approximately 50 processed pear handlers subject to regulation under the order. Small agricultural producers are defined by the Small Business Administration (SBA)(13 CFR 121.201) as those having annual receipts of less than $750,000, and small agricultural service firms are defined as those whose annual receipts are less than $7,500,000.

    According to the Noncitrus Fruits and Nuts 2016 Summary issued in June 2017 by the National Agricultural Statistics Service, the total farm-gate value of “summer/fall” processed pears grown in Oregon and Washington for 2016 was $27,874,000. Based on the number of “summer/fall” processed pear growers in the Oregon and Washington, the average gross revenue for each grower can be estimated at approximately $23,228 ($27,874,000 divided by 1,200). Furthermore, based on Committee records, the Committee has estimated that all of the Oregon-Washington pear handlers currently ship less than $7,500,000 worth of processed pears each on an annual basis. From this information, it is concluded that the majority of growers and handlers of Oregon and Washington processed pears may be classified as small entities.

    This proposed rule would increase the assessment rate established for the Committee, and collected from handlers, for the 2017-2018 and subsequent fiscal periods from $7.00 to $8.00 per ton for “summer/fall” pears for canning. The Committee unanimously recommended 2017-2018 expenditures of $800,150 and an assessment rate of $8.00 per ton for “summer/fall” pears for canning. The proposed assessment rate of $8.00 is $1.00 higher than the rate established for the 2012-2013 fiscal period. Because of the anticipated smaller crop, the Committee recommended to both lower budgeted expenses and increase the assessment rate for “summer/fall” pears in order to align assessment income with expenses.

    The 2017-2018 estimate of “summer/fall” pears for canning is 100,000 tons. At the proposed $8.00 per ton assessment rate, the Committee anticipates that assessment income of approximately $800,000, along with interest income, would be adequate to cover budgeted expenses for the 2017-2018 fiscal period of $800,150. With the proposed assessment rate and budgeted expense level, the Committee does not anticipate utilizing any funds from the monetary reserve. As such, reserve funds are estimated to be $544,990 at the end of the 2017-2018 fiscal period on June 30, 2018. That reserve level is within the maximum permitted by the order of approximately one fiscal period's operational expenses (§ 927.42(a)).

    The major expenditures recommended by the Committee for the 2017-2018 fiscal period include $605,606 for promotion and paid advertising; $147,694 for research; $25,000 for administration; and $21,850 for Committee expenses. In comparison, major expenditures for the 2016-2017 fiscal period included $682,130 for promotion and paid advertising; $127,288 for research; $25,000 for administration; and $20,850 for Committee expenses.

    The Committee discussed alternatives to this action, including recommending alternative expenditure levels and assessment rates. Although lower assessment rates were considered, none were selected because they would not have generated sufficient income to administer the order. Similarly, the Committee did not recommend lower levels of budgeted expenditures than proposed herein because it would have reduced the effectiveness of the program.

    A review of historical data and preliminary information pertaining to the upcoming fiscal period indicates that the grower price for the 2017-2018 fiscal period could range between $325 and $346 per ton of “summer/fall” processed pears. Therefore, the estimated assessment revenue for the 2017-2018 fiscal period, as a percentage of total grower revenue could range between 2.31 and 2.46 percent.

    This action would increase the assessment obligation imposed on handlers. While assessments impose some additional costs on handlers, the costs are minimal and uniform on all handlers. Some of the additional costs may be passed on to growers. However, these costs would be offset by the benefits derived by the operation of the order.

    In addition, the Committee's meeting was widely publicized throughout the processed pear industry and all interested persons were invited to attend the meeting and participate in Committee deliberations on all issues. Like all Committee meetings, the May 31, 2017, meeting was a public meeting and all entities, both large and small, were able to express views on this issue. Finally, interested persons are invited to submit comments on this proposed rule, including the regulatory and informational impacts of this action on small businesses.

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the order's information collection requirements have been previously approved by OMB and assigned OMB No. 0581-0189 (Generic Fruit Crops). No changes in those requirements as a result of this action are necessary. Should any changes become necessary, they would be submitted to OMB for approval.

    This proposed rule would not impose any additional reporting or recordkeeping requirements on either small or large processed pear handlers. As with all Federal marketing order programs, reports and forms are periodically reviewed to reduce information requirements and duplication by industry and public sector agencies.

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

    USDA has not identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate, overlap or conflict with this action.

    A small business guide on complying with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop marketing agreements and orders may be viewed at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/moa/small-businesses. Any questions about the compliance guide should be sent to Richard Lower at the previously mentioned address in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

    A 15-day comment period is provided to allow interested persons to respond to this proposed rule. Fifteen days is deemed appropriate because handlers are aware of this action, which was unanimously recommended by the Committee at a public meeting.

    List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 927

    Marketing agreements, Pears, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 927 is proposed to be amended as follows:

    PART 927—PEARS GROWN IN OREGON AND WASHINGTON 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 927 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 601-674.

    Subpart A—[AMENDED] 2. Designate the subpart labeled “Order Regulating Handling” as subpart A. Subpart B—[Administrative Provisions] 3. Designate the subpart labeled “Rules and Regulations” as subpart B and revise the heading as shown above. 4. Amend § 927.237 by revising the introductory text and paragraph (a) to read as follows:
    § 927.237 Processed pear assessment rate.

    On and after July 1, 2017, the following base rates of assessment for pears for processing are established for the Processed Pear Committee:

    (a) $8.00 per ton for any or all varieties or subvarieties of pears for canning classified as “summer/fall” excluding pears for other methods of processing;

    Dated: September 12, 2017. Bruce Summers, Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19615 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R06-OAR-2017-0435; FRL-9967-51-Region 6] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Arkansas; Revisions to Minor New Source Review Program AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve revisions to the Arkansas State Implementation Plan (SIP) minor New Source Review (NSR) program submitted on July 26, 2010, and March 24, 2017, including supplemental information provided on November 30, 2015, May 26, 2016, and July 27, 2017. Specifically, we are proposing to approve revisions that revise the minor NSR permitting thresholds and de minimis levels, as well as, additional non-substantive revisions. This proposed action is consistent with the requirements of section 110 of the CAA.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be received on or before October 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-2017-0435, at http://www.regulations.gov or via email to [email protected] Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the Web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact Ashley Mohr, 214-665-7289, [email protected] For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ashley Mohr, 214-665-7289, [email protected] To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment with Ms. Ashley Mohr or Mr. Bill Deese at 214-665-7253.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    I. Background

    The EPA is proposing approval of SIP revisions submitted by Arkansas on July 26, 2010, and March 24, 2017. The proposed revisions addressed in this action modify the Chapter 4 minor New Source Review rules enacted at Regulation Number 19 (Reg. 19), specifically the following provisions are addressed in this action: Reg. 19.401, 19.407(C)(2)(a) and (b), and 19.417. The revisions include revisions to the minor NSR permitting thresholds and de minimis levels.

    Our proposed approval of the revisions to the minor NSR permitting thresholds and de minimis levels does not remove, nor reduce, the federal and SIP approved requirements that each NSR permitting action authorizing emissions greater than the permitting thresholds provide an opportunity for the public to review and comment on the information submitted by the permit applicant. Nor does our action remove or reduce the federal and SIP approved requirements that as part of these permitting actions the public also have an opportunity to review and comment on the required Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality's (ADEQ) analysis and determination that the construction or modification of the facility will not interfere with attainment or maintenance of a national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). Our action also does not remove the requirement that ADEQ's approval of all minor NSR permit actions include a technical analysis and determination that the change will not interfere with NAAQS attainment or maintenance.

    A. July 26, 2010 Submittal

    On July 26, 2010, Arkansas submitted revisions to the SIP that included changes to the Regulations of the Arkansas Plan of Implementation for Air Pollution Control enacted at Reg. 19, Chapters 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, and Appendix A. These revisions were adopted by the Arkansas Pollution Control & Ecology Commission on December 5, 2008, and became effective on January 25, 2009.

    The EPA is proposing to take action only on the revisions to Chapter 4, Reg. 19.401, 19.407(C)(2)(a) and (b), and 19.417 contained in the July 26, 2010 submittal. The EPA has already taken action on other elements of this submittal as follows: (1) Regulation 19, Chapter 1, approved by EPA on4/3/2015 (See 80 FR 11573); (2) Regulation 19, Chapter 2, approved by EPA on 4/3/2015 (See 80 FR 11573); (3) Regulation 19, Chapter 5, approved by EPA on 4/3/2015 (See 80 FR 11573; (4) Regulation 19, Chapter 6, approved by EPA on 4/3/2015 (See 80 FR 11573); (5) Regulation 19, Chapter 7, approved by EPA on 4/3/2015 (See 80 FR 11573); (6) Regulation 19, Chapter 9, approved by EPA on 4/2/2013 (see 78 FR 19596); (7) Regulation 19, Chapter 10, approved by EPA on 4/3/2015 (See 80 FR 11573); (8) Regulation 19, Chapter 11, approved by EPA on 4/3/2015 (See 80 FR 11573); (9) Regulation 19, Chapter 13, approved by EPA on 4/3/2015 (See 80 FR 11573); (10) Regulation 19, Chapter 14, approved by EPA on 4/17/2014 (see 79 FR 21631); and (11) Regulation 19, Chapter 15, approved by EPA on 3/12/2012 (see 77 FR 14604). The EPA will address in a future action the remaining portions of the July 26, 2010 submittal, which are not directly related to the minor NSR permitting thresholds and de minimis levels.

    B. March 24, 2017 Submittal

    On March 24, 2017, Arkansas submitted revisions to the SIP that included changes to the Regulations of the Arkansas Plan of Implementation for Air Pollution Control enacted at Reg. 19, Chapters 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, Appendix A and Appendix B. These revisions were adopted by the Arkansas Pollution Control & Ecology Commission on February 26, 2016, and became effective on March 14, 2016.

    The EPA is proposing to take action only on Chapter 4, Reg. 19.401 and 19.407(C)(2)(a) and (b). As necessary, the EPA will address the remaining portions of the March 24, 2017 submittal, which are not directly related to the minor NSR permitting thresholds and de minimis levels, as part of separate actions.

    A summary of the EPA's evaluation of the submitted revisions and the basis for our proposed approval is included in this rulemaking. The accompanying Technical Support Document (TSD) includes a detailed evaluation of the submittals and our approval rationale. The TSD may be accessed online at www.regulations.gov, Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-2017-0435. As previously discussed, the portions of July 26, 2010 and March 24, 2017 SIP submittals evaluated in this action are those related to the revised minor NSR permitting thresholds and de minimis levels. While the TSD does include a line-by-line evaluation of each revised section addressed in our proposed approval, the following section focuses on the revised permitting thresholds and de minimis levels and the EPA's evaluation associated with those revisions.

    II. The EPA's Evaluation A. Revisions to Minor NSR Permitting Thresholds and De Minimis Levels

    The Arkansas SIP approved minor NSR program contains permitting thresholds and de minimis levels that are applicable to the state's minor NSR permitting program. Both the permitting thresholds and de minimis levels serve to exempt certain stationary sources or proposed changes at stationary sources from minor NSR permitting requirements. The permitting thresholds found in Reg. 19.401 serve to determine which stationary sources are required to obtain a minor NSR permit. Any sources with emissions equal to or greater than the specified permitting thresholds are required to obtain a permit. A de minimis change, as stated in Reg. 19.407(C), is a change at an existing source that will result in trivial environmental impacts and requires minimal judgement to establish permit requirements for the change. A de minimis change is not a title I modification, as stated in the Reg. 19, Chapter 2 definition for “title I modification.” The de minimis levels found in Reg. 19.407(C)(2) are used to determine if a proposed change at an existing permitted source may qualify as a de minimis change under Reg. 19. Under the SIP approved Arkansas minor NSR program, a de minimis change is exempt from minor NSR permitting requirements, including public notice requirements, but remains subject to the remaining applicable minor NSR requirements contained in the NSR regulation. For example, in accordance with Reg. 19.407(C)(6) requirements a de minimis change must be reviewed and approved by ADEQ prior to implementation by a stationary source. To seek a de minimis change approval, the permitted source must submit an application to ADEQ to demonstrate that the proposed change qualifies as de minimis and, therefore, qualifies for exemption from minor NSR permitting requirements. ADEQ reviews the application to ensure that the proposed change is de minimis and does not include any of the following changes found in Reg. 19.407(C)(4) that do not meet the definition of de minimis: (1) Any increase in the permitted emission rate without a corresponding physical change or change in the method of operation at the source; (2) any change which would result in a violation of the CAA; (3) any change seeking to change a case-by-case determination of an emission limitation established pursuant to Best Available Control Technology, § 112(g), § 112(i)(5), § 112(j), or § 111(d) of the CAA; (4) a change that would result in a violation of any provision of Reg. 19; (5) any change in a permit term, condition, or limit that a source has assumed to avoid an applicable requirement to which the source would otherwise be subject; (6) any significant change or relaxation to existing testing, monitoring, reporting, or recordkeeping requirements; or (7) any proposed change which requires more than minimal judgment to determine eligibility. In addition, multiple applications for de minimis changes that are concealing a larger modification would not be considered a de minimis change. As required by Reg. 19.405(A)(1), ADEQ also reviews the de minimis change applications submitted under Reg. 19, Chapter 4 to ensure that the proposed change at the stationary source will not result in the interference with attainment or maintenance of a NAAQS. If ADEQ determines that the proposed change does not qualify as de minimis, the de minimis change application is denied and the source must seek authorization via the appropriate NSR permit modification with public notice and reconstruction requirements. Otherwise if the de minimis action is approved by ADEQ, the source can make the proposed change immediately following receipt of the de minimis change approval. Any revisions to the existing minor NSR permit that may be necessary as a result of a de minimis change will be incorporated by ADEQ as expeditiously as possible as a de minimis modification.

    As previously stated, both the minor NSR permitting thresholds and de minimis levels approaches are approved into the current Arkansas SIP. As part of the submitted SIP revisions, Arkansas is proposing to revise the values for minor NSR permitting thresholds and de minimis levels for CO, NOX, SO2, VOC, and PM10. In addition, Arkansas is proposing to add minor NSR permitting thresholds for PM2.5 and de minimis levels for PM and PM2.5, which do not exist in the current SIP approved minor NSR permitting program. The following table summarizes the current and revised minor NSR permitting thresholds and de minimis levels.

    Table 1—Current SIP Approved and Revised Minor NSR Permitting Thresholds and De Minimis Levels Pollutant Minor NSR permitting
  • thresholds
  • (tpy)
  • Current SIP approved value Revised value Minor NSR de minimis levels
  • (tpy)
  • Current SIP approved value Revised value
    CO 40 75 5 75 NOX 25 40 5 40 SO2 25 40 5 40 VOC 25 40 20 40 PM None None None 25 PM10 10 15 5 15 PM2.5 None 10 None 10

    As shown in the previous table, the revised permitting thresholds and de minimis levels are less stringent than the values contained in the current Arkansas SIP. Therefore, as part of our evaluation, we reviewed the proposed revisions, along with supporting information provided by Arkansas, to determine if the proposed revisions to the minor NSR permitting thresholds and de minimis levels will interfere with attainment, reasonable further progress or any other applicable requirements of the Act. That evaluation, in accordance with section 110(l) of the Clean Air Act, is discussed in the following section.

    ADEQ does require, in accordance with Reg. 18.315, that facilities that are exempt from minor NSR permitting based on the revised permitting thresholds but have emissions greater than the previous SIP approved permitting thresholds register with the Department prior to operation, construction, or modification. In addition, the de minimis changes, which are exempt from minor NSR permitting requirements, are required to meet all remaining, applicable minor NSR provisions contained in Reg. 19, Chapter 4, including the requirements for ADEQ's technical review and determination that the proposed change will not interfere with the attainment or maintenance of a NAAQS.

    B. Analysis Under Section 110(l) of the CAA

    As part of our evaluation of the July 26, 2010 and March 24, 2017 submittals under section 110(l), we have examined: (1) The scope of impacts resulting from the proposed revisions, (2) the current status of ambient air quality in Arkansas, and (3) the impacts of the revised thresholds on ambient air quality via air monitoring and air modeling data.

    As part of the July 26, 2010 SIP revision submittal, ADEQ determined that the number of currently permitted minor NSR facilities statewide that would not be required to be permitted under the revised minor NSR permitting thresholds was twenty (20). ADEQ also determined the total permitted emissions of CO, NOX, SO2, VOC, and PM10 from these 20 facilities and compared those permitted emissions with the statewide emission inventory on a pollutant-by-pollutant basis. On a percentage basis, the emissions that would be exempt from permitting at these 20 facilities based on the revised minor NSR permitting thresholds were 0.006% to 0.125% of the statewide emission totals. On July 27, 2017, ADEQ provided a supplement to the July 2010 and March 2017 SIP revision submittals, which included similar CO, NOX, SO2, VOC, and PM10 emissions information for the de minimis changes approved for facilities in calendar year (CY) 2016. EPA reviewed the emissions information and determined that the emissions increases associated with the approved de minimis changes exempt from minor NSR permitting based on the revised de minimis levels were 0.0005% to 0.019% of the statewide emissions inventory. While this analysis was limited to the most recent calendar year, conservative scaling of the CY2016 emissions to account for the approximate 81/2 years that the revised de minimis levels have been effective in the state regulations results in total emissions that are still much less than 1% of the total statewide emissions inventory. In addition, the analysis of the de minimis actions did not account for any emissions decreases that occurred as part of the approved de minimis changes. As shown in these analyses, the emissions exempted from minor NSR permitting requirements in Arkansas as a result of the revised minor NSR permitting thresholds and de minimis levels is limited in scope and makes up a small portion of the statewide emissions inventory.

    On November 30, 2015, ADEQ provided supplemental information for the July 26, 2010 SIP revision submittal. The November 30, 2015 supplement included a monitoring trends analysis that examined statewide ambient air quality data since the adoption of the revised minor NSR permitting thresholds and de minimis levels in 2008 for CO, NOX, SO2, VOC, and PM10. This supplemental air monitoring trends report is available in the docket and may be accessed online at www.regulations.gov, Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-2017-0435. With the exception of the ozone DVs at the Springdale, Arkansas monitor located in Washington County, the DVs remain unchanged or show downward trends since the 2008 adoption of the increased minor NSR permitting thresholds and de minimis levels. In the November 30, 2015 supplement, ADEQ did further evaluation of the Springdale monitor and determined that the increases in the monitored ozone DVs at this monitor are likely due to the increases in mobile emissions in the Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers MSA as a result of rapid population growth in that area.1 Based on the ambient monitoring trend analysis, it does not appear that the increased minor NSR permitting thresholds and de minimis levels have negatively impacted ambient air quality or interfered with the attainment of the NAAQS. In fact, for several pollutants the ambient air quality has shown continued improvements as manifested in the decreases in monitored DVs during this period, and currently Arkansas does not have any areas classified as nonattainment for any NAAQS.

    1 ADEQ's November 30, 2015 supplement stated that the population of the Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers MSA has grown by over 65,000 people in the 2007-2014 timeframe.

    In addition to evaluating the scope of sources/emissions exempted from minor NSR permitting requirements and the ambient air monitoring trends following the adoption of the increased permitting thresholds and de minimis levels, as described in the March 24, 2017 SIP submittal ADEQ also conducted air quality modeling to examine the impacts of emissions increases at the level of the revised minor NSR permitting thresholds and de minimis levels. The modeling analysis was a combined photochemical/dispersion modeling analysis using the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model and the AMS/EPA Regulatory Model Improvement Committee (AERMIC) model (AERMOD). ADEQ employed this combined modeling approach in an effort to look at both regional and local scale impacts from emissions equal to the revised permitting thresholds and de minimis levels for VOC, NOX, SO2, CO, PM10, and PM2.5. An air quality modeling report detailing the modeling approaches and associated model results was submitted as part of the March 24, 2017 SIP revision submittal. This report is available in the docket and may be accessed online at www.regulations.gov, Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-2017-0435. The CMAQ regional modeling was based on a previous statewide modeling effort conducted for the 2008 base year and the 2008/2015 future year scenarios. For the minor NSR thresholds analysis, the future year (2015) emissions inventory was modified to include eight hypothetical point sources that were distributed throughout the state's Air Quality Control Regions. In order to reflect a generic, representative source, the stack parameters for the hypothetical sources were set equal to median values based on the 2011 National Emissions Inventory for Arkansas sources. The emission rates for each of the hypothetical sources were set equal to the minor NSR permitting thresholds/de minimis levels. While the regional CMAQ modeling analysis did show increases in modeled concentrations resulting from the addition of the hypothetical sources, the modeled impacts do not show impacts that affect the attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. To examine local or near-field impacts, additional modeling of the eight hypothetical sources was conducted using AERMOD. Similar to the regional modeling, these sources were modeled with emission rates equal to the minor NSR permitting thresholds/de minimis levels and stack parameters were set equal to median stack parameter based on the 2011 NEI data. The daily AERMOD-derived concentrations were added to the CMAQ-derived concentrations for the same location, using the CMAQ values as “background.” The values determined for the statewide daily maximum impacts are expected to represent the near-field concentrations assuming worst-case impacts from threshold emission increases at a range of locations throughout Arkansas. The modeled impacts from the near-field modeling analysis are much less than the NAAQS for all pollutants and averaging periods indicating that near-field impacts associated with emissions equal to the proposed minor NSR thresholds are not expected to result in NAAQS exceedances. As with the CMAQ-only regional modeling, the combined AERMOD/CMAQ modeling analysis does show increases in modeled concentrations throughout the state, and the associated future year DVs are also increased. However, the calculated future year DVs were all less than the associated NAAQS. In addition, most pollutants show decreased DVs in the future year case as compared with the current year DVs.

    Based on our evaluation of the analyses conducted by ADEQ to support the proposed minor NSR permitting thresholds and de minimis levels, we find that the increases in these values are not expected to interfere with attainment or reasonable further progress or any other applicable requirement of the Act. The scope of affected sources, permit actions, and the associated emissions that would be exempt from minor NSR permitting requirements based on the revised permitting thresholds and de minimis levels is a very small fraction of the statewide emissions inventory. In addition, since implementing the increased permitted thresholds/de minimis levels in 2008 for CO, VOC, NOX, SO2, and PM10, air quality in Arkansas has not been negatively impacted, and in many cases ambient concentrations have shown overall decreasing trends. We also find that the modeling analysis provided by ADEQ further supports the state's finding that sources with emissions less than the revised minor NSR permitting thresholds and de minimis levels are not anticipated to have impacts that would cause or contribute to an exceedance of the NAAQS. In addition, de minimis changes are still required to meet minor Source Review requirements contained in Reg. 19, Chapter 4 including a demonstration that the proposed modification will not interfere with the attainment or maintenance of a NAAQS on a case-by-case basis. Therefore, the EPA's evaluation finds that the proposed revisions to the Arkansas SIP related to the revised minor NSR permitting thresholds and de minimis levels are consistent with the requirements found in Section 110(l) further supporting our proposed approval of the revisions included in the July 26, 2010 and March 24, 2017 submittals that are evaluated in this action.

    III. Proposed Action

    The EPA proposes approval of the identified sections of the revisions to the minor NSR permitting program as submitted as revisions to the Arkansas SIP on July 26, 2010, and March 24, 2017, including supplement information submitted on November 30, 2015, May 26, 2016, and July 27, 2017. The EPA has made a determination in accordance with the CAA and the EPA regulations at 40 CFR 51.160-51.165. Therefore, under section 110 and part C of the Act, and for the reasons presented above and in our accompanying TSD, the EPA proposes to approve the following revisions to the Arkansas SIP that submitted on July 26, 2010, and March 24, 2017:

    • Revisions to Reg. 19.407 (submitted 07/26/2010 and 03/24/2017);

    • Revisions to Reg. 19.407(C)(2)(a) and (b) (submitted 07/26/2010 and 03/24/2017); and

    • Revisions to Reg. 19.417 (submitted 07/26/2010).

    As previously stated, this proposed action does not remove or modify the existing federal and state requirements that each NSR permit action issued by ADEQ include an analysis completed by the Department and their determination that the proposed construction or modification authorized by the permit action will not interfere with attainment or maintenance of a national ambient air quality standard.

    IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this action, we are proposing to include in a final rule regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with the requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, we are proposing to incorporate by reference revisions to the Arkansas regulations as described in the Proposed Action section above. We have made, and will continue to make, these documents generally available electronically through www.regulations.gov and/or in hard copy at the EPA Region 6 office.

    V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

    • Is not a “significant regulatory action” subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011) and 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 2017);

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the proposed rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: September 12, 2017. Samuel Coleman, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19716 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION 48 CFR Parts 1816, 1832, and 1852 [NFS Case 2017-N014] RIN 2700-AE39 NASA Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Revised Voucher and Invoice Submission & Payment Process AGENCY:

    National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    NASA is proposing to amend the NASA Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (NFS) to implement revisions to the voucher and invoice submittal and payment process. These revisions are necessary in order for NASA to comply with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued Memorandum M-15-19, which directed federal agencies to transition to electronic invoicing for appropriate federal procurements by the end of fiscal year 2018.

    DATES:

    Comments on the proposed rule should be submitted in writing to the address shown below on or before November 17, 2017, to be considered in the formation of the final rule.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments identified by NFS Case 2017-N014, using any of the following methods:

    Regulations.gov: http://www.regulations.gov. Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by entering “NFS Case 2017-N014” under the heading “Enter keyword or ID” and selecting “Search.” Select the link “Submit a Comment” that corresponds with “NFS Case 2017-N014.” Follow the instructions provided at the “Submit a Comment” screen. Please include your name, company name (if any), and “NFS Case 2017-N014” on your attached document.

    Email: [email protected] Include NFS Case 2017-N014 in the subject line of the message.

    Fax: (202) 358-3082.

    Mail: National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Headquarters, Office of Procurement, Contract and Grant Policy Division, Attn: John J. López, LP-011, 300 E. Street SW., Washington, DC 20546-0001.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. John J. Lopez, NASA HQ, Office of Procurement, Contract and Grant Policy Division, LP-011, 300 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20456-0001. Telephone 202-358-3740; facsimile 202-358-3082.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    NASA is proposing to revise the NFS to implement revisions to the voucher submittal and payment process. These revisions are necessary in order for NASA to comply with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued Memorandum M-15-19, which directed federal agencies to transition to electronic invoicing for appropriate federal procurements by the end of fiscal year 2018. In Fiscal Year 2016, NASA revised their voucher submission and payment process to electronically process cost type vouchers under cost-reimbursement type contracts. As part of NASA's goal to have all contract payments processed electronically by 2018, this proposed rule revises NASA's submission and payment process to have invoices for fixed price contracts submitted electronically.

    II. Discussion

    Sections of the NFS are being revised to implement changes to NASA's voucher and invoice submission and payment process. Specifically, NASA is proposing the following changes:

    • Revise the clause prescription at 1816.506-70(b) and associated clause at 1852.216-80(i) to require contractors to submit task order progress reports for all contract types.

    • Revise clause prescription at 1832.908-70 to include invoices.

    • Add alternate clause at 1852.232-80(i).

    • Revise clause at 1852.232-80(c)(2) to list relevant back-up documentation required to be submitted with invoices and fee vouchers in order for the contracting officers to review and approve them.

    III. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

    Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This is not a significant regulatory action and, therefore, was not subject to review under section 6(b) of E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, dated September 30, 1993. This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804.

    IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    NASA does not expect this rulemaking to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq., because the guidance will not create additional burden to the contractor but rather the rulemaking is intended to update the current voucher and invoice submission process at NASA resulting in fewer voucher/invoice rejections, rework, and payment delays. However, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis has been performed and is summarized as follows:

    NASA is proposing to revise the NFS to implement revisions to the voucher and invoice submittal and payment process. These revisions are necessary in order for NASA to comply with Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Memorandum M-15-19, which directed federal agencies to transition to electronic invoicing for appropriate federal procurements by the end of fiscal year 2018.

    The objective of this rulemaking is to remove the outdated NFS payment clause and associated prescription relative to the NASA voucher and invoice submittal and payment process and replace with a new clause that will revamp NASA's voucher and invoice submission and payment process to ensure the continued prompt payment to its suppliers. The revision will also minimize cost voucher and invoice submission and payment delays to NASA suppliers as well the potential accrual of Government interest payments to contractors.

    This proposed rule would apply to contractor requests for payment under all contract types. An analysis of data in the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) revealed that cost reimbursement and fixed priced contracts are primarily awarded to small businesses. FPDS data compiled over the past three fiscal years (FY2014 through FY2016) showed an average of 76,675 NASA contract actions, of which 45,011 (approximately 59%) were awarded to small businesses. However, there is no significant economic or administrative cost impact to small or large businesses because fee vouchers and invoices previously processed manually will be processed electronically. NASA anticipates that the rulemaking will have a positive benefit in the way of fewer voucher rejections, rework, and payment delays. In FY16, NASA processed approximately 55,000 vendor payment requests (invoice/voucher), which are currently received by various means (70% by email, 15% by mail, 2% by fax, 13% by an electronic secure file transfer). NASA's current payment request process for fee vouchers and invoices requires manual intervention at almost every step in the process. Manual intervention decreases speed and accuracy and adds to the cost per invoice/voucher. This rulemaking will further automate the processing of contract payments thus reducing processing delays, input errors, rework, interest penalties, which all add to the cost to process each invoice and voucher. The proposed rule does not contain additional reporting requirements, recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements.

    The proposed rule does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any other Federal rules. No alternative approaches were considered, because this approach will have minimal impact on small entities.

    NASA invites comments from small business concerns and other interested parties on the expected impact of this rulemaking on small entities. NASA will also consider comments from small entities concerning the existing regulations in subparts affected by this proposed rule in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 610. Interested parties must submit such comments separately and should cite 5 U.S.C. 610 (NFS Case 2017-N014), in correspondence.

    V. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The proposed rule contains information collection requirements that require the approval of the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35; however, these changes to the NFS do not impose additional information collection requirements to the paperwork burden previously approved under OMB Control Number 9000-0070, entitled Payments—FAR Sections Affected: 52.232-1 thru 52.232-4 and 52.232-6 thru 52.232-11.

    List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 1816, 1832, and 1852

    Government procurement.

    William Roets, Director, Contract and Grant Management Division.

    Accordingly, 48 CFR parts 1816, 1832, and 1852 are proposed to be amended as follows:

    1. The authority citation for parts 1816, 1832, and 1852 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    51 U.S.C. 20113(a) and 48 CFR chapter 1.

    PART 1816—TYPES OF CONTRACTS 2. Revise 1816.506-70 to read as follows:
    1816.506-70 NASA contract clause.

    Insert the clause at 1852.216-80, Task Ordering Procedure, in solicitations and contracts when an indefinite-delivery, task order contract is contemplated. The clause is applicable to both fixed-price and cost-reimbursement type contracts. The contracting officer shall use the clause with its—

    (a) Alternate I, if the cost type, fixed-price with prospective price redetermination, or fixed-price incentive contract does not include a NASA Form 533M reporting requirements; or

    (b) Alternate II, if a fixed price contract is contemplated.

    PART 1832—CONTRACT FINANCING 3. Revise 1832.908-70 to read as follows:
    1832.908-70 Submission of vouchers/invoices.

    Insert clause 1852.232-80, Submission of Vouchers/Invoices for Payment, in all solicitations and contracts.

    PART 1852—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES
    1852.216-80 [Amended]
    4. Amend 1852.216-80 by revising ALTERNATE I and adding ALTERNATE II to read as follows:
    1852.216-80 Task ordering procedure. Alternate I (Date)

    As prescribed in 1816.506-70(a), insert the following paragraph (i):

    (i) Contractor shall submit progress reports, as required. When required, the reports shall contain, at a minimum, the following information:

    (1) Contract number, task order number, and date of the order.

    (2) Total estimated dollar amount of task order(s).

    (3) Cost and hours incurred to date for each issued task order.

    (4) Costs and hours estimated to complete each issued task order.

    (5) Significant issues/problems associated with a task order.

    (6) Cost summary of the status of all task orders issued under the contract.

    (7) Invoice number.

    Alternate II (Date)

    As prescribed in 1816.506-70(b), insert the following paragraph (i):

    (i) Contractor shall submit progress reports, as required. When required, the reports shall contain, at a minimum, the following information:

    (1) Contract number, task order number, and date of the order.

    (2) Price and billed amounts to date for each task order.

    (3) Significant issues/problems associated with the task order.

    (4) Status of all task orders issued under the contract.

    (5) Invoice number.

    1852.232-80 [Amended]
    5. Amend section 1852.232-80 by— a. Revising clause title and date; b. In paragraph (b), removing the words “submit all vouchers electronically using” and adding the words “submit all vouchers and invoices using” in its place; c. Revising paragraphs (c) and (d); and d. In paragraph (e), removing the word “vouchers” and adding “vouchers/invoices” wherever it occurs.

    The revisions read as follows:

    1852.232-80 Submission of vouchers/invoices for payment.

    As prescribed in 1832.908-70, insert the following clause:

    Submission of Vouchers/Invoices for Payment (Date)

    (c) Payment requests. (1) The payment periods are stipulated in the payment clause(s) contained in this contract.

    (2) Vouchers submitted under cost-type contracts and invoices submitted under fixed-price contracts shall include the items delineated in FAR 32.905(b) supported by relevant back-up documentation. Back-up documentation shall include at a minimum, the following information:

    (i) Vouchers. (A) Breakdown of billed labor costs and associated contractor generated supporting documentation for billed direct labor costs to include rates used and number of hours incurred.

    (B) Breakdown of billed other direct costs (ODCs) and associated contractor generated supporting documentation for billed ODCs.

    (C) Indirect rate(s) used to calculate the amount of billed indirect expenses.

    (D) Progress reports, as required.

    (ii) Invoices. (A) Description of goods and services delivered as part of the contract's terms and conditions, including the dates of delivery/performance.

    (B) Progress reports, as required.

    (C) Date goods and services were performed.

    (iii) Fee vouchers. (A) Listing of all provisionally-billed fee by period or date earned since contract award.

    (B) A reconciliation of all billed and earned fee.

    (C) A clear explanation of the fee calculations.

    (d) Non-electronic payment requests. The Contractor may submit a non-electronic voucher/invoice using the steps for non-electronic payment requests described at https://www.nssc.nasa.gov/vendorpayment, when any of the following conditions are met:

    (1) The Contracting Officer administering the contract for payment has determined, in writing, that electronic submission would be unduly burdensome to the Contractor.

    (2) The contract includes provisions allowing the contractor to submit vouchers or invoices using the steps for non-electronic payment. In such instances the Contractor agrees to submit non-electronic payment requests using the method or methods specified in Section G of the contract.

    [FR Doc. 2017-19542 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7510-13-P
    82 179 Monday, September 18, 2017 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request September 13, 2017.

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

    Comments regarding this information collection received by October 18, 2017 will be considered. Written comments should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), New Executive Office Building, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20502. Commenters are encouraged to submit their comments to OMB via email to: [email protected] or fax (202) 395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling (202) 720-8958.

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

    Rural Housing Service

    Title: Single Family Housing Guaranteed Loan Program.

    OMB Control Number: 0575-0179.

    Summary of Collection: The Housing and Community Facilities Program (HCFP), herein referred to as the “Agency,” is a credit agency for the Rural Housing Service (RHS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The Agency offers supervised credit programs to build modest housing and essential community facilities in rural areas. Section 517(d) of Title V of the Housing Act of 1949, as amended, provides the authority for the Secretary to issue loan guarantees for the acquisition of new or existing dwellings and related facilities to provide decent, safe, and sanitary living conditions and other structures in rural areas. The Single Family Housing Guaranteed Loan Program (SFHGLP) was authorized under the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act. The purpose of SFHGLP is to assist low and moderate-income individuals and families in acquiring or constructing a single-family residence in a rural area with loans made by private lenders.

    Need and Use of the Information: Information is collected from both a potential homebuyer and lender. To participate in the program, lenders must submit to standards which ensure the loan objectives of the SFHGLP are met. The lender submits qualifications to the Agency and enters into an agreement that outlines both the lender and Agency's commitments and responsibilities under the guaranteed program. Information from a homebuyer includes financial documents such as confirmation of household income, assets and liabilities, a credit record, evidence the homebuyer has adequate repayment ability for the loan amount requested and if the condition and location of the property meet program guidelines. All information collected is vital for the Agency to determine if borrowers qualify for all assistance for which they are eligible.

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

    Number of Respondents: 1,476.

    Frequency of Responses: Reporting: Monthly; Quarterly; Annually.

    Total Burden Hours: 1,079,062.

    Charlene Parker, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19733 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-XV-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request September 13, 2017.

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

    Comments regarding this information collection received by October 18, 2017 will be considered. Written comments should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), New Executive Office Building, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20502. Commenters are encouraged to submit their comments to OMB via email to: [email protected] or fax (202) 395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling (202) 720-8958.

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

    Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

    Title: Blood and Tissue Collection, and Recordkeeping, at Slaughtering, Rendering, and Approved Livestock Marketing Establishments and Facilities.

    OMB Control Number: 0579-0212.

    Summary of Collection: The Animal Health Protection Act (AHPA) of 2002 is the primary Federal law governing the protection of animal health. The AHPA is contained in Title X, Subtitle E, Sections 10401-18 of Public Law 107-171, May 13, 2002, the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002. As part of its mission to monitor and test for livestock diseases, the Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), Veterinary Services (VS), maintains with approved slaughtering, rendering, and livestock marketing establishments and facilities agreements and procedures for animal disease surveillance and reporting, maintaining livestock movement records, and collecting blood and tissue samples.

    These agreements and procedures include information collection activities such as Approved Livestock Facility Agreements, Requests for Appeal of Denial of Agreement, Withdrawal of Livestock Facility Agreements, Requests for Appeal of Withdrawal of Agreements, Listing Agreements for Slaughter or Rendering Establishments, Slaughter or Rendering Facility Inspection Reports, Requests for Appeal of Denial of Listings, Requests for Appeal of Withdrawal of Listing, Schedules of Sales Days, Diseased Animal Notifications, Quarantine Signs, and maintaining animal movement records.

    Need and Use of the Information: The collection of this information identifies and prevents the interstate movement of unhealthy livestock animals with diseases within the United States. The information collected is used to: (1) Establish Livestock Facility Agreements and Listing Agreements between APHIS and owners and operators of slaughtering and rendering establishments and livestock marketing facilities, (2) rapidly confirm livestock disease occurrences through reporting and sampling, (3) trace the sources of diseases, as well as the movement of other potentially infected animals, and (4) provide epidemiological data for new or updated risk analyses in support of disease control programs, and, as required, opening international markets for animal products. Without the agreements and sampling/reporting procedures, the risk of contagious disease spread becomes very high with serious consequences for U.S. meat industries and export markets.

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

    Number of Respondents: 2,864.

    Frequency of Responses: Reporting: On occasion.

    Total Burden Hours: 2,471.

    Ruth Brown, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19788 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
    ARCTIC RESEARCH COMMISSION Notice of 108th Commission Meeting

    A notice by the U.S. Arctic Research Commission on 10/10/2017.

    Notice is hereby given that the U.S. Arctic Research Commission will hold its 108th meeting in Anchorage, AK, on October 10, 2017. The business sessions, open to the public, will convene at 8:00 a.m. at the Hotel Captain Cook, 939 W 5th Ave., Anchorage, AK 99501.

    The Agenda items include:

    (1) Call to order and approval of the agenda (2) Approval of the minutes from the 106th meeting (3) Commissioners and staff reports (4) Discussion and presentations concerning Arctic research activities

    The meeting will focus on reports and updates relating to programs and research projects affecting Alaska and the greater Arctic.

    The Arctic Research and Policy Act of 1984 (Title I Pub. L. 98-373) and the Presidential Executive Order on Arctic Research (Executive Order 12501) dated January 28, 1985, established the United States Arctic Research Commission.

    If you plan to attend this meeting, please notify us via the contact information below. Any person planning to attend who requires special accessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign language interpreters, must inform the Commission of those needs in advance of the meeting.

    Contact person for further information: Kathy Farrow, Communications Specialist, U.S. Arctic Research Commission, 703-525-0111 or TDD 703-306-0090.

    Dated: September 1, 2017. Kathy Farrow, Communications Specialist.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19798 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration EU-U.S. Privacy Shield; Invitation for Applications for Inclusion on the List of Arbitrators; Correction AGENCY:

    International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice; correction.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce published a document in the Federal Register of September 7, 2017, concerning request for comments on the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield; Invitation for Applications for Inclusion on the List of Arbitrators. The document contained incorrect dates.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to Nasreen Djouini at the U.S. Department of Commerce, either by email at [email protected], or by fax at: 202-482-5522.

    Correction

    In the Federal Register of September 7, 2017, in FR Doc. 2017-18896, on pages 42294-42295, in the Method of Collection section, correct the date for the deadline of application submissions to read:

    II. Method of Collection

    Please submit applications by October 6, 2017 deadline to Nasreen Djouini at the U.S. Department of Commerce, either by email at [email protected], or by fax at: 202-482-5522. More information on the arbitration mechanism may be found at https://www.privacyshield.gov/article?id=ANNEX-I-introduction.

    Sheleen Dumas, Departmental PRA Lead, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19742 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C-475-837; C-489-832] Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod From Italy and Turkey: Alignment of Final Countervailing Duty Determinations With Final Antidumping Duty Determinations AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (the Department) is aligning the final determinations in the countervailing duty (CVD) investigations of carbon and alloy steel wire rod (wire rod) from Italy and Turkey with the final determinations in the companion antidumping duty (AD) investigations.

    DATES:

    Applicable September 18, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    John Corrigan and Yasmin Bordas at (202) 482-7438 and (202) 482-3813, respectively (Italy); Justin Neuman and Omar Qureshi at (202) 482-0486 and (202) 482-5307, respectively (Turkey), AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On April 17, 2017, the Department initiated the CVD investigations of wire rod from Italy and Turkey.1 Simultaneously, the Department initiated AD investigations of wire rod from Belarus, Italy, the Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation, South Africa, Spain, the Republic of Turkey, Ukraine, the United Arab Emirates, and the United Kingdom.2 The CVD investigations and AD investigations cover the same class or kind of merchandise.

    1See Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Italy and Turkey: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigations, 82 FR 19213 (April 26, 2017).

    2See Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Belarus, Italy, the Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation, South Africa, Spain, the Republic of Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, and United Kingdom: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 82 FR 19207 (April 26, 2017).

    Alignment With AD Final Determination

    On September 5, 2017, the Department published the preliminary affirmative CVD determinations pertaining to wire rod from Italy and Turkey.3 On August 30, 2017, in accordance with section 705(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), 19 CFR 351.210(b)(4)(i), and 351.210(i), Nucor Corporation, a petitioner in the instant investigations, timely requested alignment of the final CVD determinations with the final determinations in the related AD investigations of wire rod from Italy and Turkey.4 Therefore, in accordance with section 705(a)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(4)(i), we are aligning the final CVD determinations with the final AD determinations. Consequently, the final CVD determinations will be issued on the same date as the final AD determinations, which are currently scheduled to be issued no later than January 8, 2018,5 unless postponed.

    3See Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Italy: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, 82 FR 41931 (September 5, 2017); see also Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod from the Republic of Turkey: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Preliminary Affirmative Critical Circumstances Determination, in Part, 82 FR 41929 (September 5, 2017).

    4See Letter to the Secretary re: Countervailing Duty Investigation of Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Italy: Request to Align Countervailing Duty Final Determination with Antidumping Duty Final Determination, dated August 30, 2017; see also Letter to the Secretary re: Countervailing Duty Investigation of Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod from the Republic of Turkey: Request to Align Countervailing Duty Final Determination with Antidumping Duty Final Determination, dated August 30, 2017.

    5 This date reflects the next business day after the deadline of January 7, 2018. See Notice of Clarification: Application of “Next Business Day” Rule for Administrative Determination Deadlines Pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930, As Amended, 70 FR 24533 (May 10, 2005).

    This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 705(a)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(g).

    Dated: September 12, 2017. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties for the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19774 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-979] Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, From the People's Republic of China: Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review AGENCY:

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

    DATES:

    Applicable September 18, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Krisha Hill or Celeste Chen, AD/CVD Operations, Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202) 482-4037 or (202) 482-0890, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On December 7, 2012, the Department of Commerce (Department) published in the Federal Register the antidumping duty order on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not assembled into modules, from the People's Republic of China (PRC) (Order).1 On December 1, 2016, the Department published a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the Order.2 The Department received multiple timely requests for an administrative review of the Order. On February 13, 2017, in accordance with section 751(a) of Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department published in the Federal Register a notice of the initiation of an administrative review of the Order.3 The administrative review was initiated with respect to 47 companies or groups of companies, and covers the period from December 1, 2015, through November 30, 2016. Requesting parties have subsequently timely withdrawn all review requests for nine companies or groups of companies for which the Department initiated a review, as discussed below.

    1See Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, From the People's Republic of China: Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, and Antidumping Duty Order, 77 FR 73018 (December 7, 2012).

    2See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity To Request Administrative Review, 80 FR 86694 (December 1, 2016).

    3See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 82 FR 10457 (February 13, 2017) (Initiation Notice).

    Partial Rescission

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the Department will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if a party that requested the review withdraws its request within 90 days of the date of publication of the notice of initiation of the requested review. All requesting parties withdrew their respective requests for an administrative review of the nine companies or groups of companies listed in the Appendix within 90 days of the date of publication of Initiation Notice. Accordingly, the Department is rescinding this review with respect to these companies, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1).4

    4See Appendix. As stated in Change in Practice in NME Reviews, the Department will no longer consider the non-market economy (NME) entity as an exporter conditionally subject to administrative reviews. See Antidumping Proceedings: Announcement of Change in Department Practice for Respondent Selection in Antidumping Duty Proceedings and Conditional Review of the Nonmarket Economy Entity in NME Antidumping Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 65963 (November 4, 2013). The PRC-wide entity is not subject to this administrative review because no interested party requested a review of the entity. See Initiation Notice.

    Assessment

    The Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. For the companies for which this review is rescinded, antidumping duties shall be assessed at rates equal to the cash deposit of estimated antidumping duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(l)(i). The Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 days after publication of this notice.

    Notification to Importers

    This notice serves as the only reminder to importers whose entries will be liquidated as a result of this rescission notice, 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 assumption that the 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 orders (APO) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under an APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction.

    This notice is issued and published in accordance with section 751(a)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).

    Dated: August 16, 2017. James Maeder, Senior Director, performing the duties of Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations. Appendix • BYD (Shangluo) Industrial Co., Ltd. • Canadian Solar International Limited • Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Changshu) Inc. • Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Luoyang) Inc. • Jinko Solar Co., Ltd. • Jinko Solar Import and Export Co., Ltd. • JinkoSolar International Limited • Shanghai BYD Co., Ltd. • Zhejiang Jinko Solar Co., Ltd.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19773 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-533-840] Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From India: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015-2016 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    On March 6, 2017, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain frozen warmwater shrimp from India. The period of review (POR) is February 1, 2015, through January 31, 2016. Based on our analysis of the comments received, we made certain changes in the margin calculations. Therefore, the final results differ from the preliminary results. The final weighted-average dumping margins for the reviewed firms are listed below in the section entitled “Final Results of the Review.”

    DATES:

    Applicable September 18, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Blaine Wiltse or Manuel Rey, AD/CVD Operations, Office II, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-6345 or (202) 482-5518, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    This review covers 231 producers and/or exporters. The producers/exporters which the Department selected for individual examination are Falcon Marine Exports Limited and its affiliate K.R. Enterprises (collectively, Falcon) and the Liberty Group.1 The producers/exporters which were not selected for individual examination are listed in the “Final Results of the Review” section of this notice.

    1 The Liberty Group consists of: Devi Marine Food Exports Private Ltd.; Kader Exports Private Limited; Kader Investment and Trading Company Private Limited; Liberty Frozen Foods Pvt. Ltd.; Liberty Oil Mills Ltd.; Premier Marine Products Private Limited; and Universal Cold Storage Private Limited.

    On March 6, 2017, the Department published the Preliminary Results. 2 On June 26, 2017, we received case briefs from Falcon and the Liberty Group (collectively, the respondents), the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee (the petitioner), and the American Shrimp Processors Association. On June 30, 2017, we received rebuttal briefs from the respondents and the petitioner.

    2See Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from India: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015-2016, 82 FR 12544 (March 6, 2017) (Preliminary Results).

    On June 19, 2017, we postponed the final results by 60 days, until September 5, 2017.3

    3See Memorandum to Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, from Manuel Rey, International Trade Compliance Analyst, Office II, Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, entitled “Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from India; 2015-2016 Administrative Review: Extension of Deadline for Final Results,” dated June 19, 2017.

    Scope of the Order

    The merchandise subject to the order is certain frozen warmwater shrimp.4 The product is currently classified under the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) item numbers: 0306.17.00.03, 0306.17.00.06, 0306.17.00.09, 0306.17.00.12, 0306.17.00.15, 0306.17.00.18, 0306.17.00.21, 0306.17.00.24, 0306.17.00.27, 0306.17.00.40, 1605.21.10.30, and 1605.29.10.10. Although the HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written product description remains dispositive.

    4 For a complete description of the Scope of the Order, see the memorandum from James Maeder, Senior Director performing the duties of Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to 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, entitled, “Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of the 2015-2016 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from India,” (dated concurrently with these results) (IDM), which is hereby adopted by this notice.

    Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case briefs by parties are listed in the Appendix to this notice and addressed in the IDM. Parties can find a complete discussion of these issues and the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum, which is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at http://access.trade.gov; the IDM is also available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room B8024, of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the IDM can be accessed directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. The signed IDM and the electronic version of the IDM are identical in content.

    Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on a review of the record and comments received from interested parties regarding our Preliminary Results, we made certain changes to the margin calculations performed for Falcon and the Liberty Group.5

    5See IDM at 4.

    Final Results of the Review

    We are assigning the following dumping margins to the firms listed below for the period of February 1, 2015, through January 31, 2016:

    Percent
  • margin
  • Manufacturer/Exporter Falcon Marine Exports Limited/K.R. Enterprises 0.00 The Liberty Group 0.84 Review-Specific Average Rate Applicable to the Following Companies: Abad Fisheries 0.84 Adilakshmi Enterprises 0.84 Akshay Food Impex Private Limited 0.84 Allana Frozen Foods Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Allanasons Ltd. 0.84 AMI Enterprises 0.84 Anand Aqua Exports 0.84 Ananda Aqua Applications/Ananda Aqua Exports (P) Limited/Ananda Foods 0.84 Ananda Enterprises (India) Private Limited 0.84 Andaman Sea Foods Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Angelique Intl 0.84 Anjaneya Seafoods 0.84 Apex Frozen Foods Private Limited 0.84 Aquatica Frozen Foods Global Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Arvi Import & Export 0.84 Asvini Exports 0.84 Asvini Fisheries Private Limited 0.84 Avanti Feeds Limited 0.84 B R Traders 0.84 Baby Marine Exports 0.84 Balasore Marine Exports Private Limited 0.84 Bhatsons Aquatic Products 0.84 Bhavani Seafoods 0.84 Bijaya Marine Products 0.84 Blue Fin Frozen Foods Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Bluepark Seafoods Private Ltd. 0.84 BMR Exports 0.84 BMR Industries Private Limited 0.84 Britto Exports 0.84 C P Aquaculture (India) Ltd. 0.84 Calcutta Seafoods Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Canaan Marine Products 0.84 Castlerock Fisheries Ltd. 0.84 Chemmeens (Regd) 0.84 Choice Canning Company 0.84 Choice Trading Corporation Private Limited 0.84 Coastal Aqua 0.84 Coastal Corporation Ltd. 0.84 Cochin Frozen Food Exports Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Coreline Exports 0.84 Corlim Marine Exports Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 D2 D Logistics Private Limited 0.84 Damco India Private Limited 0.84 Devi Fisheries Limited/Satya Seafoods Private Limited/Usha Seafoods 0.84 Diamond Seafoods Exports/Edhayam Frozen Foods Pvt. Ltd./Kadalkanny Frozen Foods/Theva & Company 0.84 Devi Sea Foods Limited 6 0.84 Digha Seafood Exports 0.84 Esmario Export Enterprises 0.84 Exporter Coreline Exports 0.84 Febin Marine Foods 0.84 Five Star Marine Exports Private Limited 0.84 Forstar Frozen Foods Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Frontline Exports Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 G A Randerian Ltd. 0.84 Gadre Marine Exports 0.84 Galaxy Maritech Exports P. Ltd. 0.84 Gayatri Seafoods 0.84 Geo Seafoods 0.84 Goodwill Enterprises 0.84 Grandtrust Overseas (P) Ltd. 0.84 Haripriya Marine Export Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Harmony Spices Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 HIC ABF Special Foods Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Hindustan Lever, Ltd. 0.84 Hiravata Ice & Cold Storage 0.84 Hiravati Exports Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Hiravati International P. Ltd. (located at APM—Mafco Yard, Sector—18, Vashi, Navi, Mumbai—400 705, India) 0.84 Hiravati International Pvt. Ltd. (located at Jawar Naka, Porbandar, Gujarat, 360 575, India) 0.84 IFB Agro Industries Ltd. 0.84 Indian Aquatic Products 0.84 Indo Aquatics 0.84 Indo French Shellfish Company Private Limited 0.84 Innovative Foods Limited 0.84 International Freezefish Exports 0.84 Interseas 0.84 ITC Limited, International Business 0.84 ITC Ltd. 0.84 Jaya Satya Marine Exports 0.84 Jaya Satya Marine Exports Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Jayalakshmi Sea Foods Private Limited 0.84 Jinny Marine Traders 0.84 Jiya Packagings 0.84 K R M Marine Exports Ltd. 0.84 K V Marine Exports 0.84 Kalyan Aqua & Marine Exports India Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Kalyanee Marine 0.84 Kanch Ghar 0.84 Karunya Marine Exports Private Limited 0.84 Kay Kay Exports 0.84 Kings Marine Products 0.84 Koluthara Exports Ltd. 0.84 Konark Aquatics & Exports Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Landauer Ltd. 0.84 Libran Cold Storages (P) Ltd. 0.84 Magnum Estates Limited 0.84 Magnum Export 0.84 Magnum Sea Foods Limited 0.84 Malabar Arabian Fisheries 0.84 Malnad Exports Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Mangala Marine Exim India Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Mangala Sea Products 0.84 Mangala Seafoods 0.84 Meenaxi Fisheries Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Milesh Marine Exports Private Limited 0.84 MSRDR Exports 0.84 MTR Foods 0.84 Munnangi Sea Foods Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 N.C. John & Sons (P) Ltd. 0.84 Naga Hanuman Fish Packers 0.84 Naik Frozen Foods Private Limited 0.84 Naik Seafoods Ltd. 0.84 Neeli Aqua Private Limited 0.84 Nekkanti Sea Foods Limited 0.84 Nezami Rekha Sea Foods Private Limited 0.84 NGR Aqua International 0.84 Nila Sea Foods Exports 0.84 Nila Sea Foods Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Nine Up Frozen Foods 0.84 Nutrient Marine Foods Limited 0.84 Oceanic Edibles International Limited 0.84 Overseas Marine Export 0.84 Paragon Sea Foods Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Paramount Seafoods 0.84 Parayil Food Products Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Penver Products Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Pesca Marine Products Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Pijikay International Exports P Ltd. 0.84 Pisces Seafood International 0.84 Premier Exports International 0.84 Premier Marine Foods 0.84 Premier Seafoods Exim (P) Ltd. 0.84 R V R Marine Products Limited 0.84 Raa Systems Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Raju Exports 0.84 Ram's Assorted Cold Storage Ltd. 0.84 Raunaq Ice & Cold Storage 0.84 Raysons Aquatics Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Razban Seafoods Ltd. 0.84 RBT Exports 0.84 RDR Exports 0.84 Riviera Exports Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Rohi Marine Private Ltd. 0.84 S & S Seafoods 0.84 S Chanchala Combines 0.84 S. A. Exports 0.84 S.J. Seafoods 0.84 Safa Enterprises 0.84 Sagar Foods 0.84 Sagar Grandhi Exports Private Limited 0.84 Sagar Samrat Seafoods 0.84 Sagarvihar Fisheries Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Sai Marine Exports Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 SAI Sea Foods 0.84 Salvam Exports (P) Ltd. 0.84 Sanchita Marine Products Private Limited 0.84 Sandhya Aqua Exports 0.84 Sandhya Aqua Exports Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Sandhya Marines Limited 0.84 Sarveshwari Exports 0.84 Sawant Food Products 0.84 Sea Foods Private Limited 0.84 Seagold Overseas Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Sharat Industries Ltd. 0.84 Sharma Industries 0.84 Shimpo Exports Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Shippers Exports 0.84 Shiva Frozen Food Exports Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Shree Datt Aquaculture Farms Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Shroff Processed Food & Cold Storage P Ltd. 0.84 Silver Seafood 0.84 Sita Marine Exports 0.84 Sowmya Agri Marine Exports 0.84 Sprint Exports Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Sri Chandrakantha Marine Exports 0.84 Sri Sakkthi Cold Storage 0.84 Sri Satya Marine Exports 0.84 Sri Venkata Padmavathi Marine Foods Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Srikanth International 0.84 Star Agro Marine Exports Private Limited 0.84 Star Organic Foods Incorporated 0.84 Sun-Bio Technology Ltd. 0.84 Supran Exim Private Limited 0.84 Suryamitra Exim Pvt. Ltd. 0.84 Suvarna Rekha Exports Private Limited 0.84 Suvarna Rekha Marines P Ltd. 0.84 TBR Exports Pvt Ltd. 0.84 Teekay Marine P. Ltd. 0.84 Tejaswani Enterprises 0.84 The Waterbase Ltd. 0.84 Triveni Fisheries P Ltd. 0.84 Uniroyal Marine Exports Ltd. 0.84 Unitriveni Overseas 0.84 V V Marine Products 0.84 V.S Exim Pvt Ltd. 0.84 Vasista Marine 0.84 Veejay Impex 0.84 Victoria Marine & Agro Exports Ltd. 0.84 Vishal Exports 0.84 Vitality Aquaculture Pvt., Ltd. 0.84 Wellcome Fisheries Limited 0.84 West Coast Frozen Foods Private Limited 0.84 Z A Sea Foods Pvt. Ltd. 0.84
    Assessment Rates

    The Department shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries.

    6 Shrimp produced and exported by Devi Sea Foods (Devi) was excluded from this order effective February 1, 2009. See Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From India: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, Partial Rescission of Review, and Notice of Revocation of Order in Part, 75 FR 41813, 41814 (July 19, 2010). Accordingly, we conducted this administrative review with respect to Devi only for shrimp produced in India where Devi acted as either the manufacturer or exporter (but not both).

    Because the weighted-average dumping margin for Falcon is zero, we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties.

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), because the Liberty Group reported the entered value for all its U.S. sales, we calculated importer-specific ad valorem duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales to the total entered value of the sales for which entered value was reported. To determine whether the duty assessment rates are de minimis, in accordance with the requirement set forth in 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we calculated importer-specific ad valorem ratios based on the entered value.

    For the companies which were not selected for individual examination, we used as the assessment rate the cash deposit rate assigned to these exporters, in accordance with our practice.7

    7See, e.g., Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From India: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 79 FR 51309 (August 28, 2014).

    The Department's “automatic assessment” practice will apply to entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by Falcon or the Liberty Group for which these companies did not know that the merchandise was destined for the United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the all-others rate if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction.8

    8 For a full discussion of this practice, see Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003).

    The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of these final results of review.

    Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: 1) the cash deposit rates for the reviewed companies will be the rates shown above, except if the rate is less than 0.50 percent (de minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1)), the cash deposit will be zero; 2) for previously reviewed or investigated companies not listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent period; 3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a previous review, or the original less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and 4) the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 10.17 percent, the all-others rate established in the LTFV investigation.9 These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

    9See Notice of Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from India, 70 FR 5147, 5148 (February 1, 2005).

    Notification to Importers

    This notice serves as the only 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.

    Administrative Protective Order

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

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

    Dated: September 5, 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. Appendix—List of Topics Discussed in the IDM Summary Background Scope of the Order Margin Calculations Discussion of the Issues 1: How to Define Time Periods for the Differential Pricing Analysis 2: Whether the Department Should Revise its Differential Pricing Analysis 3: Ministerial Error for Falcon 4: Species Product Characteristic 5: Date of Sale 6: Payment Terms/Payment Dates 7: Insurance Expenses 8: “Other” Selling Expenses 9: Packing Expenses 10: Methodology for Determining Raw Materials on an “As Sold” Basis 11: Raw Material Transportation Costs 12: Treatment of Certain Offsets 13: Labor Costs 14: Financial Expenses 15: Methodological Issues at Verification and New Factual Information Recommendation
    [FR Doc. 2017-19912 Filed 9-15-17; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-970] Multilayered Wood Flooring From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results of Administrative Review and Notice of Amended Final Results of Administrative Review Pursuant to Court Decision AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    On August 25, 2017, the United States Court of International Trade (CIT) issued its final judgment sustaining the Department of Commerce's (the Department) final results of remand redetermination pursuant to court order. The Department is notifying the public that the final judgment in this case is not in harmony with the Department's final results in the second administrative review of the antidumping duty order on multilayered wood flooring from the People's Republic of China (PRC), and that the Department is amending its determination with respect to Linyi Bonn Flooring Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (Linyi Bonn).

    DATES:

    Applicable September 4, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Aleksandras Nakutis, AD/CVD Operations, Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance—International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-3147.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    Linyi Bonn was reviewed in a new shipper review (NSR) of the antidumping duty order on multilayered wood flooring from the PRC, covering the period of review from December 1, 2012 through May 31, 2013.1 In the Final Results of NSR, the Department calculated a weighted-average dumping margin for Linyi Bonn of zero percent, also finding that Linyi Bonn had demonstrated its entitlement to a separate rate.2

    1See Multilayered Wood Flooring From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Reviews 2012-2013, 79 FR 66355 (November 7, 2014) (Final Results of NSR).

    2Id. at 66356.

    Linyi Bonn was also subsequently a respondent in an administrative review that partially overlapped the period of review for the NSR, in that it covered the period of review December 1, 2012 through November 30, 2013. On July 15, 2016, the Department published the Final Results in the administrative review, in which it found that Linyi Bonn was part of the PRC-wide entity, because Linyi Bonn failed to submit either a timely certification of no sales, a separate rate certification, or a separate rate application.3

    3See Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Final Results of New Shipper Review; 2012-2013, 80 FR 41476 (July 15, 2015), as corrected by Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of China, 80 FR 49,986 (Dep't of Commerce Aug. 18, 2015) (correction to final admin. review), and Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of China, 80 FR 52,447 (Dep't of Commerce Aug. 31, 2015) (correction to final admin. review) (collectively, Final Results).

    On April 21, 2017, the CIT remanded the Final Results, finding the Department's determination to assign Linyi Bonn the PRC-wide rate of 58.84 percent was contrary to law. The CIT held that the Department's Initiation Notice4 failed to provide notice to Linyi Bonn of the need to file a “partial” no shipments certification for only a portion of the review. The CIT remanded for the Department to “correct the problem created by its failure to provide notice.” 5 In particular, the CIT ordered the Department to afford Linyi Bonn “the opportunity it would have had if the Department's failure to provide notice had not occurred.” 6

    4See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part, 79 FR 6147 (February 3, 2014) (Initiation Notice).

    5See Linyi Bonn Flooring Manufacturing Co., Ltd. v. United States, Court No. 15-00227, Slip Op. 17-46, at 28.

    6Id.

    On June 19, 2017, the Department issued its Remand Results, in which the Department determined that Linyi Bonn did not have shipments during the period of review other than those already reviewed in the Final Results of NSR. 7

    7See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Order (June 19, 2017) (Remand Results).

    On August 25, 2017, the CIT issued its decision sustaining the Department's Remand Results. 8

    8See Linyi Bonn Flooring Manufacturing Co., Ltd. v. United States, Court No. 15-00227, Slip Op. 17-113.

    Timken Notice

    In its decision in Timken, 9 as clarified by Diamond Sawblades, 10 the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department must publish a notice of a court decision that is not “in harmony” with a Department determination and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a “conclusive” court decision. The CIT's August 25, 2017, judgment constitutes a final decision of that court that is not in harmony with the Department's Final Results. This notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken. Accordingly, the Department will continue the suspension of liquidation of the subject merchandise pending the expiration of the period of appeal, or if appealed, pending a final and conclusive court decision.

    9See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d. 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken).

    10See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d. 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades).

    Amended Final Results

    Because there is now a final court decision with respect to this case, the Department is amending its Final Results with respect Linyi Bonn. Based on the Remand Results, we no longer find that Linyi Bonn is part of the PRC-wide entity. Instead, we have found that Linyi Bonn had no reviewable shipments during the period of review that were not otherwise covered in the overlapping period of review for the partially concurrent NSR.

    In the event that the CIT's ruling is not appealed or, if appealed, is upheld by a final and conclusive court decision, the Department will issue appropriate instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection to give effect to the finding of no shipments during the period June 1, 2013, through November 30, 2013, and to ensure that any entries of subject merchandise that were produced and exported by Linyi Bonn during the period December 1, 2012, through May 31, 2013, are liquidated in accordance with the Final Results of NSR.

    Cash Deposit Requirements

    Because there has been a subsequent administrative review for Linyi Bonn, the cash deposit rate for Linyi Bonn will remain the rate established in the most recently-completed administrative review, which is zero percent.11

    11See Multilayered Wood Flooring From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, Final Determination of No Shipments, and Final Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014-2015, 82 FR 25766 (June 5, 2017).

    Notification to Interested Parties

    This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 516A(e)(1), 751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: September 11, 2017. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties for the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19771 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Upcoming 2018 International Trade Administration Aerospace Industry Trade Mission to Singapore AGENCY:

    International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The United States Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration (ITA) is announcing an additional upcoming trade mission that will be recruited, organized, and implemented by ITA. The mission is:

    • Aerospace Executive Service Trade Mission to the Singapore Airshow—February 5-9, 2018.

    A summary of the mission is found below. Application information and more detailed mission information, including the commercial setting and sector information, can be found at the trade mission Web site: http://export.gov/trademissions.

    For each mission, recruitment will be conducted in an open and public manner, including publication in the Federal Register, posting on the Commerce Department trade mission calendar (http://export.gov/trademissions) and other Internet Web sites, press releases to general and trade media, direct mail, broadcast fax, notices by industry trade associations and other multiplier groups, and publicity at industry meetings, symposia, conferences, and trade shows.

    The Following Conditions for Participation Will Be Used for Each Mission

    Applicants must submit a completed and signed mission application and supplemental application materials, including adequate information on their products and/or services, primary market objectives, and goals for participation. If the Department of Commerce receives an incomplete application, the Department may either: Reject the application, request additional information/clarification, or take the lack of information into account when evaluating the application. If the requisite minimum number of participants is not selected for a particular mission by the recruitment deadline, the mission may be cancelled.

    Each applicant must also certify that the products and services it seeks to export through the mission are either produced in the United States, or, if not, are marketed under the name of a U.S. firm and have at least fifty-one percent U.S. content by value. In the case of a trade association or organization, the applicant must certify that, for each firm or service provider to be represented by the association/organization, the products and/or services the represented firm or service provider seeks to export are either produced in the United States or, if not, marketed under the name of a U.S. firm and have at least 51% U.S. content.

    A trade association/organization applicant must certify to the above for all of the companies it seeks to represent on the mission.

    In addition, each applicant must:

    • Certify that the products and services that it wishes to market through the mission would be in compliance with U.S. export controls and regulations;

    • Certify that it has identified any matter pending before any bureau or office in the Department of Commerce;

    • Certify that it has identified any pending litigation (including any administrative proceedings) to which it is a party that involves the Department of Commerce; and

    • Sign and submit an agreement that it and its affiliates (1) have not and will not engage in the bribery of foreign officials in connection with a company's/participant's involvement in this mission, and (2) maintain and enforce a policy that prohibits the bribery of foreign officials.

    In the case of a trade association/organization, the applicant must certify that each firm or service provider to be represented by the association/organization can make the above certifications.

    The Following Selection Criteria Will Be Used for Each Mission

    Targeted mission participants are U.S. firms, services providers and trade associations/organizations providing or promoting U.S. products and services that have an interest in entering or expanding their business in the mission's destination country. The following criteria will be evaluated in selecting participants:

    • Suitability of the applicant's (or in the case of a trade association/organization, represented firm or service provider's) products or services to these markets;

    • The applicant's (or in the case of a trade association/organization, represented firm or service provider's) past, present, and prospective business activity in relation to the Mission's target market(s) and sector(s);

    • The applicant's (or in the case of a trade association/organization, represented firm or service provider's) potential for business in the markets, including likelihood of exports resulting from the mission; and

    • Consistency of the applicant's (or in the case of a trade association/organization, represented firm or service provider's) goals and objectives with the stated scope of the mission.

    Referrals from a political party or partisan political group or any information, including on the application, containing references to political contributions or other partisan political activities will be excluded from the application and will not be considered during the selection process. The sender will be notified of these exclusions.

    Trade Mission Participation Fees

    If and when an applicant is selected to participate on a particular mission, a payment to the Department of Commerce in the amount of the designated participation fee below is required. Upon notification of acceptance to participate, those selected have 5 business days to submit payment or the acceptance may be revoked.

    Participants selected for a trade mission will be expected to pay for the cost of personal expenses, including, but not limited to, international travel, lodging, meals, transportation, communication, and incidentals, unless otherwise noted. Participants will, however, be able to take advantage of U.S. Government rates for hotel rooms. In the event that a mission is cancelled, no personal expenses paid in anticipation of a mission will be reimbursed. However, participation fees for a cancelled mission will be reimbursed to the extent they have not already been expended in anticipation of the mission.

    If a visa is required to travel on a particular mission, applying for and obtaining such visas will be the responsibility of the mission participant. Government fees and processing expenses to obtain such visas are not included in the participation fee. However, the Department of Commerce will provide instructions to each participant on the procedures required to obtain business visas.

    Trade Mission members participate in trade missions and undertake mission-related travel at their own risk. The nature of the security situation in a given foreign market at a given time cannot be guaranteed. The U.S. Government does not make any representations or guarantees as to the safety or security of participants. The U.S. Department of State issues U.S. Government international travel alerts and warnings for U.S. citizens available at https://travel.state.gov/content/passports/en/alertswarnings.html. Any question regarding insurance coverage must be resolved by the participant and its insurer of choice.

    Definition of Small and Medium Sized Enterprise

    For purposes of assessing participation fees, the Department of Commerce defines Small and Medium Sized Enterprises (SME) as a firm with 500 or fewer employees or that otherwise qualifies as a small business under SBA regulations (see http://www.sba.gov/services/contractingopportunities/sizestandardstopics/index.html). Parent companies, affiliates, and subsidiaries will be considered when determining business size. The dual pricing reflects the Commercial Service's user fee schedule that became effective May 1, 2008 (see http://www.export.gov/newsletter/march2008/initiatives.html for additional information).

    Mission List: (additional information about each mission can be found at http://export.gov/trademissions).

    Aerospace Executive Service Trade Mission to the Singapore Airshow, February 5-9, 2018 Summary

    The United States Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration is organizing a non-Executive led Aerospace Executive Service Trade Mission (AESTM) to Singapore in conjunction with the Singapore Airshow 2018 (http://www.singaporeairshow.com).

    The AESTM will include representatives from a variety of U.S. aerospace-industry manufacturers and service providers. The mission participants will be introduced to international agents, distributors and end-users whose capabilities are targeted to each participant's needs.

    Mission participants will also be briefed by key local industry leaders who can advise on local market conditions and opportunities.

    The mission's goal for the AESTM at the Singapore Airshow is to enhance the presence of U.S. exporters at the show. The AESTM will enable U.S. aerospace and defense companies to familiarize themselves with this important air show, conduct market research, and explore export opportunities through pre-screened meetings with potential partners.

    Schedule Sunday, February 4, 2018 —Arrival of AESTM participants Monday, February 5, 2018 —One-on-one business matchmaking appointments —Networking Session with members of the Association of Aerospace Industries (Singapore) —Briefing at the designated hotel on AESTM event logistics —Breakfast Market Briefing for SA2016 exhibitors Tuesday, February 6, 2018 —Singapore Airshow participation —Attend U.S. Pavilion Ribbon Cutting Ceremony with U.S. VIP participation Wednesday, February 7, 2018 —Singapore Airshow participation —Show Time Business to Government Meeting Program Thursday, February 8, 2018 —Singapore Airshow participation —Show Time Business to Government Meeting Program Friday, February 9, 2018 —Singapore Airshow participation —Show Time Business to Government Meeting Program —Program Concludes Participation Requirements

    All companies interested in participating in the AESTM at the Singapore Airshow must complete and submit an application for consideration by the Department of Commerce. All applicants will be evaluated on their ability to meet certain conditions and best satisfy the selection criteria as outlined below. A minimum of ten and a maximum of 15 companies will be selected to participate in the mission from the applicant pool. Participants may include companies that are new to or have previously participated in the AESTM. U.S. companies already doing business in Singapore or elsewhere in the Asia-Pacific region as well as U.S. companies seeking to enter those markets for the first time may apply.

    Fees and Expenses

    After a company has been selected to participate on the mission, a payment to the Department of Commerce in the form of a participation fee is required. The participation fee will be $2,750 for a small or medium-sized enterprise (SME) and $3,450 for large firms.* The fee for each additional firm representative (large firm or SME) is $300. Expenses for travel to and from Singapore, lodging, meals, and incidentals will be the responsibility of each mission participant.

    * An SME is defined as a firm with fewer than 500 employees or that otherwise qualifies as a small business under SBA regulations (see https://www.sba.gov/contracting/getting-started-contractor/make-sure-you-meet-sba-size-standards/small-business-size-regulations#regulations). Parent companies, affiliates, and subsidiaries will be considered when determining business size. The dual pricing reflects the Commercial Service's user fee schedule that became effective April 12, 2017 (see http://trade.gov/fees/ for additional information).

    Conditions for Participation

    • An applicant must submit a completed mission application and supplemental application materials, including adequate information on the company's products and/or services, primary market objectives, and goals for participation. If the Department of Commerce receives an incomplete application, the Department may reject the application, request additional information, or take the lack of information into account when evaluating the applications.

    • Each applicant must also certify that the products and services it seeks to export through the mission are either produced in the United States, or, if not, marketed under the name of a U.S. firm and have at least 51 percent U.S. content of the value of the finished product or service.

    Selection Criteria for Participation

    • Suitability of the company's products or services to the Asia Pacific markets.

    • Applicant's potential for business in Asia Pacific, including likelihood of exports resulting from the mission.

    • Consistency of the applicant's goals and objectives with the stated scope of the mission.

    Payment must be made by December 1, 2017, otherwise USDOC reserves the rights to exclude applicants from the AESTM program.

    Referrals from political organizations and any documents containing references to partisan political activities (including political contributions) will be removed from an applicant's submission and not considered during the selection process.

    Timeline for Recruitment

    Mission recruitment will be conducted in an open and public manner, including publication in the Federal Register and posting on the Commerce Department trade missions calendar—http://export.gov/trademissions/—and other Internet Web sites, publication in domestic trade publications and association newsletters, mailings from internal mailing lists, faxes to internal aerospace clients, emails to aerospace distribution lists, and promotion at industry meetings, symposia, conferences, trade shows, and other events. The ITA Aerospace and Defense Technology Team members in U.S. Export Assistance Centers will have the lead in recruiting the AESTM.

    Recruitment for the mission will begin immediately and conclude no later than December 1, 2017. The U.S. Department of Commerce will evaluate applications and inform applicants of selection decisions periodically during the recruitment period. All applications received subsequent to an evaluation date will be considered at the next evaluation. Applications received after December 1, 2017, will be considered only if space and scheduling constraints permit.

    Contacts Jason Sproule, Senior International Trade Specialist, U.S. Commercial Service—Los Angeles, U.S. Department of Commerce, Phone: +1-213-894-8785, Email: [email protected] Hawcheng Ng, Commercial Specialist, U.S. Embassy Singapore, U.S. Department of Commerce, Phone: +011-65-6476-9037, Email: [email protected]
    Frank Spector, Senior Advisor for Trade Missions.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19797 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DR-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-533-861] Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin From India: Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015/2017 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (the Department) is rescinding the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain polyethylene terephthalate resin from India, based on the timely withdrawal of request for review. The period of review (POR) is October 15, 2015, through April 30, 2017.

    DATES:

    Applicable September 18, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    On May 1, 2017, the Department published in the Federal Register a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the antidumping duty order 1 of certain polyethylene terephthalate resin from India for the POR October 15, 2015, through April 30, 2017.2 On May 31, 2017, the Department received a timely request for an administrative review from Ester Industries Ltd. (Ester), in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.213(b).3 No other parties requested an administrative review. Pursuant to Ester's review request and in accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), on July 6, 2017, the Department published in the Federal Register a notice of initiation of an administrative review covering Ester.4 However, on July 17, 2017, Ester withdrew its request for an administrative review.5

    1See Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from Canada, the People's Republic of China, India, and the Sultanate of Oman: Amended Final Affirmative Antidumping Determination (Sultanate of Oman) and Antidumping Duty Orders, 81 FR 27979 (May 6, 2016).

    2See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity to Request Administrative Review, 82 FR 20315 (May 1, 2017).

    3See Ester letter to Secretary of Commerce, “Ester Industries Ltd: Request for Administrative Review of Anti-Dumping Duty Administrative Review,” dated May 31, 2017.

    4See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 82 FR 31292 (July 6, 2017).

    5See Ester letter to Secretary of Commerce, “Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from India: Withdrawal Request for Review—Ester Industries Ltd,” dated July 17, 2017.

    Rescission of Review

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the Department will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if the party, or parties, that requested a review withdraws the requests within 90 days of the publication of the notice of initiation of the requested review. As noted above, Ester withdrew its request for review by the 90-day deadline, and no other party requested an administrative review of this order. Therefore, in response to the timely withdrawal of the request for review, and in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the Department is rescinding this review.

    Assessment

    The Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. Antidumping duties shall be assessed at rates equal to the cash deposit of estimated antidumping duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(1)(i). The Department intends to issue appraisement instructions to CBP 15 days after the publication of this notice in the Federal Register.

    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 POR. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Department's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.

    Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Order

    This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). 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 sanctionable violation.

    This notice is published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).

    Dated: September 12, 2017. James Maeder, Senior Director performing the duties of Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19772 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C-580-882] Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products From the Republic of Korea: Correction to the Opportunity To Request Administrative Review Notice AGENCY:

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brian Davis, AD/CVD Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-7924.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    On September 1, 2017, the Department published its opportunity to request administrative review of antidumping or countervailing duty orders, findings, or suspended investigations, as appropriate, for the September 2017 anniversary month.1 The Initiation Notice included a reference to the countervailing duty order on certain cold-rolled steel flat products from the Republic of Korea, and identified the period of review for that order as July 1, 2016, through December 31, 2016.2 However, the correct period of review is July 29, 2016, through December 31, 2016. The Department is hereby correcting the Initiation Notice to address this error. This correction to the notice of initiation of administrative review is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a) and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended.

    1See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity to Request Administrative Review, 82 FR 41595 (September 1, 2017) (Initiation Notice).

    2Id. at 41597.

    Dated: September 12, 2017. James Maeder, Senior Director performing the duties of Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19770 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XF692 Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of a public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Pacific Fishery Management Council's (Pacific Council) Groundfish Management Team (GMT) will hold a week-long work session that is open to the public.

    DATES:

    The GMT meeting will be held Monday, October 2, 2017, from 1 p.m. (Pacific Daylight Time) until business for the day is completed. The GMT meeting will reconvene Tuesday, October 3 through Thursday, October 5, 2017, from 8:30 a.m. until business for each day has been completed.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the Pacific Council, Large Conference Room, 7700 NE Ambassador Place, Suite 101, Portland, OR 97220-1384.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Kelly Ames, Pacific Council; phone: (503) 820-2426.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The primary purpose of the GMT meeting is to develop recommendations for consideration by the Pacific Council at its November 14-20, 2017 meeting in Costa Mesa, California. Specific agenda topics include the development of the 2019-2020 harvest specifications and management measures including rebuilding analyses. The GMT may also address other groundfish and administrative agenda items scheduled for the November Council meeting. A detailed agenda will be available on the Council's Web site prior to the meeting. No management actions will be decided by the GMT.

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

    Special Accommodations

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

    Dated: September 13, 2017. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19745 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XF693 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 Pacific Fishery Management Council's (Pacific Council) Coastal Pelagic Species Management Team (CPSMT) will hold a meeting that is open to the public.

    DATES:

    The CPSMT meeting will be held Tuesday, October 3 through Thursday, October 5, 2017. The meeting will begin at 9 a.m. on October 3, and 8:30 a.m. each other day. The meeting will go until 5 p.m. each day or until business for each day has been completed.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held in the Krill Conference Room of the NOAA Southwest Fisheries Science Center, 8901 La Jolla Shores Dr., La Jolla, CA 92037-1508.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kerry Griffin, Pacific Council; telephone: (503) 820-2409.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The purpose of the meeting is to discuss several items relevant to coastal pelagic species (CPS) management. These include CPS Fishery Management Plan housekeeping updates, anchovy abundance and reference points, completion of the CPS Stock Assessment and Fishery Evaluation document, future meeting planning, and administrative items. Public comment may be taken at the discretion of the CPSMT Chair.

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

    Special Accommodations

    This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Mr. Dale Sweetnam; email: [email protected]; phone: (858) 546-7170 at least 10 days prior to the meeting date.

    Dated: September 13, 2017. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19746 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION Agency Information Collection Activities: Notice of Intent To Renew Collection Number 3038-0062, Off-Exchange Foreign Currency Transactions AGENCY:

    Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC” or “Commission”) is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed renewal of a collection of certain information by the agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act (“PRA”), Federal agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, and to allow 60 days for public comment. This notice solicits comments on the collections of information provided for by part 5 of the Commission's regulations under the Commodity Exchange Act (“CEA”) relating to off-exchange foreign currency transactions.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before November 17, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by “Off-Exchange Foreign Currency Transactions,” and Collection Number 3038-0062 by any of the following methods:

    • The Agency's Web site, at http://comments.cftc.gov/. Follow the instructions for submitting comments through the Web site.

    Mail: Christopher Kirkpatrick, Secretary of the Commission, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW., Washington, DC 20581.

    Hand Delivery/Courier: Same as mail above. Please submit your comments using only one method.

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

    Please submit your comments using only one method.

    All comments must be submitted in English, or if not, accompanied by an English translation. Comments will be posted as received to http://www.cftc.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Lauren Bennett, Special Counsel, 202-418-5290, [email protected], Division of Swap Dealer and Intermediary Oversight, Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the PRA, Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of Information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3 and includes agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A), requires Federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, the CFTC is publishing notice of the proposed collection of information listed below. 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.

    Title: Off-Exchange Foreign Currency Transactions (OMB Control No. 3038-0062). This is a request for an extension of a currently approved information collection.

    Abstract: Part 5 of the Commission's regulations under the CEA establishes rules applicable to retail foreign exchange dealers (“RFEDs”), futures commission merchants (“FCMs”), introducing brokers (“IBs”), commodity trading advisors (“CTAs”), and commodity pool operators (“CPOs”) engaged in the offer and sale of off-exchange forex contracts to retail customers. Specifically:

    Regulation 5.5 requires RFEDs, FCMs, and IBs to distribute risk disclosure statements to new retail forex customers.

    Regulation 5.6 requires RFEDs and FCMs to report any failures to maintain the minimum capital required by Commission regulations.

    Regulation 5.8 requires RFEDs and FCMs to calculate their total retail forex obligation.

    Regulation 5.10 requires RFEDs to maintain and preserve certain risk assessment documentation.

    Regulation 5.11(a)(1) requires RFEDs to submit certain risk assessment documentation to the Commission within 60 days of the effective date of their registration.

    Regulation 5.11(a)(2) requires RFEDs to submit certain financial documentation to the Commission within 105 calendar days of the end of each fiscal year. RFEDs must also submit additional information, if requested, regarding affiliates' financial impact on an RFED's organizational structure.

    Regulation 5.12(a) requires RFED applicants to submit a Form 1-FR-FCM concurrently with their registration application.

    Regulation 5.12(b) requires registered RFEDs to file a Form 1-FR-FCM on a monthly and annual basis.

    Regulation 5.12(g) states that, in the event that an RFED cannot file its Form 1-FR-FCM for any period within the time specified in Regulation 5.12(b), the RFED may file an application for an extension of time with its self-regulatory organization.

    Regulation 5.13(a) requires RFEDs and FCMs to provide monthly account statements to their customers.

    Regulation 5.13(b) requires RFEDs and FCMs to provide confirmation statements to their customers within one business day after the execution of any retail forex or forex option transaction.

    Regulation 5.14 requires RFEDs and FCMs to maintain current ledgers of each transaction affecting its asset, liability, income, expense and capital accounts.

    Regulation 5.18(g) requires each RFED, FCM, CPO, CTA, and IB subject to part 5 to maintain a record of all communications received that give rise to possible violations of the Act, rules, regulations or orders thereunder related to their retail forex business.

    Regulation 5.18(i) requires each RFED and FCM to prepare and maintain on a quarterly basis a calculation of non-discretionary retail forex customer accounts open for any period of time during the quarter that were profitable, and the percentage of such accounts that were not profitable.

    Regulation 5.18(j) requires the CCO of each RFED and FCM to certify annually that the firm has in place processes to establish, maintain, review, modify and test policies and procedures reasonably designed to achieve compliance with the Act, rules, regulations and orders thereunder.

    Regulation 5.19 requires each RFED, FCM, CPO, CTA, and IB subject to part 5 to submit to the Commission copies of any dispositive or partially dispositive decision for which a notice of appeal has been filed in any material legal proceeding (1) to which the firm is a party to or to which its property or assets is subject with respect to retail forex transactions, or (2) instituted against any person who is a principal of the firm arising from conduct in such person's capacity as a principal of that firm.

    Regulation 5.20 requires RFEDs, FCMs and IBs to submit documentation requested pursuant to certain types of special calls by the Commission.

    Regulation 5.23 requires RFEDs, FCMs and IBs to notify the Commission regarding bulk transfers and bulk liquidations of customer accounts.

    The rules establish reporting and recordkeeping requirements that are necessary to implement the provisions of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 1 regarding off-exchange transactions in foreign currency with members of the public. The rules are intended to promote customer protection by providing safeguards against irresponsible or fraudulent business practices.2

    1 Public Law 110-246, 122 Stat. 1651, 2189-220 (2008).

    2See Regulation of Off-Exchange Retail Foreign Exchange Transactions and Intermediaries, 75 FR 55410, 55416 (Sept. 10, 2010).

    With respect to the collection of information, the CFTC invites comments on:

    • Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information will have a practical use;

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

    • Ways to enhance the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    • Ways to minimize the burden of 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.

    All comments must be submitted in English, or if not, accompanied by an English translation. Comments will be posted as received to http://www.cftc.gov. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. If you wish the Commission to consider information that you believe is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, a petition for confidential treatment of the exempt information may be submitted according to the procedures established in § 145.9 of the Commission's regulations.3

    3 17 CFR 145.9.

    The Commission reserves the right, but shall have no obligation, to review, pre-screen, filter, redact, refuse or remove any or all of your submission from http://www.cftc.gov that it may deem to be inappropriate for publication, such as obscene language. All submissions that have been redacted or removed that contain comments on the merits of the Information Collection Request will be retained in the public comment file and will be considered as required under the Administrative Procedure Act and other applicable laws, and may be accessible under the Freedom of Information Act.

    Burden Statement: The Commission is revising its estimate of the burden for this collection to reflect the current number of affected registrants and revised burden estimates. Accordingly, the respondent burden for this collection is estimated to be as follows:

    Number of Registrants: 169.

    Estimated Average Burden Hours per Registrant: 777.

    Estimated Aggregate Burden Hours: 131,259.

    Frequency of Recordkeeping: As applicable.

    Authority:

    44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

    Dated: September 12, 2017. Robert N. Sidman, Deputy Secretary of the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19749 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Air Force Air University Board of Visitors Meeting AGENCY:

    Air University Board of Visitors, Department of Air Force.

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    Under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and 41 CFR 102-3.150, the Department of Defense announces that the Air University Board of Visitors' fall meeting will take place on Monday, 13 November 2017, from 8:00 a.m. to approximately 5 p.m. and Tuesday, 14 November, 2017, from 7:30 a.m. to approximately 3:00 p.m. Central Standard Time. The meeting will be held in the Air University Commander's Conference Room located in Building 800 at Maxwell Air force Base, AL. The purpose of this meeting is to provide independent advice and recommendations on matters pertaining to the educational, doctrinal, and research policies and activities of Air University.

    The agenda will include topics relating to the policies, programs, and initiatives of Air University educational programs and will include an out brief from the Air Force Institute of Technology and Community College of the Air Force Subcommittees.

    Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended, and 41 CFR 102-3.155 all sessions of the Air University Board of Visitors' meetings' will be open to the public. Any member of the public wishing to provide input to the Air University Board of Visitors' should submit a written statement in accordance with 41 CFR 102-3.140(c) and section 10(a)(3) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act and the procedures described in this paragraph. Written statements can be submitted to the Designated Federal Officer at the address detailed below at any time.

    Statements being submitted in response to the agenda mentioned in this notice must be received by the Designated Federal Officer at the address listed below at least ten calendar days prior to the meeting which is the subject of this notice. Written statements received after this date may not be provided to or considered by the Air University Board of Visitors until its next meeting. The Designated Federal Officer will review all timely submissions with the Air University Board of Visitors' Board Chairperson and ensure they are provided to members of the Board before the meeting that is the subject of this notice. Any member of the public wishing to attend this meeting should contact the Designated Federal Officer listed below at least ten calendar days prior to the meeting for information on base entry procedures.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. Shawn O'Mailia, Designated Federal Officer, Air University Headquarters, 55 LeMay Plaza South, Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama 36112-6335, telephone (334) 953-4547.

    Henry Williams, Acting Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19758 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-10-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Navy [Docket ID: USN-2014-0016] Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Marine Junior Reserve Officer's Training Corps (MCJROTC), DoD.

    ACTION:

    30-Day information collection notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Defense has submitted to OMB for clearance, the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act.

    DATES:

    Consideration will be given to all comments received by October 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments and recommendations on the proposed information collection should be emailed to Ms. Jasmeet Seehra, DoD Desk Officer, at [email protected] Please identify the proposed information collection by DoD Desk Officer and the Docket ID number and title of the information collection.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Fred Licari, 571-372-0493, or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title, Associated Form and OMB Number: Individual MCJROTC Instructor Evaluation Summary; NAVMC 10942; OMB Control Number 0703-0016.

    Type of Request: Reinstatement.

    Number of Respondents: 509.

    Responses per Respondent: 1.

    Annual Responses: 509.

    Average Burden per Response: 30 minutes.

    Annual Burden Hours: 254.5 hours.

    Needs and Uses: The information collection requirement is necessary to provide a written record of the overall performance of duty of MCJROTC instructors who are responsible for implementing the MCJROTC curriculum. The individual MCJROTC Instructor Evaluation Summary is completed by principles to evaluate the effectiveness of individual MCJROTC instructors. The form is further used as a performance related counseling tool and as a record of service performance to document performance and growth of individual MCJROTC instructors. Evaluating the performance of instructors is essential in ensuring that they provide quality training.

    Affected Public: Individuals or Households.

    Frequency: On occasion.

    Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

    OMB Desk Officer: Ms. Jasmeet Seehra.

    You may also submit comments and recommendations, identified by Docket ID number and title, by the following method:

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

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name, Docket ID number and title for this Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.

    DoD Clearance Officer: Mr. Frederick Licari.

    Written requests for copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Mr. Licari at WHS/ESD Directives Division, 4800 Mark Center Drive, East Tower, Suite 03F09, Alexandria, VA 22350-3100.

    Dated: September 13, 2017. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19751 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Navy Board of Advisors to the Presidents of the Naval Postgraduate School and the Naval War College; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Meeting AGENCY:

    Department of the Navy, Board of Advisors to the Presidents of the Naval Postgraduate School and the Naval War College, Department of Defense

    ACTION:

    Notice of Federal Advisory Committee meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Defense (DoD) is publishing this notice to announce that the following Federal Advisory Committee meeting of the Board of Advisors (BOA) to the Presidents of the Naval Postgraduate School (NPS) and the Naval War College (NWC) will take place.

    DATES:

    Day 1—Open to the public Wednesday, October 18, 2017, from 9:00 a.m. to 5 p.m. Day 2—Open to the public Thursday, October 19, 2017, from 9:00 a.m. to 12 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at 3003 Washington Boulevard, Arlington, VA.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jacquelyn (Jaye) Panza, 831-656-2514 (Voice), 831-656-2337 (Facsimile), [email protected] (Email). Mailing address is Naval Postgraduate School, 1 University Circle, Monterey, CA 93943-5001. Web site: https://my.nps.edu/web/board-of-advisors/home. The most up-to-date changes to the meeting agenda may be found on the Web site.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This meeting is being held under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) of 1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and 41 CFR 102-3.140 and 102-3.150.

    Purpose of the Meeting: The Committee examines the effectiveness with which the NPS and the NWC are accomplishing its missions.

    Agenda: Board of Advisors to the Presidents of the Naval Postgraduate School and the Naval War College Committee (NPS/NWC BOA) and its two subcommittees will be held. This meeting will be open to the public. For more information about the Committee, please visit http://my.nps.edu/web/board-of-advisors. 1. October 18, 2017, 9:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m.: The NPS BOA Subcommittee will meet to inquire into programs and curricula; instruction; administration; state of morale of the student body, faculty, and staff; fiscal affairs of NPS. The committee will review any other matters relating to the operations of the NPS as the board considers pertinent. 2. October 18, 2017, 1:00 p.m.-5:00 p.m.: General deliberations and inquiry by the NWC BOA Subcommittee into NWC programs and mission priorities; re-accreditation review; administration; military construction; leader development continuum; defense planning guidance efforts; and any other matters relating to the operations of the NWC as the board considers pertinent. 3. October 19, 2017, 9:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m.: The NPS and NWC Subcommittees will provide out briefs from their meetings to the NPS/NWC BOA Committee after which the Committee will discuss topics raised during the subcommittee sessions.

    Meeting Accessibility: Meeting room is fully accessible to persons with disabilities in compliance with applicable disability rights laws.

    Written Statements: For access, information, or to send written statements for consideration at the committee meeting contact Ms. Jaye Panza, Designated Federal Official, Naval Postgraduate School, 1 University Circle, Monterey, CA 93943-5001 or by fax 831-656-2337 by October 12, 2017.

    Dated: September 12, 2017. A.M. Nichols, Lieutenant Commander, Judge Advocate General's Corps, U.S. Navy, Federal Register Liaison Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19764 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3810-FF-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION [Docket No.: ED-2017-ICCD-0072] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Integrated Partner Management (IPM) System AGENCY:

    Federal Student Aid (FSA), Department of Education (ED).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, ED is proposing a new information collection.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before October 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    To access and review all the documents related to the information collection listed in this notice, please use http://www.regulations.gov by searching the Docket ID number ED-2017-ICCD-0072. Comments submitted in response to this notice should be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov by selecting the Docket ID number or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. Please note that comments submitted by fax or email and those submitted after the comment period will not be accepted. Written requests for information or comments submitted by postal mail or delivery should be addressed to the Director of the Information Collection Clearance Division, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., LBJ, Room 216-34, Washington, DC 20202-4537.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact Beth Grebeldinger, 202-377-4018.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Department of Education (ED), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. ED is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

    Title of Collection: Integrated Partner Management (IPM) System.

    OMB Control Number: 1845-NEW.

    Type of Review: A new information collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: State, Local, and Tribal Governments; Private Sector.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 9,220.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 7,890.

    Abstract: Federal Student Aid has developed the Integrated Partner Management (IPM) system. IPM is the new solution for application processing and financial reporting, that will replace 3 legacy applications. Consolidation of these applications will improve timeliness, data integrity and Department's analysts' ability to get a comprehensive view from one application as opposed to the current disjointed views across multiple applications. The new IPM system will include the application for approval for institutions and financial partners (including lenders) to participate in Federal Student Financial Aid programs. The IPM system will also allow institutions and financial partners participating in the Title IV HEA programs to submit the required audited financial statements and compliance audits. IPM includes significant advances to both partners and FSA analysts in the process used for providing oversight to FSA partners in the Title IV and improvements in the tools and technologies currently in place. IPM will transition a process that is currently heavily paper based to an easy to navigate, automated work-flow process. Under the IPM system the institutions log into a secure Department Web site, enter information pertaining to their eligibility, audit and finances and attach electronic documents to support eligibility, audit and financial statement submissions.

    Dated: September 13, 2017. Kate Mullan, Acting Director, Information Collection Clearance Division, Office of the Chief Privacy Officer, Office of Management.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19769 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY National Petroleum Council Meeting AGENCY:

    Office of Fossil Energy, Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Notice of open meeting; correction.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Energy (DOE) published in the Federal Register on September 11, 2017, a notice of an open meeting for the National Petroleum Council. The notice is being corrected for the street address. Agenda items will stay the same.

    Correction

    In the Federal Register of September 11, 2017, in FR DOC. 2017-19096, on page 42664, make the following corrections:

    In the ADDRESSES heading, first column, first paragraph, first line, correct address to, “800 Sixteenth Street NW.,”

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 12, 2017. LaTanya R. Butler, Deputy Committee Management Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19747 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Agency Information Collection Extension AGENCY:

    U.S. Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Submission for Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review; comment request.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Energy (DOE) has submitted an information collection request to the OMB for an extension under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The DOE requests a three-year extension of its “Privacy Act Administration” information collection (formerly titled “Records and Administration”), OMB Control Number 1910-1700. The information collection and collection instrument aids DOE's processing of Privacy Act requests submitted by an individual or an authorized representative, wherein he or she requests records that the government may maintain pertaining to that individual. The DOE's use of this form continues to contribute to DOE's Privacy Act processes, including, but not limited to, providing for faster processing of Privacy Act information requests by asking individuals or their authorized representatives for pertinent information needed for records retrieval. DOE published a 60-day Notice and Request for Comments concerning this collection in the Federal Register on April 10, 2017. No comments were received in response to the 60-day notice.

    DATES:

    Comments regarding this collection must be received on or before October 18, 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, please advise the OMB Desk Officer of your intention to make a submission as soon as possible. The Desk Officer may be telephoned at 202-395-4718.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to the DOE Desk Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Room 10102, 735 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503 and to Ken Hunt, Chief Privacy Officer, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Rm. 8H-085, Washington, DC 20585 or by facsimile at 202-586-8151 or by email at [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ken Hunt, Chief Privacy Officer, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Rm. 8H-085, Washington, DC 20585 or by facsimile at 202-586-8151 or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This information collection request contains: (1) OMB No. 1910-1700; (2) Information Collection Request Title: Privacy Act Administration (formerly titled “Records and Administration”); (3) Type of Request: Regular; (4) Purpose: The Privacy Act Information Request form aids DOE's processing of Privacy Act requests submitted by an individual or an authorized representative, wherein he or she requests records that the government may maintain pertaining to that individual. The DOE's use of this form continues to contribute to DOE's Privacy Act processes, including, but not limited to, providing for faster processing of Privacy Act information requests by asking individuals or their authorized representatives for pertinent information needed for records retrieval; (5) Annual Estimated Number of Respondents: 135; (6) Annual Estimated Number of Total Responses: 135; (7) Annual Estimated Number of Burden Hours: 45; (8) Annual Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Burden: $0.

    Statutory Authority: The Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552(a); 10 CFR 1008.7; and DOE Order 206.1.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on July 19, 2017. Allan K. Manuel, Deputy Chief Information Officer for Enterprise Policy, Portfolio Management, and Governance, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19768 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Notice of Request for Information on Solar Energy Technology Analysis & Data Needs AGENCY:

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Notice of request for information.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) invites public comment on its Request for Information (RFI) number DE-FOA-0001818 regarding the Solar Energy Technology Analysis & Data Needs. DOE's Solar Energy Technologies Office (SETO) is requesting input on integrated data and analysis needs across the solar value chain to inform near to mid-term plans for the development of resources such as information based network planning, real time optimization, and bankability tools in the context of DOE's SunShot 2030 goals. SETO aims to better understand the information-related problems and questions that exist for key stakeholders, including manufacturers, project developers, financiers, engineering procurement and construction businesses, state and local jurisdictions, researchers, analysts, and others supporting the technological advancement and wide scale adoption of solar technology.

    DATES:

    Responses to the RFI must be received by October 6, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested parties are to submit comments electronically to [email protected] no later than 5:00 p.m. (ET) on October 6, 2017. Include Solar Energy Technology Analysis & Data Needs in the subject of the title. Responses must be provided as attachments to an email and only electronic responses will be accepted. Please identify your answers by responding to a specific question or topic if applicable. Respondents may answer as many or as few questions as they wish. Respondents are requested to provide the following information at the start of their response to this RFI:

    • Company/institution name;

    • Company/institution contact;

    • Contact's address, phone number, and email address.

    The complete RFI document is located at https://eere-exchange.energy.gov/.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Questions may be addressed to Dr. Casey Canfield, ORISE Fellow, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Solar Energy Technologies Office, EE-4S, 1000 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20585. Telephone: 202-287-1783. Email: [email protected] Further instruction can be found in the RFI document posted on EERE Exchange.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    SETO is requesting information about (1) how the U.S. solar industry and application space use and value existing resources, (2) needs that can be addressed with data access, research, and analysis, and (3) opportunities to better engage stakeholders on the use and development of these resources. Over the past three years, a variety of high-quality informational resources on solar energy technology have been created by a diverse group of organizations, including universities, consultants, companies, technology developers, and the national laboratories. By cataloguing the specific information resources that the industry relies on, SETO hopes to better understand the vision driving innovation and identify gaps in knowledge creation or exchange. SETO is also interested in understanding the channels through which stakeholders access information so that future SETO-funded analysis can be disseminated as widely and effectively as possible. In addition, SETO is interested in understanding to what degree stakeholders are interested in being engaged in the development process of new tools and resources.

    The RFI is available at: https://eere-exchange.energy.gov/.

    Confidential Business Information

    Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person submitting information that he or she believes to be confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit via email two well marked copies: One copy of the document marked “confidential” including all the information believed to be confidential, and one copy of the document marked “non-confidential” with the information believed to be confidential deleted. DOE will make its own determination about the confidential status of the information and treat it according to its determination.

    Factors of interest to DOE when evaluating requests to treat submitted information as confidential include: (1) A description of the items; (2) whether and why such items are customarily treated as confidential within the industry; (3) whether the information is generally known by or available from other sources; (4) whether the information has previously been made available to others without obligation concerning its confidentiality; (5) an explanation of the competitive injury to the submitting person that would result from public disclosure; (6) when such information might lose its confidential character due to the passage of time; and (7) why disclosure of the information would be contrary to the public interest.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 12, 2017. Ebony Vauss, Acting Director, Solar Energy Technologies Office, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19775 Filed 9-15-17; 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 rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER11-1850-007; ER11-1846-007; ER11-1847-007; ER11-1848-007; ER11-2598-010; ER13-1192-004.

    Applicants: Direct Energy Business, LLC, Direct Energy Business Marketing, LLC, Direct Energy Marketing Inc., Direct Energy Services, LLC, Gateway Energy Services Corporation, Energy America, LLC.

    Description: Second Supplement to June 28, 2017 Northeast Region Triennial Report of the Direct Energy Sellers.

    Filed Date: 9/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20170908-5132.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-1191-003.

    Applicants: Otter Tail Power Company.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to Submit Restated Conforming Agreement—Rate Schedule No. 151 to be effective 7/30/2010.

    Filed Date: 9/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20170908-5054.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2152-000.

    Applicants: Cottonwood Wind Project, LLC.

    Description: Amendment to July 26, 2017 Cottonwood Wind Project, LLC tariff filing.

    Filed Date: 9/7/17.

    Accession Number: 20170907-5205.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/28/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2203-001.

    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Service Agreement Nos. 218 and 335—Revision to be effective 7/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/7/17.

    Accession Number: 20170907-5184.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/28/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2322-001.

    Applicants: Nexus Energy Inc.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Nexus Energy Market-based Rate Tariff v2 to be effective 11/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20170908-5002.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2449-000.

    Applicants: Public Service Company of New Hampshire.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Rate Schedule No. IA-ES-37 Interconnection Agreement Between PSNH and Pontook to be effective 12/16/2016.

    Filed Date: 9/7/17.

    Accession Number: 20170907-5186.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/28/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2450-000.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation of Service Agreement No. 3153, Queue No. W1-029 to be effective 8/22/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20170908-5093.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2451-000.

    Applicants: Alabama Power Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Camilla Solar Energy LGIA Filing to be effective 8/29/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20170908-5130.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2452-000.

    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Amendment to Wholesale Distribution Tariff GIP, SGIA, and LGIA to be effective 9/9/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20170908-5140.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/17.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric securities filings:

    Docket Numbers: ES17-55-000.

    Applicants: Kentucky Utilities Company.

    Description: Application under Section 204 of the Federal Power Act of Kentucky Utilities Company.

    Filed Date: 9/7/17.

    Accession Number: 20170907-5195.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/28/17.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric reliability filings:

    Docket Numbers: RD17-8-000.

    Applicants: North American Electric Reliability Corporation, Reliability First Corporation.

    Description: Joint Petition of the North American Electric Reliability Corporation and ReliabilityFirst Corporation for Approval of Proposed Regional Reliability Standard BAL-502-RF-03.

    Filed Date: 9/7/17.

    Accession Number: 20170907-5201.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/10/17.

    Docket Numbers: RD17-9-000.

    Applicants: North American Electric Reliability Corporation, SERC Reliability Corporation.

    Description: Joint Petition of the North American Electric Reliability Corporation, et. al. for Approval of Proposed Regional Reliability Standard PRC-006-SERC-02.

    Filed Date: 9/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20170908-5127.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/10/17.

    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 8, 2017. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19722 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP17-492-000] Texas Gas Transmission, LLC; Notice of Request Under Blanket Authorization

    Take notice that on September 5, 2017, Texas Gas Transmission, LLC (Texas Gas), located at 9 Greenway Plaza, Suite 2800, Houston, Texas 77046 filed a Prior Notice Request pursuant to Sections 157.205 and 157.216 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's regulations under the Natural Gas Act, and Texas Gas' blanket certificate issued in Docket No. CP82-407-001, for authorization to (i) plug and abandon Injection/Withdrawal Well No. 17378, (ii) abandon in place approximately 1,050 feet of 4.5-inch storage well lateral line, and (iii) abandon by removal the side valve and associated above-ground equipment in its Midland Storage Field located in Muhlenberg County, Kentucky, all as more fully set forth in the application, which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. The filing may also be viewed on the Web at http://www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at [email protected] or call toll-free, (866) 208-3676 or TTY, (202) 502-8659.

    Any questions regarding this Application should be directed to Kathy D. Fort, Manager, Certificates and Tariffs, Texas Gas Transmission, LLC, 610 West Second Street, Owensboro, Kentucky 42301, telephone no. (270) 688-6825, facsimile no. (270) 688-6896, or email to [email protected]

    Any person may, within 60 days after the issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to intervene or notice of intervention. Any person filing to intervene or the Commission's staff may, pursuant to section 157.205 of the Commission's Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.205) file a protest to the request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefore, the proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day after the time allowed for protest. If a protest is filed and not withdrawn within 30 days after the time allowed for filing a protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for authorization pursuant to section 7 of the NGA.

    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9, within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either: Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.

    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenter's will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commenter's will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentary, will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order.

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests, and interventions via the Internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the e-Filing link. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    Dated: September 12, 2017. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19732 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC17-175-000.

    Applicants: Caney River Wind Project, LLC, Rocky Ridge Wind Project, LLC.

    Description: Joint Application for Authorization under Section 203 for the Disposition of Jurisdictional Facilities, Request for Expedited Consideration and Confidential Treatment of Caney River Wind Project, LLC, et al.

    Filed Date: 9/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20170908-5162.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/17.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2036-001.

    Applicants: Florida Power & Light Company.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: FPL Response to Deficiency Letter and Request for Shortened Comment Period to be effective 10/31/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/11/17.

    Accession Number: 20170911-5016.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/2/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2453-000.

    Applicants: Imperial Valley Solar 3, LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Imperial Valley Solar 3, LLC MBR Tariff to be effective 9/9/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20170908-5160.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2454-000.

    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 1518R13 Arkansas Electric Cooperative Corp NITSA NOA to be effective 9/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/11/17.

    Accession Number: 20170911-5021.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/2/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2455-000.

    Applicants: Southwestern Public Service Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: SPS-WILD-E&P Agrmt-697-0.0.0 to be effective 9/12/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/11/17.

    Accession Number: 20170911-5022.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/2/17.

    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 11, 2017. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19726 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP17-1026-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: 09/06/17 Negotiated Rates—Direct Energy Business Marketing, LLC R-7465-07 to be effective 11/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/6/17.

    Accession Number: 20170906-5047.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-1027-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: 09/06/17 Negotiated Rates—ENSTOR Energy Services, LLC R-7305-02 to be effective 11/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/6/17.

    Accession Number: 20170906-5048.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-1028-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: 09/06/17 Negotiated Rates—Consolidated Edison Company of New York R-560-16 to be effective 11/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/6/17.

    Accession Number: 20170906-5049.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-1029-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: 09/06/17 Negotiated Rates—Hartree Partners, LP (HUB) 7090-89 to be effective 11/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/6/17.

    Accession Number: 20170906-5131.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-1030-000.

    Applicants: Equitrans, L.P.

    Description: Compliance filing Notice Regarding Non-Jurisdictional Gathering Facilities (PEB-371 & PEG-82).

    Filed Date: 9/6/17.

    Accession Number: 20170906-5148.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-1031-000.

    Applicants: Florida Public Utilities Company, CITY OF PENSACOLA, FLORIDA.

    Description: Joint Petition for Temporary Waivers of Capacity Release Regulations and Related Tariff Provisions and Request for Expedited Action and Shortened Comment Period of Florida Public Utilities Company, et al. under RP17-1031.

    Filed Date: 9/7/17.

    Accession Number: 20170907-5196.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/14/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-2473-000.

    Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.

    Description: Report Filing: 2016 Cash Pool Filing.

    Filed Date: 9/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20170908-5071.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/20/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-2474-000.

    Applicants: Gulf Crossing Pipeline Company LLC.

    Description: Report Filing: 2016 Cash Pool Filing.

    Filed Date: 9/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20170908-5072.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/20/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-1032-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: 09/08/17 Negotiated Rates—Twin Eagle Resource Management R-7300-06 to be effective 11/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20170908-5074.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/20/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-1033-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: 09/08/17 Negotiated Rates—Mercuria Energy America, Inc. R-7540-12 to be effective 11/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20170908-5078.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/20/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-1034-000.

    Applicants: Rockies Express Pipeline LLC.

    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: Neg Rate 2017-09-07 Triad Hunter (2) to be effective 9/8/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20170908-5109.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/20/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-1035-000.

    Applicants: National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation.

    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: Minor Revisions and Housekeeping Changes (2017) to be effective 10/8/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20170908-5152.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/20/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-974-001.

    Applicants: Garden Banks Gas Pipeline, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Garden Banks Supplemental LINK Filing to be effective 10/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20170908-5069.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/15/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-976-001.

    Applicants: Mississippi Canyon Gas Pipeline, L.L.C.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Miss Canyon LINK Supplemental Filing to be effective 10/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20170908-5070.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/15/17.

    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 11, 2017. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr. Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19724 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. EL17-84-000] PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.; Notice of Institution of Section 206 Proceeding and Refund Effective Date

    On September 8, 2017, an order was issued in Docket No. EL17-84-000, pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C. 824e (2012), instituting an investigation into the justness and reasonableness of Hudson Transmission Partners, L.L.C. (HTP) being unable to convert its Firm Transmission Withdrawal Rights to Non-Firm Transmission Withdrawal Rights.1

    1PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., 160 FERC 61,056 (2017).

    The refund effective date in Docket No. EL17-84-000, established pursuant to section 206(b) of the FPA, will be the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register.

    Any interested person desiring to be heard in Docket No. EL17-84-000 must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate, with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.214, within 21 days of the date of issuance of the order.

    Dated: September 8, 2017. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19725 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP17-1023-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing:09/5/17 Negotiated Rates—DTE Energy Trading, Inc. R-1830-14 to be effective 11/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/5/17.

    Accession Number: 20170905-5123.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-1024-000.

    Applicants: Sabal Trail Transmission, LLC.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Non-conforming Agreement—Duke Contract No. 850002 to be effective 10/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/5/17.

    Accession Number: 20170905-5137.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-1025-000.

    Applicants: Dogwood Energy, LLC, Kansas Municipal Energy Agency.

    Description: Request for Waiver and Expedited Action of Dogwood Energy, LLC, et. al. and Kansas Municipal Energy Agency.

    Filed Date: 9/5/17.

    Accession Number: 20170905-5155.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/18/17.

    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 6, 2017. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19723 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2109-001.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., Old Dominion Electric Cooperative.

    Description: Compliance filing: Compliance Filing per 8/31/17 Order in Docket No. ER17-2109-000 to be effective 7/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/12/17.

    Accession Number: 20170912-5034.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/3/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2456-000.

    Applicants: Ohio Power Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: OPCo-Fremont Energy Center Facilities Agreement Cancellation to be effective 9/30/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/11/17.

    Accession Number: 20170911-5101.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/2/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2457-000.

    Applicants: Rock Creek Wind Project, LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: MBR Tariff to be effective 9/15/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/12/17.

    Accession Number: 20170912-5031.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/3/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2458-000.

    Applicants: Public Service Company of Colorado.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 20170911_Yampa Valley 2nd Amended Cleanup Filing to be effective 4/28/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/12/17.

    Accession Number: 20170912-5086.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/3/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2459-000.

    Applicants: American Transmission Systems, Incorporation, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: ATSI Submits Engineering and Construction Services Agreement No. 4712 to be effective 11/11/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/12/17.

    Accession Number: 20170912-5089.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/3/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2460-000.

    Applicants: Public Service Company of Colorado.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 20170911_IREA 4th Amended Cleanup Filing to be effective 4/28/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/12/17.

    Accession Number: 20170912-5092.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/3/17.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric securities filings:

    Docket Numbers: ES17-25-000; ES17-26-000; ES17-27-000; ES17-28-000; ES17-29-000; ES17-30-000.

    Applicants: Entergy Arkansas, Inc., Entergy Louisiana, LLC, Entergy Mississippi, Inc., Entergy New Orleans, Inc., Entergy Texas, Inc., System Energy Resources, Inc.

    Description: Supplement to April 28, 2017 Joint Application for Authorizations under FPA Section 204 of Entergy Arkansas, Inc., et al.

    Filed Date: 9/1/17.

    Accession Number: 20170901-5232.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/22/17.

    Docket Numbers: ES17-56-000.

    Applicants: Georgia Power Company.

    Description: Application for Borrowing Authority of Georgia Power Company.

    Filed Date: 9/12/17.

    Accession Number: 20170912-5069.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/3/17.

    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 12, 2017. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19727 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Sunshine Act Meetings

    The following notice of meeting is published pursuant to section 3(a) of the government in the Sunshine Act (Pub. L. 94-409), 5 U.S.C. 552b:

    AGENCY HOLDING MEETING:

    Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

    TIME AND DATE:

    September 20, 2017, 10:00 a.m.

    PLACE:

    Room 2C, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    STATUS:

    Open.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    Agenda * Note—Items listed on the agenda may be deleted without further notice.

    CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

    Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Telephone (202) 502-8400.

    For a recorded message listing items struck from or added to the meeting, call (202) 502-8627.

    This is a list of matters to be considered by the Commission. It does not include a listing of all documents relevant to the items on the agenda. All public documents, however, may be viewed on line at the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary link, or may be examined in the Commission's Public Reference Room.

    1035th Meeting—Regular Meeting [September 20, 2017 10:00 a.m.] Item No. Docket No. Company ADMINISTRATIVE A-1 AD16-1-000 Agency Administrative Matters. A-2 AD16-7-000 Customer Matters, Reliability, Security and Market Operations. ELECTRIC E-1 RM16-13-000 Balancing Authority Control, Inadvertent Interchange, and Facility Interconnection Reliability Standards. E-2 RM16-20-000 Remedial Action Schemes Reliability Standard. E-3 RM17-12-000 Emergency Preparedness and Operations Reliability Standards. E-4 ER16-2656-000, ER16-2656-001, ER16-2656-002, ER16-2656-003 Arizona Public Service Company. E-5 ER17-388-000 SunZia Transmission, LLC. E-6 ER16-1564-000 The AES Corporation. E-7 ER17-933-000 Exelon Generation Company, LLC. E-8 EL00-66-021 Louisiana Public Service Commission and the Council for the City of New Orleans v. Entergy Services, Inc. E-9 ER09-1158-000 Delmarva Power & Light Company. E-10 EL17-46-000 Basin Electric Power Cooperative. E-11 ER17-387-001 Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. E-12 ER17-1302-000 Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. E-13 ER17-1303-000 Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. E-14 ER17-1304-000 Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. E-15 ER17-1305-000 Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. E-16 ER17-1332-000 Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. E-17 ER17-1306-000 PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. E-18 OMITTED E-19 ER17-1333-000 Southwest Power Pool, Inc. E-20 ER17-520-000 Southwest Power Pool, Inc. E-21 ER17-772-000, ER17-772-001, ER17-772-002 Southwest Power Pool, Inc. E-22 EL17-34-000 Alcoa Corporation. E-23 ER16-2320-001 Pacific Gas and Electric Company. GAS G-1 OMITTED. G-2 RP17-349-000 Black Marlin Pipeline Company. G-3 RP17-519-000 Texas Eastern Transmission, LP. G-4 OR13-14-002 Western Refining Pipeline, LLC. HYDRO H-1 P-12569-014 Public Utility District No. 1 of Okanogan County, Washington. H-2 P-12628-013 City of Nashua, Iowa. H-3 P-2114-289 Public Utility District No. 2 of Grant County, Washington. H-4 P-2197-112, P-2197-113 Alcoa Power Generating Inc., Cube Yadkin Generation LLC. H-5 P-2197-110 Alcoa Power Generating Inc., Cube Yadkin Generation LLC. H-6 P-2114-286, P-2114-287 Public Utility District No. 2 of Grant County, Washington. Issued: September 13, 2017. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.

    A free webcast of this event is available through www.ferc.gov. Anyone with Internet access who desires to view this event can do so by navigating to www.ferc.gov's Calendar of Events and locating this event in the Calendar.

    The event will contain a link to its webcast. The Capitol Connection provides technical support for the free webcasts. It also offers access to this event via television in the DC area and via phone bridge for a fee. If you have any questions, visit www.CapitolConnection.org or contact Danelle Springer or David Reininger at 703-993-3100.

    Immediately following the conclusion of the Commission Meeting, a press briefing will be held in the Commission Meeting Room. Members of the public may view this briefing in the designated overflow room. This statement is intended to notify the public that the press briefings that follow Commission meetings may now be viewed remotely at Commission headquarters, but will not be telecast through the Capitol Connection service.

    [FR Doc. 2017-19870 Filed 9-14-17; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-9966-42-OAR] Allocations of Cross-State Air Pollution Rule Allowances From New Unit Set-Asides for the 2017 Compliance Year AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of data availability (NODA).

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is providing notice of the availability of data on emission allowance allocations to certain units under the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR). EPA has completed final calculations for the first round of allocations of allowances from the CSAPR new unit set-asides (NUSAs) for the 2017 control periods and has posted spreadsheets containing the calculations on EPA's Web site. The only change from the preliminary calculations is the elimination of allocations of CSAPR SO2 Group 2 allowances to four units in Georgia that for purposes of the preliminary calculations were incorrectly identified as new units instead of existing units.

    DATES:

    September 18, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Questions concerning this action should be addressed to Robert Miller at (202) 343-9077 or [email protected] or to Kenon Smith at (202) 343-9164 or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under each CSAPR trading program where EPA is responsible for determining emission allowance allocations, a portion of each state's emissions budget for the program for each control period is reserved in a NUSA (and in an additional Indian country NUSA in the case of states with Indian country within their borders) for allocation to certain units that would not otherwise receive allowance allocations. Each NUSA allowance allocation process involves up to two rounds of allocations to eligible units, termed “new” units, followed by the allocation to “existing” units of any allowances not allocated to new units.1 In a NODA published in the Federal Register on June 21, 2017 (82 FR 28243), we provided notice of preliminary calculations for the first-round 2017 NUSA allowance allocations. We also described the process for submitting any objections to the preliminary calculations. This NODA concerns the final calculations for this round of 2017 NUSA allocations.

    1 The procedures for annually allocating allowances from each NUSA to eligible units are set forth in the CSAPR regulations at 40 CFR 97.411(b) and 97.412 (CSAPR NOX Annual Trading Program), 97.511(b) and 97.512 (CSAPR NOX Ozone Season Group 1 Trading Program), 97.611(b) and 97.612 (CSAPR SO2 Group 1 Trading Program), 97.711(b) and 97.712 (CSAPR SO2 Group 2 Trading Program), and 97.811(b) and 97.812 (CSAPR NOX Ozone Season Group 2 Trading Program).

    EPA received written objections from four parties in response to the June 21 NODA.2 For the reasons discussed below, we have concluded that none of the written objections provides a valid basis for altering the preliminary calculations of NUSA allowance allocations.

    2 A fifth written objection was withdrawn prior to EPA's drafting of this notice.

    The first written objection was submitted by a representative for a combustion turbine that commenced commercial operation in 2007 in simple cycle configuration and that in 2016 was modified to combined cycle configuration through the installation of additional equipment including a heat recovery steam generator, duct burners, and a steam turbine. According to the objection, the additional equipment should be treated for CSAPR purposes as a separate, new affected unit that is eligible for allocations of CSAPR NUSA allowances.3

    3 The objection seeks NUSA allocations of CSAPR NOX Annual, CSAPR SO2 Group 2, and CSAPR NOX Ozone Season Group 2 allowances. However, the facility is located in Kansas, and allocations of 2017 CSAPR NOX Annual allowances to units in Kansas are governed by a SIP revision rather than by the allocation procedures in the federal CSAPR regulations. 81 FR 42256 (June 29, 2016). EPA therefore addresses the objection only as it relates to allowances for the remaining two programs.

    EPA disagrees with this objection based primarily on our interpretation of the CSAPR definitions of “combustion turbine” and “unit.” The CSAPR definition of “combustion turbine” covers two possible equipment configurations—the equipment required for simple cycle operation, consisting of a compressor, combustor, and turbine, and the equipment required for combined cycle operation, consisting of the preceding equipment plus a heat recovery steam generator, duct burners (if any), and a steam turbine.4 The facility in question meets the CSAPR definition of “combustion turbine” both before and after the addition of the new equipment described above; the effect of adding the new equipment is simply to cause the facility to meet a different provision of the definition. Nothing in the definition suggests that the addition of equipment to a given facility that causes a different provision of the definition to apply should be interpreted as splitting that facility into two separate combustion turbines, as the objection claims. Moreover, our interpretation that the facility in question remains a single combustion turbine is strongly supported by the CSAPR definition of “unit,” which encompasses a “combustion turbine” and further states in relevant part that “[a] unit that undergoes a physical change . . . shall continue to be treated as the same unit.” 5 The objection asserts that this definition means that only the original equipment is “the same unit,” while the additional equipment comprising the “physical change” is a separate unit, but we disagree. To the contrary, we believe a plain reading of the definition indicates that a unit to which a physical change has been made remains “the same unit” but with a physical change.

    4 The full definition states: “Combustion turbine means an enclosed device comprising: (1) If the device is simple cycle, a compressor, a combustor, and a turbine and in which the flue gas resulting from the combustion of fuel in the combustor passes through the turbine, rotating the turbine; and (2) If the device is combined cycle, the equipment described in paragraph (1) of this definition and any associated duct burner, heat recovery steam generator, and steam turbine.” 40 CFR 97.702, 97.802.

    5 The full definition states: “Unit means a stationary, fossil-fuel-fired boiler, stationary, fossil-fuel-fired combustion turbine, or other stationary, fossil-fuel-fired combustion device. A unit that undergoes a physical change or is moved to a different location or source shall continue to be treated as the same unit. A unit (the replaced unit) that is replaced by another unit (the replacement unit) at the same or a different source shall continue to be treated as the same unit, and the replacement unit shall be treated as a separate unit.” 40 CFR 97.702, 97.802.

    In summary, we interpret the CSAPR regulations as providing that the facility in question remains the same, single “combustion turbine” for CSAPR purposes after the addition of the new equipment as it was before the addition of the new equipment.6 Because we do not agree that the additional equipment should be treated as a separate, new affected unit for CSAPR purposes, it is unnecessary to address the portions of the objection concerning the quantities of NUSA allowances for which such a new unit theoretically would be eligible.

    6 EPA further notes that the facility's representatives have not complied with multiple CSAPR requirements that would apply if the additional equipment in fact did constitute a separate, new affected unit for CSAPR purposes. For example, they have not submitted a certificate of representation identifying the additional equipment as a new affected unit, see 40 CFR 97.415(d), 97.715(d), 97.815(d), have not submitted a monitoring plan identifying such a new unit (or identifying the new stack as a common stack serving multiple units), see §§ 97.434(b), 97.734(b), 97.834(b), and have not reported any separate hourly emissions or heat input data for such a new unit, see §§ 97.434(d), 97.734(d), 97.834(d).

    The second and third written objections were submitted by representatives of two facilities whose units are treated as new units for purposes of the original CSAPR trading programs but are treated as existing units for purposes of the more recent CSAPR NOX Ozone Season Group 2 trading program. The units in question commenced commercial operation in 2011 and 2012 and their owners have identified them as affected by CSAPR. In the CSAPR rulemaking finalized in 2011 that established the original four CSAPR trading programs, EPA determined that all likely affected units that commenced commercial operation prior to January 1, 2010 should be treated as existing units for purposes of these four trading programs.7 In the CSAPR Update rulemaking finalized in 2016 that established the CSAPR NOX Ozone Season Group 2 Trading Program, we determined that all likely affected units that commenced commercial operation prior to January 1, 2015 should be treated as existing units for purposes of this trading program.8 Under these criteria, the units in question are new units for purposes of the original four CSAPR trading programs and existing units for purposes of the CSAPR NOX Ozone Season Group 2 Trading Program. The facilities' representatives object to the units' classification as existing units under this last trading program and request that the units be classified instead as new units eligible for allocations of NUSA allowances under this program.

    7 76 FR 48208, 48288-91 (August 8, 2011).

    8 81 FR 74504, 74563-66 (October 26, 2016).

    As noted above, allocations of NUSA allowances under the CSAPR NOX Ozone Season Group 2 Trading Program are governed by 40 CFR 97.811(b) and 97.812. The regulations provide a detailed set of procedures that EPA must follow when allocating NUSA allowances, including procedures for identifying the units eligible for each round of NUSA allocations for each control period. Under § 97.811(b)(1)(ii)(B), objections to our preliminary calculations of first-round allocations “shall be limited to addressing whether the calculations (including the identification of the CSAPR NOX Ozone Season Group 2 units) are in accordance with § 97.812(a)(2) through (7) and (12) and §§ 97.830 through 97.835”—in other words, whether the calculations (including identification of eligible units) have been performed in accordance with the detailed procedures set forth in the regulations. The objections to the June 21 NODA fall outside this narrow scope. The January 1, 2015 cutoff date used to determine whether a particular unit is an existing unit for purposes of this trading program was established as part of the CSAPR Update rulemaking and can be revised only through another rulemaking. The process of allocating NUSA allowances is strictly an administrative process that implements regulations already in effect, not a rulemaking process in which regulations may be revised.

    EPA has confirmed that the units in question are not eligible to receive allocations of NUSA allowances under the regulations for the CSAPR NOX Ozone Season Group 2 Trading Program. Under § 97.812(a)(3), first-round allocations are determined for “each CSAPR NOX Ozone Season Group 2 unit described in paragraph (a)(1) of this section”—i.e., § 97.812(a)(1). This paragraph of the regulations identifies three categories of units eligible for first-round allocations: First, units that have not been allocated allowances as existing units pursuant to § 97.811(a)(1); second, units that have been allocated allowances as existing units from a given state's budget for a given control period but have lost those allocations under the trading program's correction provisions (because the units either are not located in that state or are not subject to the program at the start of that control period); and third, units that have ceased operation for a sufficient length of time to lose their allocations as existing units and have subsequently resumed operation.9 As discussed above, the units in question meet the criteria established in the CSAPR Update rulemaking to be considered existing units for purposes of the CSAPR NOX Ozone Season Group 2 Trading Program, and the units accordingly have been allocated allowances as existing units pursuant to § 97.811(a)(1). The units do not fall within one of the categories of units eligible for NUSA allocations as set forth in § 97.812(a)(1), and the regulations do not provide us with the authority either to grant exceptions for individual units or to identify additional categories of eligible units beyond those set forth in § 97.812(a)(1).

    9See § 97.812(a)(1)(i), (ii), and (iii), respectively.

    As an alternative to having the facility's units reclassified as new units for purposes of the CSAPR NOX Ozone Season Group 2 Trading Program, the third written objection also seeks modifications to the data used to compute the units' allocations of allowances as existing units under that program. However, like the January 1, 2015 cutoff date, EPA's determinations of which data should be used to determine allowance allocations to existing units were made in the CSAPR Update rulemaking 10 and can be revised only through another rulemaking, not through the administrative process of allocating NUSA allowances. The objection is therefore outside the scope of the June 21 NODA.

    10See 81 FR at 74564-65.

    Finally, the fourth written objection seeks modifications to the total amount of the NUSA for Oklahoma under the CSAPR NOX Ozone Season Group 2 Trading Program. Again, EPA's determinations regarding the NUSA total amounts were made in the CSAPR Update rulemaking; further, the actual amounts are codified in the CSAPR regulations.11 The total amount of the NUSA for Oklahoma can be revised only through another rulemaking, not through the administrative process of allocating NUSA allowances, so the objection is outside the scope of the June 21 NODA.

    11See 81 FR at 74565; 40 CFR 97.810(a)(17)(ii).

    In addition to the written objections discussed above, EPA also received a telephone inquiry that led to the discovery of an error in the preliminary calculations for NUSA allocations of CSAPR SO2 Group 2 allowances. Specifically, because of incorrect processing of a change in the plant code used to identify certain existing units at the Wansley power plant in Georgia, Wansley CC units 6A, 6B, 7A, and 7B were incorrectly identified as new units eligible to receive NUSA allocations. We have corrected the error and these units are not allocated allowances as new units in the final calculations.

    The final unit-by-unit data and allowance allocation calculations are set forth in Excel spreadsheets titled “CSAPR_NUSA_2017_NOx_Annual_1st_Round_Final_Data”, “CSAPR_NUSA_2017_NOx_OS_1st_Round_Final_Data”, and “CSAPR_NUSA_2017_SO2_1st_Round_Final_Data”, available on EPA's Web site at https://www.epa.gov/csapr/csapr-compliance-year-2017-nusa-nodas. The three spreadsheets show our final determinations of first-round 2017 NUSA allocations under the CSAPR NOX annual, CSAPR NOX ozone season (Group 1 and Group 2), and CSAPR SO2 (Group 1 and Group 2) trading programs, respectively.

    EPA notes that an allocation or lack of allocation of allowances to a given unit does not constitute a determination that CSAPR does or does not apply to the unit. We also note that allocations are subject to potential correction.

    (Authority: 40 CFR 97.411(b), 97.511(b), 97.611(b), 97.711(b), and 97.811(b).) Dated: July 27, 2017. Karen L. Orehowsky, Acting Director, Clean Air Markets Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs, Office of Air and Radiation.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19822 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-9967-48-ORD; Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2017-0496, ORD-2017-0497, ORD-2014-0526] Availability of the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) Assessment Plans for Nitrate/Nitrite, Chloroform, and Ethylbenzene AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of public comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is announcing a 30-day public comment period associated with the draft IRIS Assessment Plans for Nitrate/Nitrite, Chloroform, and Ethylbenzene. These documents communicate information on the scoping needs identified by EPA program and regional offices and the IRIS Program's initial problem formulation activities. Specifically, the assessment plans outline the objectives for each assessment and the type of evidence considered most pertinent to address the scoping needs.

    EPA is releasing these draft IRIS Assessment Plans for public comment. These assessment plans will also be discussed during the September 27-28 Science Advisory Board (SAB) Chemical Assessment Advisory Committee (CAAC) peer consultation meeting. These documents were prepared by the National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA) within EPA's Office of Research and Development (ORD).

    DATES:

    The 30-day public comment period begins September 18, 2017, and ends October 18, 2017. Comments must be received on or before October 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    The IRIS Assessment Plan for Nitrate/Nitrite, will be available via the Internet on IRIS' Recent Additions at http://www.epa.gov/iris/iris-recent-additions and in the public docket at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA-HQ-ORD-2017-0496.

    The IRIS Assessment Plan for Chloroform will be available via the Internet on IRIS' Recent Additions at http://www.epa.gov/iris/iris-recent-additions and in the public docket at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA-HQ-ORD-2017-0497.

    The IRIS Assessment Plan for Ethylbenzene will be available via the Internet on IRIS' Recent Additions at http://www.epa.gov/iris/iris-recent-additions and in the public docket at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA-HQ-ORD-2014-0526.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For information on the public comment period, contact the ORD Docket at the EPA Headquarters Docket Center; telephone: 202-566-1752; facsimile: 202-566-9744; or email: [email protected]

    For technical information on the IRIS Assessment Plans, contact Dr. James Avery, NCEA; telephone: 703-347-8668; or email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background Information on IRIS Assessment Plans

    EPA's IRIS Program is a human health assessment program that evaluates quantitative and qualitative risk information on effects that may result from exposure to chemicals found in the environment. Through the IRIS Program, EPA provides the highest quality science-based human health assessments to support the Agency's regulatory activities and decisions to protect public health. As part of scoping and initial problem formulation activities prior to the development of a draft assessment, the IRIS Program carries out a broad, preliminary literature survey to assist in identifying health effects that have been studied in relation to the chemical or substance of interest as well as science issues that may need to be considered when evaluating its toxicity. This information, in conjunction with scoping needs identified by EPA program and regional offices, are used to inform the development of an IRIS Assessment Plan (IAP).

    The IAP communicates to the public the plan for reviewing each individual chemical assessment and includes summary information on the IRIS Program's scoping and initial problem formulation, objectives and specific aims for the assessment, and a PECO (Population, Exposure, Comparators, and Outcomes) framework for the systematic review. The PECO provides the framework for developing literature search strategies and inclusion/exclusion criteria, particularly with respect to evidence stream (i.e., human, animal, mechanistic), exposure measures and outcome measures. The IAP serves to inform the subsequent development of chemical specific systematic review protocols, which will be made publicly available. For more information, visit EPA's IRIS Program Web site at https://www.epa.gov/iris.

    II. How To Submit Technical Comments to the Docket at www.regulations.gov

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2017-0496 for Nitrate/Nitrite, EPA-HQ-ORD-2017-0497 for Chloroform, and EPA-HQ-ORD-2014-0526 for Ethylbenzene, by one of the following methods:

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

    Email: [email protected]

    Fax: 202-566-9744.

    Mail: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center (ORD Docket), Mail Code: 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460. The phone number is 202-566-1752.

    Hand Delivery: The ORD Docket is located in the EPA Headquarters Docket Center, EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC.

    The EPA Docket Center 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. Deliveries are only accepted during the docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. If you provide comments by mail or hand delivery, please submit three copies of the comments. For attachments, provide an index, number pages consecutively with the comments, and submit an unbound original and three copies.

    Instructions: Direct your comments to EPA-HQ-ORD-2017-0496 for Nitrate/Nitrite, EPA-HQ-ORD-2017-0497 for Chloroform, and EPA-HQ-ORD-2014-0526 for Ethylbenzene. Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified comment period. Comments received after the closing date will be marked “late,” and may only be considered if time permits. It is EPA's policy to include all comments it receives in the public docket without change and to make the comments available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless a comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information for which disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information through www.regulations.gov or email that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

    Docket: Documents in the docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other materials, such as copyrighted material, are publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the ORD Docket in the EPA Headquarters Docket Center.

    Dated: August 30, 2017. Mary Ross, Director, National Center for Environmental Assessment.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19707 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Sunshine Act Meetings AGENCY:

    Federal Election Commission.

    DATE AND TIME:

    Wednesday, September 20, 2017 at 9:30 a.m.

    PLACE:

    999 E Street NW., Washington, DC (Ninth Floor).

    STATUS:

    This meeting will be open to the public.

    ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED:

    Draft Advisory Opinion 2017-10: Citizens for Plutocracy Management and Administrative Matters

    Individuals who plan to attend and require special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should contact Dayna C. Brown, Secretary and Clerk, at (202) 694-1040, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting date.

    PERSON TO CONTACT FOR INFORMATION:

    Judith Ingram, Press Officer, Telephone: (202) 694-1220.

    Dayna C. Brown, Secretary and Clerk of the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19955 Filed 9-14-17; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
    FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION Sunshine Act Meeting AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING:

    Federal Maritime Commission.

    TIME AND DATE:

    September 20, 2017; 10:00 a.m.

    PLACE:

    800 N. Capitol Street NW., First Floor Hearing Room, Washington, DC.

    STATUS:

    The first portion of the meeting will be held in Open Session; the second portion in Closed Session.

    Matters To Be Considered: Portions Open to the Public 1. Briefing by Commissioner Dye on the Supply Chain Innovation Teams and Update from Global Liner Shipping Asia Conference 2. Staff Briefing on Review Process for Carrier and Marine Terminal Operator Agreements Portions Closed to the Public 1. Staff Update on Petition of the Coalition for Fair Port Practices (P4-16) CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

    Rachel E. Dickon, Assistant Secretary (202) 523 5725.

    Rachel E. Dickon, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19847 Filed 9-14-17; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 6731-AA-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Notice of Proposals To Engage in or To Acquire Companies Engaged in Permissible Nonbanking Activities

    The companies listed in this notice have given notice under section 4 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843) (BHC Act) and Regulation Y, (12 CFR part 225) to engage de novo, or to acquire or control voting securities or assets of a company, including the companies listed below, that engages either directly or through a subsidiary or other company, in a nonbanking activity that is listed in § 225.28 of Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.28) or that the Board has determined by Order to be closely related to banking and permissible for bank holding companies. Unless otherwise noted, these activities will be conducted throughout the United States.

    Each notice is available for inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notice also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the question whether the proposal complies with the standards of section 4 of the BHC Act.

    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding the applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than October 2, 2017.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland (Nadine Wallman, Vice President) 1455 East Sixth Street, Cleveland, Ohio 44101-2566. Comments can also be sent electronically to [email protected]:

    1. SSB Bancorp, Inc., Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; to engage de novo in extending credit and servicing loans pursuant to section 225.28(b)(1) of Regulation Y.

    B. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (Colette A. Fried, Assistant Vice President) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414:

    1. First Internet Bancorp, Fishers, Indiana; to acquire 9.99 percent of the voting shares of Lendeavor, Inc., San Francisco, California, and thereby engage in extending credit and servicing loans pursuant to section 225.28(b)(1) of Regulation Y.

    2. Iowa State Financial Services Corporation, Fairfield, Iowa; to continue engaging in extending credit and servicing loans pursuant to section 225.25(b)(1) of Regulation Y.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 12, 2017. Yao-Chin Chao, Assistant Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19681 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding Company

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

    The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than September 27, 2017.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta (Chapelle Davis, Assistant Vice President) 1000 Peachtree Street NE., Atlanta, Georgia 30309. Comments can also be sent electronically to [email protected]:

    1. Kenneth Ray Lehman, Arlington, Virginia; to acquire voting shares of ABB Financial Group, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire shares of Affinity Bank, both of Atlanta, Georgia.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 12, 2017. Yao-Chin Chao, Assistant Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19680 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT ETHICS Updated OGE Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board AGENCY:

    Office of Government Ethics (OGE).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given of the appointment of members of the updated OGE Senior Executive Service (SES) Performance Review Board.

    DATES:

    September 18, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Shelley K. Finlayson, Chief of Staff and Program Counsel, Office of Government Ethics, Suite 500, 1201 New York Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20005-3917; Telephone: 202-482-9300; TYY: 800-877-8339; FAX: 202-482-9237.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    5 U.S.C. 4314(c) requires each agency to establish, in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Office of Personnel Management at 5 CFR part 430, subpart C and § 430.310 thereof in particular, one or more Senior Executive Service performance review boards. As a small executive branch agency, OGE has just one board. In order to ensure an adequate level of staffing and to avoid a constant series of recusals, the designated members of OGE's SES Performance Review Board are being drawn, as in the past, in large measure from the ranks of other executive branch agencies. The board shall review and evaluate the initial appraisal of each OGE senior executive's performance by his or her supervisor, along with any recommendations in each instance to the appointing authority relative to the performance of the senior executive. This notice updates the membership of OGE's SES Performance Review Board as it was most recently published at 78 FR 76148 (December 16, 2013).

    Approved: September 13, 2017. David J. Apol, Acting Director, U.S. Office of Government Ethics.

    The following officials have been appointed members of the SES Performance Review Board of the Office of Government Ethics: Shelley K. Finlayson, [Chair], Chief of Staff and Program Counsel, Office of Government Ethics; Stuart Bender, Director, Office of Ethics, U.S. Department of Agriculture; Judith S. Kaleta, Deputy General Counsel, U.S. Department of Transportation; and Shira Pavis Minton, Ethics Counsel, Office of the Ethics Counsel, Securities and Exchange Commission.

    [FR Doc. 2017-19835 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6345-03-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [30Day-17-0888] Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act Review

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has submitted the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The notice for the proposed information collection is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies.

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address any of the following: (a) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses; and (e) Assess information collection costs.

    To request additional information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the information collection plan and instruments, call (404) 639-7570 or send an email to [email protected] Within 30 days of this notice, direct written comments and/or suggestions regarding the items contained in this notice to the Attention: CDC Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503 or by fax to (202) 395-5806.

    Proposed Project

    Factors Influencing the Transmission of Influenza (OMB Control Number 0920-0888; Expired 6-30-2017)—Reinstatement with change—National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    Background and Brief Description

    The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) is authorized to conduct research to advance the health and safety of workers under Section 20(a)(1) of the 1970 Occupational Safety and Health Act. Influenza continues to be a major public health concern because of the substantial health burden from seasonal influenza and the potential for a severe pandemic. Although influenza is known to be transmitted by infectious secretions, these secretions can be transferred from person to person in many different ways, and the relative importance of the different pathways is not known. The likelihood of the transmission of influenza virus by small infectious airborne particles produced during coughing and breathing is particularly unclear. The question of airborne transmission is especially important in healthcare facilities, where influenza patients tend to congregate during influenza season, because it directly impacts the infection control and personal protective measures that should be taken by healthcare workers.

    Work under the previous approval showed that patients infected with influenza virus produce airborne particles containing viable airborne influenza virus during both breathing and coughing, but that breathing may generate more airborne infectious material than coughing over time. However, this work was hampered because the amounts of influenza virus in almost all of the aerosol samples were below the limit of quantification. Thus, CDC made the following changes to the project:

    (1) CDC will modify the cough and exhalation-aerosol collection system to collect aerosol particles continuously for 40 minutes, rather than collecting particles from discrete coughs and exhalations as in the previous study. This will increase the amount of influenza virus that is collected.

    (2) Researchers will collect a blood sample from each participant to allow testing for blood markers of influenza infection and a comparison of the levels of these markers to the amount of expelled influenza in aerosol particles.

    (3) Researchers increased the time required for participation from 63 minutes to 95 minutes to allow for a longer aerosol collection period and for the blood collection.

    (4) Researchers will recruit and test an equal number of control subjects without symptoms of respiratory illness in addition to subjects with influenza-like illness. This will allow the determination of the differences in blood biomarker levels between healthy and infected subjects.

    (5) Because of the longer participation time and because blood collection has been found to be a strong disincentive for participation, the token of appreciation for participating in the study has been increased from $25 to $40.

    The purpose of the proposed study is to gain a better understanding of the production of infectious aerosols by patients with influenza, and to compare this to the levels of biomarkers of influenza infection in the blood of these patients. To do this, researchers will collect airborne particles produced by volunteer subjects with influenza to test for influenza virus. Researchers will also measure the levels of influenza infection-associated biomarkers in blood samples from these subjects.

    A test coordinator will recruit volunteer adult participants by using a poster and flyers describing the study. Researchers will verbally screen interested potential participants to verify that they have influenza-like symptoms and that they do not have any medical conditions that would preclude their participation. Researchers will also recruit a matching number of healthy control participants.

    Researchers will ask qualified participants who agree to participate in the study to read and sign an informed consent form, and then to complete a short health questionnaire. After completing the forms, researchers will measure the participant's oral temperature and collect two nasopharyngeal mucus samples and five ml of blood. The researchers will then ask the participants to don elastomeric masks, and breathe and cough normally for 40 minutes into an aerosol particle collection system. The total time from initial verbal screening to completion will be about 95 minutes.

    The study will require 90 volunteer test subjects each year for 3 years, totaling 270 test participants. There are no costs to respondents other than their time. The total number of annual burden hours are 148.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of respondents Form name Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hrs.)
  • Potential participant Initial verbal screening 180 1 3/60 Qualified participant Informed consent form 90 1 15/60 Qualified participant Health questionnaire 90 1 5/60 Qualified participant Medical testing 90 1 72/60
    Leroy Richardson, Chief, Information Collection Review Office, Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the Associate Director for Science, Office of the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19748 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Clinical Laboratory Improvement Advisory Committee (CLIAC) AGENCY:

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), announces the following meeting for the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Advisory Committee (CLIAC). This meeting is open to the public, limited only by the space available. The meeting room accommodates approximately 100 people. The public is also welcome to view the meeting by webcast http://cdclabtraining.adobeconnect.com/cliac.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on November 1, 2017, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., EDT and November 2, 2017, 8:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m., EDT.

    ADDRESSES:

    CDC, 2500 Century Center Boulevard, Rooms 1200/1201, Atlanta, Georgia 30345 and http://cdclabtraining.adobeconnect.com/cliac.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Nancy Anderson, MMSc, MT(ASCP), Chief, Laboratory Practice Standards Branch, Division of Laboratory Systems, Center for Surveillance, Epidemiology and Laboratory Services, Office of Public Health Scientific Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE., Mailstop F-11, Atlanta, Georgia 30329-4018, telephone (404) 498-2741; [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Purpose: This Committee is charged with providing scientific and technical advice and guidance to the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS); the Assistant Secretary for Health; the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; the Commissioner, Food and Drug Administration (FDA); and the Administrator, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). The advice and guidance pertain to general issues related to improvement in clinical laboratory quality and laboratory medicine practice and specific questions related to possible revision of the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendment (CLIA) standards. Examples include providing guidance on studies designed to improve safety, effectiveness, efficiency, timeliness, equity, and patient-centeredness of laboratory services; revisions to the standards under which clinical laboratories are regulated; the impact of proposed revisions to the standards on medical and laboratory practice; and the modification of the standards and provision of non-regulatory guidelines to accommodate technological advances, such as new test methods, the electronic transmission of laboratory information, and mechanisms to improve the integration of public health and clinical laboratory practices.

    Matters To Be Considered: The agenda will include agency updates from CDC, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), and The Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Presentations and discussions will focus on laboratory testing in the era of telemedicine; antibiotic resistance testing issues; culture independent diagnostic tests; and a report from the Institute of Medicine (IOM) CLIAC workgroup. Agenda items are subject to change as priorities dictate.

    All people attending the CLIAC meeting in-person are required to register for the meeting online at least 5 business days in advance for U.S. citizens and at least 30 business days in advance for international registrants. Register at: https://wwwn.cdc.gov/cliac/. Register by scrolling down and clicking the “Register for this Meeting” button and completing all forms according to the instructions given. Please complete all the required fields before submitting your registration and submit no later than October 25, 2017 for U.S. registrants and September 19, 2017 for international registrants.

    It is the policy of CLIAC to accept written public comments and provide a brief period for oral public comments on agenda items. Public comment periods for each agenda item are scheduled immediately prior to the Committee discussion period for that item. In general, each individual or group requesting to make oral comments will be limited to a total time of five minutes (unless otherwise indicated). To assure adequate time is scheduled for public comments, speakers should notify the contact person below at least one week prior to the meeting date. For individuals or groups unable to attend the meeting, CLIAC accepts written comments until the date of the meeting (unless otherwise stated). However, it is requested that comments be submitted at least one week prior to the meeting date so that the comments may be made available to the Committee for their consideration and public distribution. Written comments, one hard copy with original signature, should be provided to the contact person at the mailing or email address below, and will be included in the meeting's Summary Report.

    The CLIAC meeting materials will be made available to the Committee and the public in electronic format (PDF) on the internet instead of by printed copy. Check the CLIAC Web site on the day of the meeting for materials: https://wwwn.cdc.gov/cliac/.

    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. 2017-19498 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-19-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Solicitation of Nominations for Appointment to the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC) ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is seeking nominations for membership on the HICPAC. The HICPAC consists of 14 experts in fields including but not limited to, infectious diseases, infection prevention, healthcare epidemiology, nursing, clinical microbiology, surgery, hospitalist medicine, internal medicine, epidemiology, health policy, health services research, public health, and related medical fields. Nominations are being sought for individuals who have expertise and qualifications necessary to contribute to the accomplishments of the committee's objectives. Nominees will be selected based on expertise in the fields of infectious diseases, infection prevention, healthcare epidemiology, nursing, environmental and clinical microbiology, surgery, internal medicine, epidemiology, health policy, health services research, and public health. Federal employees will not be considered for membership. Members may be invited to serve for four-year terms. Selection of members is based on candidates' qualifications to contribute to the accomplishment of HICPAC objectives https://www.cdc.gov/hicpac/.

    DATES:

    Nominations for membership on the HICPAC be received no later than November 30, 2017. Packages received after this time will not be considered for the current membership cycle.

    ADDRESSES:

    All nominations should be mailed to HICPAC, Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion, NCEZID, CDC, 1600 Clifton Road NE., Mailstop A-07, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, emailed (recommended) to [email protected], or faxed to (404) 639-4043.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Erin Stone, M.S., HICPAC, Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion, NCEZID, CDC, 1600 Clifton Road NE., Mailstop A-07, Atlanta, Georgia 30333; Telephone (404) 639-4045; [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services policy stipulates that committee membership be balanced in terms of points of view represented, and the committee's function. Appointments shall be made without discrimination on the basis of age, race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, HIV status, disability, and cultural, religious, or socioeconomic status. Nominees must be U.S. citizens, and cannot be full-time employees of the U.S. Government. Current participation on federal workgroups or prior experience serving on a federal advisory committee does not disqualify a candidate; however, HHS policy is to avoid excessive individual service on advisory committees and multiple committee memberships. Committee members are Special Government Employees, requiring the filing of financial disclosure reports at the beginning and annually during their terms. CDC reviews potential candidates for HICPAC membership each year, and provides a slate of nominees for consideration to the Secretary of HHS for final selection. HHS notifies selected candidates of their appointment near the start of the term in July 2018, or as soon as the HHS selection process is completed. Note that the need for different expertise varies from year to year and a candidate who is not selected in one year may be reconsidered in a subsequent year.

    Nominees must be U.S. citizens, and cannot be full-time employees of the U.S. Government. Candidates should submit the following items:

    Current curriculum vitae, including complete contact information (telephone numbers, mailing address, email address)

    At least one letter of recommendation from person(s) not employed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (Candidates may submit letter(s) from current HHS employees if they wish, but at least one letter must be submitted by a person not employed by an HHS agency (e.g., CDC, NIH, FDA, etc.).

    Nominations may be submitted by the candidate him- or herself, or by the person/organization recommending the candidate.

    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 CDC 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. 2017-19501 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [30Day-17-17ABE] Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act Review

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has submitted the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The notice for the proposed information collection is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies.

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address any of the following: (a) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses; and (e) Assess information collection costs.

    To request additional information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the information collection plan and instruments, call (404) 639-7570 or send an email to [email protected] Direct written comments and/or suggestions regarding the items contained in this notice to the Attention: CDC Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503 or by fax to (202) 395-5806. Written comments should be received within 30 days of this notice.

    Proposed Project

    Developmental Projects to Improve the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey and Related Programs—New—National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    Background and Brief Description

    Section 306 of the Public Health Service (PHS) Act (42 U.S.C. 242k), as amended, authorizes that the Secretary of Health and Human Services (DHHS), acting through NCHS, shall collect statistics on the extent and nature of illness and disability; environmental, social and other health hazards; and determinants of health of the population of the United States. The Division of Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (DHNES) has conducted national surveys and related projects periodically between 1970 and 1994, and continuously since 1999.

    The mission of DHNES programs is to produce descriptive statistics which measure the health and nutrition status of the general population. The continuous operation of DHNES programs presents unique challenges in testing new survey content and activities, such as outreach or participant screening etc.

    This generic request covers developmental projects to help evaluate and enhance DHNES existing and proposed data collection activities to increase research capacity and improve data quality. The information collected through this Generic Information Collection Request will not be used to make generalizable statements about the population of interest or to inform public policy; however, methodological findings from these projects may be reported.

    The purpose and use of projects under this NHANES generic clearance would include developmental projects necessary for activities such as testing new procedures, equipment, and approaches that are going to be folded into NHANES; designing and testing examination components or survey questions; creating new studies including biomonitoring and clinical measures; creating new cohorts, including a pregnancy and/or a birth—24 month cohort; testing of the cognitive and interpretive aspects of survey methodology; feasibility testing of proposed new components or modifications to existing components; testing of human-computer interfaces/usability; assessing the acceptability of proposed NHANES components among likely participants; testing alternative approaches to existing NHANES procedures, including activities related to improving nonresponse; testing the use of or variations/adjustments in incentives; testing content of web based surveys; testing the feasibility of obtaining bodily fluid specimens (blood, urine, semen, saliva, breastmilk) and tissue sample (swabs); testing digital imaging technology and related procedures (e.g., retinal scan, liver ultrasound, Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA), prescription and over-the-counter dietary supplements bottles); testing the feasibility of and procedure/processes for accessing participant's medical records from healthcare settings (e.g., hospitals and physician offices); testing the feasibility and protocols for home examination measurements; testing survey materials and procedures to improve response rates, including changes to advance materials and protocols, changes to the incentive structure, introduction of new and timely outreach and awareness procedures including the use of social media; conducting crossover studies; creating and testing digital survey materials; conducting customer satisfaction assessments or surveys.

    The types of participants covered by the NHANES generic may include current or past NHANES participants; family or household members of NHANES participants; individuals eligible to be participants in NHANES, but who did not screen into the actual survey; convenience samples; volunteers from the general public; subject matter experts or consultants such as survey methodologist, academic researchers, clinicians or other health care providers; NHANES data or Web site users; individuals abroad who would be part of a collaborative development project(s) between NCHS and related public health agencies and/or public health researchers abroad.

    The type of participant involved in a given developmental project would be determined by the nature of the project. The details of each project will be included in the specific GenIC submissions.

    There is no cost to respondents other than their time. A three year clearance is requested. The total estimated annualized burden hours are 16,698.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of
  • respondent
  • Form name Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • Individuals or households Developmental Projects, Special Study, Focus Group documents 3,500 1 3 Volunteers Developmental Projects & Special Study, Focus Group documents 600 1 3 NHANES participants Developmental Projects & Special Study documents 1,400 1 3 Subject Matter Experts Focus Group/Developmental Project Documents 15 1 1 NHANES web or Data users Customer Satisfaction/Usability Documents 1,100 2 5/60
    Leroy A. Richardson, Chief, Information Collection Review Office, Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the Associate Director for Science, Office of the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19743 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [30Day-17-0260] Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act Review

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has submitted the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. CDC previously published a “Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and Recommendations” notice on May 31, 2017 to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. CDC did not receive comments related to the previous notice. The purpose of this notice is to allow an additional 30 days for public comments.

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. The Office of Management and Budget is particularly interested in comments that:

    (a) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (b) Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

    (c) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;

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

    (e) Assess information collection costs.

    To request additional information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the information collection plan and instruments, call (404) 639-7570 or send an email to [email protected] Direct written comments and/or suggestions regarding the items contained in this notice to the Attention: CDC Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503 or by fax to (202) 395-5806. Provide written comments within 30 days of notice publication.

    Proposed Project

    Health Hazard Evaluation and Technical Assistance—Requests and Emerging Problems (OMB Control No. 0920-0260, Expiration Date 11/30/2017)—Revision—National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    Background and Brief Description

    The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 and the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, mandates the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) respond to requests for health hazard evaluations (HHE) to identify chemical, biological or physical hazards in workplaces throughout the United States. Each year, NIOSH receives approximately 290 such requests. Most HHE requests come from the following types of companies: Service, manufacturing, health and social services, transportation, construction, agriculture, mining, skilled trade and construction.

    A printed HHE request form is available in English and in Spanish. The form is also available on the Internet and differs from the printed version only in format and in the fact that it can be submitted directly from the Web site. The request form takes an estimated 12 minutes to complete. The form provides the mechanism for employees, employers, and other authorized representatives to supply the information required by the regulations governing the NIOSH HHE program (42 CFR 85.3-1). The information provided is used by NIOSH to determine whether there is reasonable cause to justify conducting an investigation and provides a mechanism to respond to the requestor.

    NIOSH reviews the HHE request to determine if an on-site evaluation is needed. The primary purpose of an on-site evaluation is to help employers and employees identify and eliminate occupational health hazards. For 40% of the requests received NIOSH determines an on-site evaluation is needed.

    In about 70% of on-site evaluations, employees are interviewed to help further define concerns. Interviews may take approximately 15 minutes per respondent. The interview questions are specific to each workplace and its suspected diseases and hazards.

    In approximately 30% of on-site evaluations (presently estimated to be 37 facilities), questionnaires are distributed to the employees (averaging about 100 employees per site). Questionnaires may require approximately 30 minutes to complete. The survey questions are specific to each workplace and its suspected diseases and hazards, however, items in the questionnaires are derived from standardized or widely used medical and epidemiologic data collection instruments.

    NIOSH administers a follow-back program to assess the effectiveness of its HHE program in reducing workplace hazards. The first follow-back questionnaire is sent shortly after the first visit for an on-site evaluation and takes about 10 minutes to complete. A second follow-back questionnaire is sent a month after the final report and requires about 20 minutes to complete. At 24 months, a third follow-back questionnaire is sent which takes about 15 minutes to complete. The first and third follow-back questionnaires have had minor re-wording of questions to improve the ease of responding with no change in information requested or estimated time to complete. The second follow-back questionnaire has added new questions regarding final report content and format. This accounts for the additional 5 minute increase in estimated completion time from the 2014 revision of the second follow-back questionnaire.

    For requests where NIOSH does not conduct an on-site evaluation, the requestor receives the first follow-back questionnaire 1 month after our report and a second one 12 months after our response. The first questionnaire takes about 10 minutes to complete and the second questionnaire takes about 15 minutes to complete. No changes other that for some minor re-wording of questions have been made. No additional information is collected and the time estimates for completion remain unchanged.

    Minimal changes have been made to the request form for Health Hazard Evaluations. The revisions made in this package are minor re-wording of questions contained in four of the five follow-back questionnaires to improve the ease of responding by the questionnaire recipients.

    There is no cost to respondents other than their time. The total estimated annual burden hours are 2,959. This is 61 hours less than the 3,020 hours approved for the 2014 revision. This reflects both a slight decrease in the anticipated number of Health Hazard Evaluation requests (300 to 290) as well as changes in the response requirements of requests received based upon recent program experience.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of respondent Form Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden
  • per response
  • (in hours)
  • Employees/employee representatives/or employers Health Hazard Evaluation Request Form 290 1 12/60 Employees Health Hazard Evaluation specific interview example 2,580 1 15/60 Employees Health Hazard Evaluation specific question­naire example 3,700 1 30/60 Employees Employee Contact Postcard 2,150 1 5/60 Follow-back for onsite evaluations—employer & employee representative Year 1 Initial Site Visit Followback Survey form 244 1 10/60 Employer & employee representative Year 1 Closeout for Health Hazard Evaluation Followback Survey with site visit 244 1 20/60 Employer & employee representative Year 2 1 Year Later for Health Hazard Evaluation Followback Survey with site visit 244 1 15/60 Follow-back for evaluations without onsite—employer & employee representative Year 1 Closeout for Health Hazard Evaluation without site visit 98 1 10/60 Employer & employee representative Year 2 1 Year Later for Health Hazard Evaluation without site visit 98 1 15/60
    Leroy A. Richardson, Chief, Information Collection Review Office, Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the Associate Director for Science, Office of the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19744 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Advisory Committee to the Director (ACD), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)—Health Disparities Subcommittee (HDS) AGENCY:

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announces the following meeting of the Advisory Committee to the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention—Health Disparities Subcommittee (ACD, CDC-HDS). This meeting is open to the public, limited only by the room that accommodates 45 people and audio phone line that accommodates 50 callers. The public is also welcome to listen to the meeting by dialing 866-918-8397 and enter code 9346283, this conference line is available to the first 50 callers. The public comment period is from 9:45 a.m. to 9:50 a.m. and 3:45 p.m. to 3:55 p.m. The deadline to register for in-person attendance and/or notice of intent to make oral or written comment is October 30, 2017. To register, please send an email to [email protected]

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on November 9, 2017, 8:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. ET.

    ADDRESSES:

    CDC, Building 21, 12th Floor, Rooms 12105-12101, 1600 Clifton Road NE., Atlanta, Georgia 30329.

    Bridge line: 866-918-8397 and enter code 9346283.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Leandris Liburd, Ph.D., M.P.H., M.A., Designated Federal Officer, Health Disparities Subcommittee, Advisory Committee to the Director, CDC, 1600 Clifton Road NE., M/S K-77, Atlanta, Georgia 30329. Telephone (404) 498-6482, Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Purpose: The Subcommittee will provide counsel to ACD, CDC on strategic and other health disparities and health equity issues and provide guidance on opportunities for CDC.

    Matters to be Considered: The Health Disparities Subcommittee Agenda will include discussions on addressing health disparities in achieving the agency's overarching health impact goals including selected observations from the HDS for the ACD, CDC to consider, and on progress of the HDS, and on progress toward activities related to data disaggregation and childhood trauma. 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. 2017-19779 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC) AGENCY:

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases (NCEZID), announces the following meeting for the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC). This meeting is open to the public, limited only by room seating available. The public is also welcome to listen to the meeting by 866-836-4010, passcode: 18307719, and, and 100 teleconference lines are available.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on November 8, 2017, 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., EST and November 9, 2017, 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m., EST.

    ADDRESSES:

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Global Communications Center, Building 19, Auditorium B, 1600 Clifton Road NE., Atlanta, Georgia 30329.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Erin Stone, M.A., HICPAC, Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion, NCEZID, CDC, l600 Clifton Road NE., Mailstop A-07, Atlanta, Georgia 30329, Telephone (404) 639-4045, Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Purpose: The Committee is charged with providing advice and guidance to the Director, Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion (DHQP), the Director, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases (NCEZID), the Director, CDC, the Secretary, Health and Human Services regarding (1) the practice of healthcare infection prevention and control; (2) strategies for surveillance, prevention, and control of infections, antimicrobial resistance, and related events in settings where healthcare is provided; and (3) periodic updating of CDC guidelines and other policy statements regarding prevention of healthcare-associated infections and healthcare-related conditions.

    Matters to be Considered: The agenda will include updates on CDC's activities for prevention of healthcare associated infections (HAIs), and DHQP's modeling efforts. It will also include updates from the following HICPAC workgroups: The Guideline for Prevention of Infection in Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) Patients; the Guideline for Prevention of Infection in Healthcare Personnel; the workgroup on updating the CDC recommendation categorization scheme; the workgroup on developing CDC recommendations for products and practices; and the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) Surveillance Workgroup.

    Agenda items are subject to change as priorities dictate.

    Time will be available for public comment. The public is welcome to submit written comments in advance of the meeting. Comments should be submitted in writing by email to the contact person listed below. The deadline for receipt is October 25, 2017. All requests must contain the name, address, and organizational affiliation of the speaker, as well as the topic being addressed. Written comments should not exceed one single-spaced typed page in length and delivered in 3 minutes or less. Members of the public who wish to provide public comments should plan to attend the public comment session at the start time listed. Please note that the public comment period may end before the time indicated, following the last call for comments. Written comments received in advance of the meeting will be included in the official record of the meeting. Registration is required to attend in person or on the phone. Interested parties may register at www.cdc.gov/hicpac.

    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. 2017-19778 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services [Document Identifiers: CMS-10292 and CMS-R-148] Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is announcing an opportunity for the public to comment on CMS' intention to collect information from the public. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), federal agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information, and to allow a second opportunity for public comment on the notice. Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including the necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions, the accuracy of the estimated burden, ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden.

    DATES:

    Comments on the collection(s) of information must be received by the OMB desk officer by October 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    When commenting on the proposed information collections, please reference the document identifier or OMB control number. To be assured consideration, comments and recommendations must be received by the OMB desk officer via one of the following transmissions: OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention: CMS Desk Officer, Fax Number: (202) 395-5806 OR Email: [email protected].

    To obtain copies of a supporting statement and any related forms for the proposed collection(s) summarized in this notice, you may make your request using one of following:

    1. Access CMS' Web site address at Web site address at https://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-Guidance/Legislation/PaperworkReductionActof1995/PRA-Listing.html.

    2. Email your request, including your address, phone number, OMB number, and CMS document identifier, to [email protected]

    3. Call the Reports Clearance Office at (410) 786-1326.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    William Parham at (410) 786-4669.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. The term “collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires federal agencies to publish a 30-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, CMS is publishing this notice that summarizes the following proposed collection(s) of information for public comment:

    1. Type of Information Collection Request: Extension of a currently approved collection; Title of Information Collection: State Medicaid HIT Plan, Planning Advance Planning Document, and Implementation Advance Planning Document for Section 4201 of the Recovery Act; Use: To assess the appropriateness of state requests for the administrative Federal financial participation for expenditures under their Medicaid Electronic Health Record Incentive Program related to health information exchange, our staff will review the submitted information and documentation to make an approval determination of the state advance planning document. Form Number: CMS-10292 (OMB control number: 0938-1088); Frequency: Once and occasionally; Affected Public: State, Local, and Tribal Governments; Number of Respondents: 56; Total Annual Responses: 56; Total Annual Hours: 896. (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Marty Rice at 410-786-2417.)

    2. Type of Information Collection Request: Extension of a currently approved collection; Title of Information Collection: Limitations on Provider Related Donations and Health Care Related Taxes; Limitation on Payment to Disproportionate Share Hospitals; Medicaid and Supporting Regulations in 42 CFR 433.68, 433.74 and 447.272; Use: States may request a waiver of the broad based and uniformity tax program requirements. Each state must demonstrate that its tax program(s) do not violate the hold harmless provision. Additionally, state Medicaid agencies must report (quarterly) on health care related taxes collected and the source of provider related donations received by the state or unit of local government. Each state must maintain, in readily reviewable form, supporting documentation that provides a detailed description of each donation and tax program being reported, as well as the source and use of all donations received and collected. Without this information, the amount of Federal financial participation payable to a state cannot be determined; Form Number: CMS-R-148 (OMB control number: 0938-0618); Frequency: Quarterly and occasionally; Affected Public: State, Local, or Tribal Governments; Number of Respondents: 50; Total Annual Responses: 40; Total Annual Hours: 3,200. (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Stuart Goldstein at 410-786-0694.)

    Dated: September 13, 2017. William N. Parham, III, Director, Paperwork Reduction Staff, Office of Strategic Operations and Regulatory Affairs.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19787 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4120-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services [Document Identifiers: CMS-437 and CMS-10515] Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is announcing an opportunity for the public to comment on CMS' intention to collect information from the public. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA), federal agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information (including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information) and to allow 60 days for public comment on the proposed action. Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding our burden estimates or any other aspect of this collection of information, including the necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions, the accuracy of the estimated burden, ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected, and the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received by November 17, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    When commenting, please reference the document identifier or OMB control number. To be assured consideration, comments and recommendations must be submitted in any one of the following ways:

    1. Electronically. You may send your comments electronically to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for “Comment or Submission” or “More Search Options” to find the information collection document(s) that are accepting comments.

    2. By regular mail. You may mail written comments to the following address: CMS, Office of Strategic Operations and Regulatory Affairs, Division of Regulations Development, Attention: Document Identifier/OMB Control Number _________, Room C4-26-05, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850.

    To obtain copies of a supporting statement and any related forms for the proposed collection(s) summarized in this notice, you may make your request using one of following:

    1. Access CMS' Web site address at http://www.cms.hhs.gov/PaperworkReductionActof1995.

    2. Email your request, including your address, phone number, OMB number, and CMS document identifier, to [email protected]

    3. Call the Reports Clearance Office at (410) 786-1326.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    William Parham at (410) 786-4669.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Contents

    This notice sets out a summary of the use and burden associated with the following information collections. More detailed information can be found in each collection's supporting statement and associated materials (see ADDRESSES).

    CMS-437 Psychiatric Unit Criteria Work Sheet CMS-10515 Payment Collections Operations Contingency Plan

    Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. The term “collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA requires federal agencies to publish a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, CMS is publishing this notice.

    Information Collection

    1. Type of Information Collection Request: Reinstatement with Change of a currently approved collection; Title of Information Collection: Psychiatric Unit Criteria Work Sheet; Use: Certain specialty hospitals and hospital specialty distinct-part units may be excluded from the Inpatient Medicare Prospective Payment System (IPPS) and be paid at a different rate. These specialty hospitals and distinct-part units of hospitals include Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities (IRFs) units, Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities (IRFs) hospitals and Inpatient Psychiatric Facilities (IPFs).

    CMS regulations at 42 CFR 412.20 through 412.29 describe the criteria under which these specialty hospitals and specialty distinct-part hospital units are excluded from the IPPS. Form CMS-437 is used by Inpatient Psychiatric Facilities (IPFs) to attest to meeting the necessary requirements that make them exempt for receiving payment from Medicare under the IPPS. These IPFs must use CMS-437 to attest that they meet the requirements for IPPS exempt status prior to being placed into excluded status. IPFs must re-attest to meeting the exclusion criteria annually. Form Number: CMS-437 (OMB control number: 0938-0358); Frequency: Annually; Affected Public: Private sector—Business or other for-profits; Number of Respondents: 1,616; Total Annual Responses: 1,616; Total Annual Hours: 1,212. (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Caroline Gallaher at 410-786-8705.)

    2. Type of Information Collection Request: Extension of a currently approved collection; Title of Information Collection: Payment Collections Operations Contingency Plan; Use: Section 1402 of the PPACA provides for the reduction of cost sharing for certain individuals enrolled in a QHP through an Exchange, and section 1412 of the PPACA provides for the advance payment of these reductions to issuers. The data collection will be used by HHS to make payments or collect charges from SBE issuers under the following programs: advance payments of the premium tax credit, advanced cost-sharing reductions, and Exchange user fees. The workbook template was used to make payments in January 2014 and will continue through December 2020, as may be required based on HHS's operational progress. Form Number: CMS-10515 (OMB Control Number: 0938-1217); Frequency: Monthly; Affected Public: Private sector (Business or other for-profits and not-for-profit institutions); Number of Respondents: 575; Total Annual Responses: 7,475; Total Annual Hours: 51,175. (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Jaya Ghildiyal at 301-492-5149).

    Dated: September 13, 2017. William N. Parham, III, Director, Paperwork Reduction Staff, Office of Strategic Operations and Regulatory Affairs.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19795 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4120-01-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: Vascular and Hematology Integrated Review Group; Hypertension and Microcirculation Study Section.

    Date: October 10-11, 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: Ai-Ping Zou, MD, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4118, MSC 7814, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-408-9497, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Brain Disorders and Clinical Neuroscience Integrated Review Group; Clinical Neuroscience and Neurodegeneration Study Section.

    Date: October 10-11, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Alessandra C. Rovescalli, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, National Institutes of Health, Center for Scientific Review, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Rm 5205 MSC7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-1021, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Cardiovascular and Respiratory Sciences Integrated Review Group; Lung Injury, Repair, and Remodeling Study Section.

    Date: October 10-11, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 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: Ghenima Dirami, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4122, MSC 7814, Bethesda, MD 20892, 240-498-7546, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Population Sciences and Epidemiology Integrated Review Group; Infectious Diseases, Reproductive Health, Asthma and Pulmonary Conditions, Study Section.

    Date: October 10-11, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Bethesda North Marriott Hotel & Conference Center, Montgomery County Conference Center Facility, 5701 Marinelli Road, North Bethesda, MD 20852.

    Contact Person: Lisa Steele, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3139, MSC 7770, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 257-2638, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Biological Chemistry and Macromolecular Biophysics Integrated Review Group; Macromolecular Structure and Function D Study Section.

    Date: October 11, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    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: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Cellular and Molecular Technologies.

    Date: October 11-12, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Bethesda North Marriott Hotel & Conference Center, 5701 Marinelli Road, Bethesda, MD 20852.

    Contact Person: Tatiana V. Cohen, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive Room 5213, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-455-2364, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Infectious Diseases and Microbiology Integrated Review Group; Vector Biology Study Section.

    Date: October 11, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Cambria Suites Rockville, 1 Helen Henegham Way, Rockville, MD 20850.

    Contact Person: Liangbiao Zheng, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3214, MSC 7808, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-402-5671, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Genes, Genomes, and Genetics Integrated Review Group; Genomics, Computational Biology and Technology Study Section.

    Date: October 11-12, 2017.

    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Crystal Gateway Marriott, 1700 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA 22202.

    Contact Person: Baishali Maskeri, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-827-2864, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; SBIB Clinical Pediatric and Fetal Applications Subcommittee.

    Date: October 11, 2017.

    Time: 9:00 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.

    Contact Person: Songtao Liu, MD, Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5108, Bethesda, MD 20817, 301-435-3578, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Cell Biology Integrated Review Group; Molecular and Integrative Signal Transduction Study Section.

    Date: October 11, 2017.

    Time: 10:00 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: Charles Selden, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive Room 5187 MSC 7840, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-451-3388, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Societal and Ethical Issues in Research.

    Date: October 11, 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: Karin F. Helmers, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3148, MSC 7770, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 254-9975, [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 12, 2017. Sylvia L. Neal, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19728 Filed 9-15-17; 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 Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of a meeting of the NHLBI Special Emphasis Panel.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Special Emphasis Panel; Sex Hormone Induced Thromboembolism in Pre-Menopausal Women.

    Date: October 11, 2017.

    Time: 9:00 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: Kristen Page, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review/DERA, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 7185, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-827-7953, [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 12, 2017. Michelle Trout, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19729 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; DDK-C Conflicts.

    Date: October 13, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Bethesda North Marriott Hotel & Conference Center, 5701 Marinelli Road, Bethesda, MD 20852.

    Contact Person: Jian Yang, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Room 7111, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452, (301) 594-7799, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; PAR-16-034: Ancillary Studies in Kidney Disease (R01).

    Date: October 25, 2017.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Ann A. Jerkins, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Room 7119, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452, 301-594-2242, [email protected].

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.847, Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Research; 93.848, Digestive Diseases and Nutrition Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology and Hematology Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: September 12, 2017. David Clary, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19731 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Initial Review Group; Kidney, Urologic and Hematologic Diseases D Subcommittee.

    Date: October 17-19, 2017.

    Time: 4:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One Bethesda Metro Center, 7400 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Contact Person: Barbara A. Woynarowska, Ph.D., Scientific Review Administrator, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Room 7007, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452, (301) 402-7172, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Initial Review Group; Digestive Diseases and Nutrition C Subcommittee.

    Date: October 18-20, 2017.

    Time: 5:45 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Residence Inn Bethesda, 7335 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Contact Person: Maria E. Davila-Bloom, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Room 7017, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452, (301) 594-7637, davila-bloom[email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Initial Review Group; Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Diseases B Subcommittee.

    Date: October 25-27, 2017.

    Time: 5:30 p.m. to 2:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Residence Inn Capital View, 2850 South Potomac Avenue, Arlington, VA 22202.

    Contact Person: John F. Connaughton, Ph.D., Chief, Scientific Review Branch, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes Of Health, Room 7007, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452, (301) 594-7797, [email protected].

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.847, Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Research; 93.848, Digestive Diseases and Nutrition Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology and Hematology Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: September 12, 2017. David Clary, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19730 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard [Docket No. USCG-2010-0164] National Boating Safety Advisory Council AGENCY:

    U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Federal Advisory Committee meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Boating Safety Advisory Council and its Subcommittees will meet to discuss issues relating to recreational boating safety. These meetings will be open to the public.

    DATES:

    The National Boating Safety Advisory Council will meet on Tuesday, October 10, 2017, from 8 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. and Thursday, October 12, 2017 from 9 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. The Boats and Associated Equipment Subcommittee will meet on Tuesday, October 10, 2017, from 1 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. The Prevention through People Subcommittee will meet on Tuesday, October 10, 2017, from 2:45 p.m. to 5 p.m. The Recreational Boating Safety Strategic Planning Subcommittee will meet on Wednesday, October 11, 2017, from 8:30 a.m. to 10 a.m. The Regulatory Reform Review Subcommittee will meet on Wednesday, October 11, 2017 from 10:15 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. and 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. Please note that these meetings may conclude early if the National Boating Safety Advisory Council has completed all business.

    ADDRESSES:

    All meetings will be held in the Ballroom of the Holiday Inn Arlington (http://www.hiarlington.com), 4610 N. Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA 22203.

    For information on facilities or services for individuals with disabilities or to request special assistance at the meeting, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section below as soon as possible.

    Instructions: You are free to submit comments at any time, including orally at the meetings, but if you want Council members to review your comment before the meetings, please submit your comments no later than October 2, 2017. We are particularly interested in the comments in the “Agenda” section below. You must include “Department of Homeland Security” and the docket number USCG-2010-0164. Written comments may also be submitted using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If you encounter technical difficulties with comments submission, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section below. Comments received will be posted without alteration at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. You may review the Privacy and Security Notice for Regulations.gov at https://www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice.

    Docket Search: For access to the docket to read documents or comments related to this notice, go to http://www.regulations.gov insert USCG-2010-0164 in the “Search” box, press Enter, then click the item you wish to view.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Jeff Ludwig, Alternate Designated Federal Officer of the National Boating Safety Advisory Council, telephone (202) 372-1061, or at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice of this meeting is given pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Title 5, U.S.C, Appendix). Congress established the National Boating Safety Advisory Council in the Federal Boat Safety Act of 1971(Pub. L. 92-75). The National Boating Safety Advisory Council currently operates under the authority of 46 U.S.C. 13110 and 46 U.S.C. 4302(c). The latter requires the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard by delegation to consult with the National Boating Safety Advisory Council in prescribing regulations for recreational vessels and associated equipment and on other major safety matters.

    Agenda Day 1

    The agenda for the National Boating Safety Advisory Council meeting is as follows:

    Tuesday, October 10, 2017

    (1) Opening remarks.

    (2) Receipt and discussion of the following reports:

    (a) Chief, Office of Auxiliary and Boating Safety, Update on the U.S. Coast Guard's implementation of National Boating Safety Advisory Council Resolutions and Recreational Boating Safety Program report.

    (b) Alternate Designated Federal Officer's report concerning Council administrative and logistical matters.

    (3) Presentation on the U.S. Coast Guard Rulemaking Process

    (4) Subcommittee Session(s):

    Boats and Associated Equipment Subcommittee

    Issues to be discussed include alternatives to pyrotechnic visual distress signals; grant projects related to boats and associated equipment; and updates to 33 CFR 181 “Manufacturer Requirements” and 33 CFR 183 “Boats and Associated Equipment.”

    Prevention Through People Subcommittee

    Issues to be discussed include paddlesports participation, overview of State boating Safety programs, and licensing requirements for on-water boating safety instruction providers.

    (5) Public comment period.

    (6) Meeting Recess.

    Day 2 Wednesday, October 11, 2017

    The day will be dedicated to Subcommittee sessions:

    (1) Recreational Boating Safety Strategic Planning Subcommittee.

    Issues to be discussed include progress on implementation of the 2017-2021 Strategic Plan.

    (2) Regulatory Reform Review Subcommittee.

    Issues to be discussed include the subcommittee's progress on reviewing recreational boating safety regulations found in 33 CFR Subchapter S.

    Day 3 Thursday, October 12, 2017

    The full Council will resume meeting:

    (1) Receipt and Discussion of the Boats and Associated Equipment, Prevention through People, Recreational Boating Safety Strategic Planning, and Regulatory Reform Review Subcommittee reports.

    (2) Discussion of any recommendations to be made to the U.S. Coast Guard.

    (3) Public comment period.

    (4) Voting on any recommendations to be made to the U.S. Coast Guard.

    (5) Adjournment of meeting.

    There will be a comment period for the National Boating Safety Advisory Council members and a comment period for the public after each report presentation, but before each is voted on by the Council. The Council members will review the information presented on each issue, deliberate on any recommendations presented in the Subcommittees' reports, and formulate recommendations for the Department's consideration.

    The meeting agenda and all meeting documentation can be found at: http://homeport.uscg.mil/NBSAC. Alternatively, you may contact Mr. Jeff Ludwig as noted in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above.

    Public comments or questions will be taken throughout the meeting as the Council discusses the issues and prior to deliberations and voting. There will also be a public comment period at the end of the meeting. Speakers are requested to limit their comments to 3 minutes. Please note that the public comment period may end before the period allotted, following the call for comments. Contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above to register as a speaker.

    Jennifer F. Williams, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Director of Inspections and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19738 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Docket ID: FEMA-2017-0013; OMB No. 1660-0072] Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Mitigation Grant Programs/e-Grants 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 a reinstatement, without change, of a previously approved information collection for which approval has expired. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice seeks comments concerning the collection of information necessary to implement grants for the Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) program and the Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) program.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before October 18, 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, email address [email protected] or Jennie Orenstein, Branch Chief, HMA Division—Grants Policy, (202) 212-4071.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The FMA program is authorized by Section 1366 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 4104c. The FMA program, under 44 CFR part 79, provides funding for measures taken to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk of flood damage to buildings, manufactured homes, and other structures insured under the National Flood Insurance Program. The Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012 (Pub. L. 112-141) eliminated the Repetitive Flood Claims (RFC) and Severe Repetitive Loss (SRL) programs, and made significant changes to the FMA program by consolidating the former RFC and SRL programs into FMA. Cost-share requirements were changed to allow more Federal funds for properties with repetitive flood claims.

    The PDM program is authorized by Section 203 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5133, as amended by Section 102 of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, Public Law 106-390, 114 Stat. 1553. It provides grants for cost-effective mitigation actions prior to a disaster event to reduce overall risks to the population and structures, while also reducing reliance on funding from actual disaster declarations.

    In accordance with OMB Circular A-102, FEMA requires that all parties interested in receiving FEMA mitigation grants submit an application package for grant assistance. Applications and sub-applications for the PDM and FMA programs are submitted via the e-Grants system. The e-Grants system was developed and updated to meet the intent of the e-Government initiative, authorized by Public Law 106-107. This initiative required that all government agencies both streamline grant application processes and provide for the means to electronically create, review, and submit a grant application via the Internet. Title 2 CFR 200.335, promulgated in 2013, encourages Federal awarding agencies and non-Federal entities to, whenever practicable, collect, transmit, and store Federal award-related information in open and machine readable formats rather than in closed formats or on paper.

    This proposed information collection previously published in the Federal Register on May 9, 2017 at 82 FR 21548 with a 60-day public comment period. No public comments were received. This information collection expired on June 30, 2017. FEMA is requesting a reinstatement, without change, of a previously approved information collection for which approval has expired. Although FEMA initially proposed to revise this information collection by adding a new Quarterly Progress Report form, a new form is not necessary. The e-Grants system already collects information on the status of funded FMA/PDM mitigation activities on a quarterly basis after award. The information that is collected is limited to project status, work completed, number of properties acquired or relocated, and addresses of properties acquired or relocated during a given quarter. Therefore, FEMA is requesting a reinstatement of the collection without change. 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: Mitigation Grant Programs/e-Grants.

    Type of Information Collection: Reinstatement, without change, of a previously approved information collection for which approval has expired.

    OMB Number: 1660-0072.

    FEMA Forms: None.

    Abstract: FEMA's Flood Mitigation Assistance and Pre-Disaster Mitigation programs utilize an automated grant application and management system called e-Grants. These grant programs provide funding for the purpose of reducing or eliminating the risks to life and property from hazards. The e-Grants system includes all of the application information needed to apply for funding under these grant programs.

    Affected Public: State, Local and Tribal Government.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 56.

    Estimated Number of Responses: 4,312.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 18,788.

    Estimated Total Annual Respondent Cost: $927,939.

    Estimated Respondents' Operation and Maintenance Costs: None.

    Estimated Respondents' Capital and Start-Up Costs: None.

    Estimated Total Annual Cost to the Federal Government: $6,598,456.16.

    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 11, 2017. Tammi Hines, Acting Records Management Program Chief, Mission Support, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19790 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-52-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Docket ID: FEMA-2017-0024; OMB No. 1660-0137] Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Emergency Notification System (ENS) AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice and 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 18, 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, or email address [email protected] Or, Melton Roland, ENS Program Manager, FEMA/ORR, [email protected], or telephone at 540-665-6152.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This proposed information collection previously published in the Federal Register on June 20, 2017 at 82 FR 28083 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: Emergency Notification System (ENS).

    Type of information collection: Extension, without change, of a currently approved information collection.

    OMB Number: 1660-0137.

    Form Titles and Numbers: None.

    Abstract: The ENS contains contact information for FEMA emergency team members, and for certain DHS HQ teams as well as USCIS and FLETC teams. The ENS uses this information to send email, call cell, home, work phones and SMS devices to inform team members they have been activated. Teams include FEMA HQ COOP, Hurricane Liaison Team (HLT), Urban Search & Rescue (US&R), Emergency Response Group (ERG), etc. The system can only be accessed via DHS OneNet.

    Affected Public: State, Local or Tribal Government; Federal Government.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 700.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 500 hours.

    Estimated Cost: The estimated annual cost to respondents for the hour burden is $14,410. There are no annual costs to respondents operations and maintenance costs for technical services. There are no annual start-up or capital costs. The cost to the Federal Government is $173,350.96.

    Dated: September 13, 2017. Tammi Hines, Acting Records Management Program Chief, Mission Support, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19792 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY [Docket ID DHS-2017-0045] Meeting of The President's National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    Committee management; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The President's National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee (NSTAC) will meet on Wednesday, October 11, 2017, in Washington, DC. The meeting will be partially closed to the public.

    DATES:

    The NSTAC will meet on Wednesday, October 11, 2017, from 10:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT). Please note that the meeting may close early if the committee has completed its business.

    ADDRESSES:

    The October 2017 NSTAC Meeting's open session will be held at the Department of Homeland Security Immigration and Customs Enforcement Facility, 500 12th Street SW., Washington, DC, and will begin at 1:00 p.m. For information on facilities or services for individuals with disabilities, or to request special assistance at the meeting, or to attend in person, contact [email protected] no later than Wednesday, October 4, 2017.

    Members of the public are invited to provide comment on the issues that will be considered by the committee as listed in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below. Associated briefing materials that participants may discuss during the meeting will be available at www.dhs.gov/nstac for review as of Monday, October 2, 2017. Comments may be submitted at any time and must be identified by docket number DHS-2017-0045. Comments may be submitted by one of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Please follow the instructions for submitting written comments.

    Email: [email protected] Include the docket number DHS-2017-0045 in the subject line of the email.

    Fax: (703) 705-6190, ATTN: Sandy Benevides.

    Mail: Designated Federal Officer, Stakeholder Engagement and Critical Infrastructure Resilience Division, National Protection and Programs Directorate, Department of Homeland Security, 245 Murray Lane, Mail Stop 0612, Arlington, VA 20598-0612.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the words “Department of Homeland Security” and the docket number for this action. Comments received will be posted without alteration at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.

    Docket: For access to the docket and comments received by the NSTAC, please go to www.regulations.gov and enter docket number DHS-2017-0045.

    A public comment period will be held during the meeting on Wednesday, October 11, 2017, from 2:40 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. EDT. Speakers who wish to participate in the public comment period must register in advance by no later than Friday, October 6, 2017, at 5:00 p.m. EDT by emailing [email protected] Speakers are requested to limit their comments to three minutes and will speak in order of registration. Please note that the public comment period may end before the time indicated, following the last request for comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Helen Jackson, NSTAC Designated Federal Officer, Department of Homeland Security, (703) 705-6276 (telephone) or [email protected] (email).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. Appendix (Pub. L. 92-463). The NSTAC advises the President on matters related to National Security and Emergency Preparedness (NS/EP) telecommunications and cybersecurity policy.

    Agenda: The committee will meet in an open session on October 11, 2017, receive remarks from Department of Homeland Security (DHS) leadership and other senior Government officials regarding the Government's current cybersecurity initiatives and NS/EP priorities. The meeting will include a keynote address and a panel discussion on a cybersecurity moonshot, which looks at identifying new processes to address cybersecurity challenges. NSTAC members will also deliberate and vote on the Committee's NSTAC Report to the President on Internet and Communications Resilience which addresses ways in which the private sector and Government, together, can improve the resilience of the Internet and communications ecosystem (e.g., botnets).

    The committee will also meet in a closed session to receive a classified briefing regarding cybersecurity threats and discuss future studies based on the Government's NS/EP priorities and perceived vulnerabilities.

    Basis for Closure: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), The Government in the Sunshine Act, it has been determined that two agenda items require closure, as the disclosure of the information discussed would not be in the public interest. The first of these agenda items, the classified briefing, will provide members with a cybersecurity threat briefing on vulnerabilities related to the communications infrastructure. Disclosure of these threats would provide criminals who seek to compromise commercial and Government networks with information on potential vulnerabilities and mitigation techniques, weakening the Nation's cybersecurity posture. This briefing will be classified at the top secret level, thereby exempting disclosure of the content by statute. Therefore, this portion of the meeting is required to be closed pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1)(A) & (B) The second agenda item, a discussion of potential NSTAC study topics, will address areas of critical cybersecurity vulnerabilities and priorities for Government. Government officials will share data with NSTAC members on initiatives, assessments, and future security requirements across public and private sector networks. The information will include specific vulnerabilities within cyberspace that affect the United States' information and communication technology infrastructures and proposed mitigation strategies. Disclosure of this information to the public would provide criminals with an incentive to focus on these vulnerabilities to increase attacks on the Nation's critical infrastructure and communications networks. As disclosure of this portion of the meeting is likely to significantly frustrate implementation of proposed DHS actions, it is required to be closed pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(B).

    Helen Jackson, Designated Federal Officer for the NSTAC.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19793 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-9P-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Office of the Secretary Notice of Availability for Memorandum on Rescission of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals AGENCY:

    Office of the Secretary, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    In a memorandum dated September 5, 2017, the Acting Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) rescinded the June 15, 2012 DHS memorandum entitled “Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion with Respect to Individuals Who Came to the United States as Children.” The September 5, 2017 memorandum is available on the DHS Web site at the following location: https://www.dhs.gov/news/2017/09/05/memorandum-rescission-daca.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On June 15, 2012, then Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano issued a memorandum entitled “Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion with Respect to Individuals Who Came to the United States as Children.” The 2012 memorandum established the policy known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA).

    On September 5, 2017, Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Elaine Duke issued a memorandum entitled “Rescission of the June 15, 2012 Memorandum Entitled `Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion with Respect to Individuals Who Came to the United States as Children.' ” The September 5, 2017 memorandum rescinded the June 15, 2012 memorandum and directed DHS personnel to take all appropriate actions to execute a wind-down of the DACA program consistent with the parameters established in the memorandum. The September 5, 2017 memorandum is available on the DHS Web site at the following location: https://www.dhs.gov/news/2017/09/05/memorandum-rescission-daca.

    Dated: September 11, 2017. Elaine C. Duke, Acting Secretary of Homeland Security.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19794 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-97-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY [Docket No. DHS-2017-0038] Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records AGENCY:

    Department of Homeland Security, Privacy Office.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Modified Privacy Act System of Records.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) proposes to modify a current DHS system of records titled, “Department of Homeland Security/U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Customs and Border Protection—001 Alien File, Index, and National File Tracking System of Records.” This system of records contains information regarding transactions involving an individual as he or she passes through the U.S. immigration process, some of which may also be covered by separate Systems of Records Notices. DHS primarily maintains information relating to the adjudication of benefits, investigation of immigration violations, and enforcement actions in Alien Files (A-Files). Alien Files became the official file for all immigration records created or consolidated since April 1, 1944. Before A-Files, many individuals had more than one file with the agency. To streamline immigration recordkeeping, legacy Immigration and Naturalization Service issued each individual an Alien Number, allowing the agency to create a single file for each individual containing that individual's official immigration record. DHS also uses other immigration files to support administrative, fiscal, and legal needs.

    DATES:

    Submit comments on or before October 18, 2017. This modified system will be effective upon publication. New or modified routine uses will become effective October 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by docket number DHS-2017-0038 by one of the following methods:

    Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    Fax: 202-343-4010.

    Mail: Jonathan R. Cantor, Acting Chief Privacy Officer, Privacy Office, Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC 20528-0655.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For general questions, please contact: Donald K. Hawkins, (202) 272-8000, Privacy Officer, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, 20 Massachusetts Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20529. For privacy questions, please contact: Jonathan R. Cantor, (202) 343-1717, Acting Chief Privacy Officer, Privacy Office, Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC 20528-0655.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    As DHS moves to conducting more immigration actions in an electronic environment and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) adjudicates more immigration benefits and requests for action in its USCIS Electronic Immigration System, DHS no longer considers the paper A-File as the sole repository and official record of information related to an individual's official immigration record. An individual's immigration history may be in the following materials and formats: (1) A paper A-File; (2) an electronic record in the Enterprise Document Management System or USCIS Electronic Immigration System; or (3) a combination of paper and electronic records and supporting documentation.

    The Department of Homeland Security, therefore, is updating the “Department of Homeland Security/U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Customs and Border Protection-001 Alien File, Index, and National File Tracking System of Records notice to: (1) Redefine which records constitute the official record of an individual's immigration history to include the following materials and formats: (a) The paper A-File, (b) an electronic record in the Enterprise Document Management System or U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Electronic Immigration System, or (c) a combination of paper and electronic records and supporting documentation; (2) clarify that data originating from this system of records may be stored in a classified paper A-File or classified electronic network; (3) provide updated system locations; (4) update category of individuals covered by this System of Records Notice, to include individuals acting as legal guardians or designated representatives in immigration proceedings involving an individual who is physically or developmentally disabled or severely mentally impaired (when authorized); Civil Surgeons who conduct and certify medical examinations for immigration benefits; law enforcement officers who certify a benefit requestors cooperation in the investigation or prosecution of a criminal activity; and interpreters; (5) expand the categories of records to include the following: country of nationality; country of residence; the USCIS Online Account Number; social media handles, aliases, associated identifiable information, and search results; and the Department of Justice (DOJ), Executive Office for Immigration Review and Board of Immigration Appeals proceedings information; (6) add and describe the purpose for the USCIS Electronic Immigration System, Electronic Document Management System, and Microfilm Digitization Application System; (7) expand the data elements used to retrieve records; (8) update the parameters for retention and disposal of A-Files; (9) add the Microfilm Digitization Application System retention schedule; (10) update system manager to Associate Director, Immigration Records and Identity Services; (11) update record source categories to include publicly available information obtained from the internet, public records, public institutions, interviewees, commercial data providers, and information obtained and disclosed pursuant to information sharing agreements; and (12) update routine use E to comply with new policy contained in Office of Management and Budget Circular A-108. Additionally, this notice includes non-substantive changes to simplify the formatting and text of the previously published notice. The exemptions for the existing system of records notice will continue to be applicable for this updated system of records notice. This modified system of records notice will be included in the DHS's inventory of record systems.

    I. Background

    In accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a, the DHS U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) proposes to update and reissue a current DHS system of records titled, “DHS/USCIS-ICE-CBP-001 Alien File, Index, and National File Tracking System of Records.”

    DHS implements U.S. immigration law and policy through USCIS' processing and adjudication of applications and petitions submitted for citizenship, asylum, and other immigration benefits. USCIS also supports national security by preventing individuals from fraudulently obtaining immigration benefits and by denying applications from individuals who pose national security or public safety threats. DHS implements U.S. immigration policy and law through ICE's law enforcement activities and CBP's inspection and border security processes.

    Legacy immigration and naturalization agencies previously collected and maintained information concerning all immigration and inspection interactions. Before Alien Files (A-Files), many individuals had more than one file with the agency requiring legacy personnel to search multiple records systems and indexes for all records pertaining to one individual. The former Immigration and Naturalization Services (INS) introduced A-Files and issued each individual an Alien Number (A-Number) allowing INS to create one file for each individual containing the entire agency's records for the subject. Legacy immigration case file records that were not consolidated into the A-File are still maintained since these records hold historical value and are shared with government agencies and members of the public who request this information for mission-related and genealogy purposes.

    The Alien File, Index, and National File Tracking System of Records is the official record system that contains information regarding the transactions of an individual as he or she passes through the U.S. immigration process. Currently, A-Files may be maintained in two formats: Paper A-Files or electronic A-Files within the Enterprise Document Management System (EDMS). The official record will now take three possible forms: (1) Records contained within the paper A-File; (2) records contained within the electronic record from EDMS or USCIS Electronic Immigration System (USCIS ELIS); or (3) a combination of paper and electronic records and supporting documentation. The A-File serves as the official record of an individual's immigration history. It is used in immigration proceedings before U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) immigration judges and the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), and is the official record used in Federal court litigation and other official agency business transactions. USCIS is the custodian of the A-File and the documents contained within it that are derived from various systems belonging to USCIS, ICE, and CBP. All three components create, contribute information to, and use A-Files, hence this joint System of Records Notice (SORN).

    A notice detailing this system of records was last published in the Federal Register on November 21, 2013, as the DHS/USCIS/ICE/CBP001 Alien File, Index, and National File Tracking System of Records, 78 FR 69864. DHS is updating the DHS/USCIS/ICE/CBP-001 Alien File, Index, and National File Tracking System of Records to include the following substantive changes: (1) Redefine which records constitute the official record of an individual's immigration history to include the following materials and formats: (a) The paper A-File, (b) the electronic A-File, or (c) a combination of paper and electronic records and supporting documentation; (2) clarify that data originating from this system of records may be stored in a classified paper A-File or classified electronic network; (3) provide updated system locations; (4) update category of individuals covered by this SORN to include individual acting as legal guardians or designated representatives in immigration proceedings involving individuals who are physically or developmentally disabled or severely mentally impaired (when authorized); Civil Surgeons who conduct and certify medical examinations for immigration benefits; and law enforcement officers who certify a benefit requestors cooperation in the investigation or prosecution of a criminal activity; and interpreters; (5) expand the categories of records to include country of nationality; country of residence; the USCIS Online Account Number; social media handles, aliases, associated identifiable information, and search results; and information regarding the DOJ Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) and BIA proceedings; (6) add and describe the purpose of the USCIS ELIS, EDMS, and Microfilm Digitization Application System (MiDAS); (7) expand data elements used to retrieve records; (8) update the parameters for retention and disposal of paper A-Files and electronic A-Files; (9) include the MiDAS retention schedule; (10) change system manager to Associate Director, Immigration Records and Identity Services (IRIS); (11) update record source categories to include publicly available information obtained from the internet, public records, public institutions, interviews, commercial data providers, and information shared obtained through information sharing agreements; and (12) update routine use E to comply with Office of Management and Budget Circular A-108.

    Consistent with DHS's information sharing mission, information stored in the DHS/USCIS/ICE/CBP-001 Alien File, Index, and National File Tracking System of Records may be shared with other DHS components that have a need to know the information to carry out their national security, law enforcement, immigration, intelligence, or other homeland security functions. In addition, information contained within the DHS/USCIS/ICE/CBP-001 Alien File, Index, and National File Tracking System of Records may be shared with appropriate Federal, State, local, tribal, territorial, foreign, or international government agencies consistent with the routine uses set forth in this system of records notice. The exemptions for the existing system of records notice will continue to be applicable for this system of records notice. Additionally, this modified system will be included in DHS's inventory of record systems.

    II. Privacy Act

    The Privacy Act embodies fair information practice principles in a statutory framework governing the means by which Federal Government agencies collect, maintain, use, and disseminate individuals' records. The Privacy Act applies to information that is maintained in a “system of records.” A “system of records” is a group of any records under the control of an agency from which information is retrieved by the name of an individual or by some identifying number, symbol, or other identifying particular assigned to the individual. In the Privacy Act, an individual is defined to encompass U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents. Additionally, and similarly, the Judicial Redress Act (JRA) provides a statutory right to covered persons to make requests for access and amendment to covered records, as defined by the JRA, along with judicial review for denials of such requests. In addition, the JRA prohibits disclosures of covered records, except as otherwise permitted by the Privacy Act.

    Below is the description of the DHS/USCIS/ICE/CBP-001 Alien File, Index, and National File Tracking System of Records. In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a(r), DHS has provided a report of this system of records to the Office of Management and Budget and to Congress.

    SYSTEM NAME AND NUMBER:

    Department of Homeland Security (DHS) U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)-001 Alien File, Index, and National File Tracking System of Records.

    SECURITY CLASSIFICATION:

    Unclassified, sensitive, for official use only, and classified. The data may be retained in classified paper A-File or on classified networks. The nature and character of the underlying classification of these records will not change unless it is combined with classified information.

    SYSTEM LOCATION:

    Records are maintained in (1) paper A-Files; (2) electronic A-Files in EDMS and USCIS ELIS; (3) Central Index System (CIS); (4) MiDAS; and (5) National File Tracking System (NFTS). Other applications, as Enterprise Citizenship and Immigrations Services Centralized Operational Repository (eCISCOR) and the Person Centric Query Service (PCQS), may retrieve information from the aforementioned applications.

    Paper A-Files: Paper A-Files are primarily located at the National Records Center in Lee's Summit, Missouri and component field offices. Paper A-Files may also be located at Headquarters, Regional, District, and other USCIS File Control Offices (FCO) throughout the United States and foreign countries as detailed on the agency's Web site, http://www.uscis.gov. A-Files may also be located at ICE and CBP offices and facilities.

    EDMS: EDMS contains electronic A-Files.

    USCIS ELIS: USCIS ELIS contains electronic A-Files. USCIS ELIS is an online, electronic account and case management system that stores information submitted or integrated into the system for the processing of specific applications, petitions, or requests. Submissions may originate in an electronic format or be converted to an electronic format from paper and include forms, supporting documentation associated with each submission notices of agency action (e.g., appointment notices, requests for evidence or originals, notices of intent to deny, or withdrawal notice and other final agency decisions) on a specific application, petition, or request, whether filed directly online or received by USCIS in a paper format and subsequently scanned for integration into the USCIS ELIS. USCIS ELIS also stores the USCIS Online Account Number and biographic information about the individual filing a request for an immigration decision or agency action that can be used to retrieve information about other immigration requests that may have been filed by the individual.

    CIS: CIS serves as a DHS-wide index of key information for A-Files (whether paper or electronic). CIS contains information on individuals who interact with DHS. The system contains biographic information on those individuals which can be used to retrieve additional information from other systems. However, A-Files are not contained in CIS.

    MiDAS: MiDAS contains digitized copies of immigration-related records that were created between 1893 and 1975.

    NFTS: NFTS has the location information for all A-File records (whether paper or electronic). NFTS allows DHS to track and log the movement of paper A-Files in a centralized database, and provide timely and accurate access to the immigration case file location. This system facilitates USCIS' ability to efficiently manage and streamline access to immigration files under its control.

    The databases maintaining the above information are located within the DHS data center in the Washington, DC metropolitan area as well as throughout the country. Access to these electronic systems is possible at USCIS sites at Headquarters and in the field offices throughout the United States, at appropriate facilities under the jurisdiction of DHS, and other locations at which officers of DHS component agencies may be posted or operate to facilitate DHS's homeland security mission.

    SYSTEM MANAGER(S):

    Associate Director, Immigration Records and Identity Services, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 20 Massachusetts Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20529.

    AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM:

    Authority for maintaining this system is in Sections 103 and 290 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), as amended (8 U.S.C. 1103 and 1360), and the regulations issued pursuant thereto; and Section 451 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 107-296), codified at 6 U.S.C. 271.

    PURPOSE(S) OF THE SYSTEM:

    The purpose of this system of records is to facilitate administration of benefits and enforcement of provisions under the INA and related immigration statutes. A-Files (whether paper or electronic), immigration case files, CIS, MiDAS, and NFTS are used primarily by DHS employees for immigration processing and adjudication, protection of national security, and administering and enforcing immigration and nationality laws and related regulations and policy. These records also assist DHS with detecting violations of immigration and nationality laws; supporting the referral of such violations for prosecution or other appropriate enforcement action; supporting law enforcement efforts and inspection processes at the U.S. borders; as well as to carry out DHS enforcement, immigration, intelligence, and or other homeland security functions.

    The purpose of the A-File is to document and maintain the official record of an individual's immigration applications, petitions, and requests, as well as enforcement transactions as he or she passes through the U.S. immigration process. The official records in the A-Files consist of paper and electronic records of the individual's transactions through the immigration process including records of immigration benefit requests and requests for agency action filed with USCIS, but does not include all case processing and decisional data.

    The purpose of the EDMS is to store the A-File electronically and to share the A-File more efficiently within DHS and with external agencies.

    The purpose of USCIS ELIS is to maintain the A-File of certain paper- and electronically-filed benefit request forms with USCIS, in addition its electronic case processing, adjudication, and management functions. The associated information and data for cases maintained in USCIS ELIS for case processing, adjudication, and management functions are covered under other USCIS SORNs.

    The purpose of CIS is to maintain a repository of electronic data that summarizes the history of an immigrant or non-immigrant in the adjudication process. In addition, CIS maintains information about individuals of interest to the U.S. Government for investigative purposes. Information contained within CIS is used for immigration benefit determination and for immigration law enforcement operations by USCIS, ICE, and CBP.

    The purpose of MiDAS is to maintain a repository of historical immigration case files for use by government agencies for mission-related purposes such as assisting in the determination to grant or deny a government benefit or to conduct law enforcement or other investigations. Furthermore, USCIS makes records of deceased subjects available to members of the public who request them for genealogy and other historical research purposes.

    The purpose of NFTS is to account for the specific location of immigration files, and to track the request and transfer of immigration files.

    CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE SYSTEM:

    • Lawful permanent residents;

    • Naturalized U.S. citizens;

    • Individuals when petitioning for benefits under the INA, as amended, on behalf of another individual;

    • Individuals acting as legal guardians or designated representatives in immigration proceedings involving an individual who has a physical or developmental disability or mental impairment (as authorized under the INA);

    • Individuals who receive benefits under the INA;

    • Individuals who are subject to the enforcement provisions of the INA;

    • Individuals who are subject to the INA and:

    o Are under investigation by DHS for possible national security threats or threats to the public safety,

    o were investigated by DHS in the past,

    ○ are suspected of violating immigration-related criminal or immigration-related civil provisions of treaties, statutes, regulations, Executive Orders, and Presidential Proclamations administered by DHS, or

    ○ are witnesses and informants having knowledge of such violations;

    • Relatives and associates of any of the individuals listed above who are subject to the INA;

    • Individuals who have renounced their U.S. citizenship;

    • Civil Surgeons who are required to conduct and certify medical examinations for immigration benefits; and law enforcement officers who certify a benefit requestor's cooperation in the investigation or prosecution of a criminal activity;

    • Preparers assisting an individual seeking an immigration benefit or agency action under the INA;

    • Interpreters assisting an individual seeking an immigration benefit or agency action under the INA;

    • Attorneys or representatives recognized by USCIS or accredited by the BIA; or

    • Law enforcement officers who certify a benefit requestor's cooperation in the investigation or prosecution of a criminal activity.

    Note:

    Individuals may fall within one or more of these categories.

    CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:

    A. A-Files contain official record material about each individual for whom DHS has created a record under the INA such as: Naturalization certificates; various documents and attachments (e.g., birth and marriage certificates); applications, petitions, and requests for immigration determinations or agency action under the immigration and nationality laws; reports of arrests and investigations; statements; other reports; records of proceedings before or filings made with the U.S. immigration courts and any administrative or federal district court or court of appeal; correspondence; and memoranda. Specific data elements may include:

    • A-Numbers;

    • Receipt file number(s);

    • Full name and any aliases used;

    • Physical and mailing addresses (to include U.S. and foreign);

    • Phone numbers and email addresses;

    • Social Security number (SSN);

    • Date of birth;

    • Place of birth (city, state, and country);

    • Country of citizenship;

    • Country of nationality;

    • Country of residence;

    • Gender;

    • Physical characteristics (height, weight, race, eye and hair color, photographs, fingerprints);

    • Government-issued identification information (i.e., passport, driver's license):

    ○ Document type;

    ○ Issuing organization;

    ○ Document number; and

    ○ Expiration date;

    • Military membership and/or status;

    • Arrival/Departure information (record number, expiration date, class of admission, etc.);

    • Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Identification Number/Universal Control Number;

    • Fingerprint Identification Number;

    • Immigration enforcement history, including, but not limited to, arrests and charges, immigration proceedings and appeals, and dispositions including removals or voluntary departures;

    • Immigration status;

    • Family history;

    • Travel history;

    • Education history;

    • Employment history;

    • Criminal history;

    • Professional accreditation information;

    • Medical information;

    • Information regarding the status of Department of Justice (DOJ), Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR) and (BIA) proceedings, if applicable;

    • Specific benefit eligibility information as required by the benefit being sought;

    • Social media handles and aliases, associated identifiable information, and search results; and

    • Cassette/audio tapes, audio-visual/videotapes, CDs, DVDs, or transcripts of immigration interviews.

    B. CIS contains information on those individuals who during their interactions with DHS have been assigned an A-Number. The system contains biographic information on those individuals, allowing DHS employees to quickly review the individual's immigration status. The information in the system can then be used to retrieve additional information on the individual from other systems. The information in the system can be used to request the paper A-File from the USCIS FCO that has custody of the A-File. Specific data elements may include:

    • A-Number(s);

    • Full name and any aliases used;

    • SSN;

    • Date of birth;

    • Place of birth (city, state, and country);

    • Country of citizenship;

    • Country of nationality;

    • Gender;

    • Government issued identification information (i.e., passport, driver's license):

    • Document type;

    • Issuing organization;

    • Document number;

    • Expiration date;

    • Arrival/Departure information (record number, expiration date, class of admission, etc.);

    • Immigration status;

    • Father and Mother's first name;

    • FBI Identification/Identification Universal Control Number;

    • Fingerprint Identification Number;

    • Immigration enforcement history, including arrests and charges, immigration proceedings and appeals, and dispositions including removals or voluntary departures; and

    • NFTS file location and status information.

    C. EDMS contains official record material about each individual for whom DHS has created a record pursuant to the INA and the same information as contained in the as a paper A-File except for material that cannot be scanned from the paper A-File (e.g., cassette/audio tapes, audio-visual/video tapes, CDs, or DVDs).

    D. USCIS ELIS contains official record information and material used to determine an outcome on an immigration application, petition, or request or request agency action, such as supporting documentation, and notices of agency action on the specific immigration request. USCIS ELIS also stores the USCIS Online Account Number biographic information about the individual seeking an immigration benefit or requesting agency action that can be used to retrieve information about other requests filed by the individual, and the electronic copy of the naturalization or certificate of citizenship. Specific data elements may include, but are not limited to:

    • Full Name;

    • Aliases;

    • Physical and mailing addresses;

    • A-Number;

    • USCIS Online Account Number;

    • SSN;

    • Date of birth and/or death;

    • Country of citizenship;

    • Country of nationality;

    • Country of residence;

    • Place of birth;

    • Gender;

    • Marital status;

    • Military membership or status;

    • Phone and fax numbers (including mobile phone numbers);

    • Email address;

    • Immigration status;

    • Biometric information (e.g., fingerprints, photographs, signature) and other information used to conduct background and security checks;

    • Physical description (e.g., height, weight, eye color, hair color, race, ethnicity, identifying marks like tattoos or birthmarks);

    • Government issued identification information (i.e., passport, driver's license):

    ○ Document type;

    ○ Issuing organization;

    ○ Document number; and

    ○ Expiration date;

    • Immigration benefit type and/or agency action requested (e.g., deferred action);

    • Supporting documentation as necessary (e.g. birth, marriage, and divorce certificates; licenses; academic diplomas and transcripts; appeals, requests for rehearing, and motions to reopen or reconsideration; explanatory statements; and unsolicited information submitted voluntarily by the individual seeking an immigration benefit or requesting agency action or family members in support of the request);

    • Notices and communications, including:

    ○ Requests for evidence;

    ○ Notices of intent to deny, fine, or terminate; and

    ○ Proofs of benefit (e.g., Employment Authorization Card, Permanent Resident Card);

    • Signature;

    • Fee payment information (e.g., credit card number, Pay.gov Payment Tracking Number);

    • Audio-visual recordings, including interviews and naturalization ceremonies;

    • Travel history;

    • Education history;

    • Work history;

    • Records regarding organization membership or affiliation;

    • Family relationships (e.g., parent, spouse, sibling, child, other dependents);

    • Information regarding the status of DOJ, EOIR and BIA proceedings, if applicable;

    • Case processing information such as the date an immigration request was filed or received by USCIS; status of such a request; location of record; other control number when applicable; and fee receipt data;

    • Representative information, including:

    ○ Name;

    ○ Law Firm/recognized organization;

    ○ Physical and mailing addresses;

    ○ Phone and fax numbers;

    ○ Email address;

    ○ Attorney Bar Card Number or equivalent;

    ○ Bar membership;

    ○ BIA representative accreditation authorization and expiration dates;

    ○ Law practice restriction(s) explanation; and

    ○ Signature.

    • Preparer and Interpreter information, including:

    ○ Full Name;

    ○ Business or Organization name;

    ○ Physical and mailing addresses;

    ○ Phone and fax numbers;

    ○ Email address; and

    ○ Signature.

    E. NFTS contains the location of the A-File whether paper or electronic. Specific data elements include:

    • A-Number;

    • Receipt File Number;

    • Primary immigration file tracking number (e.g., A-Number, Receipt File Number, Certificate Number (C-Number), and Temporary Number (T-Number));

    • Location of the paper A-File and Receipt File within the USCIS FCO, as well as the history of who has maintained the paper A-File, including the component, section, and employee; and

    • Name of the USCIS FCO that has jurisdiction over a case maintained in USCIS ELIS and any transfer of jurisdiction to another USCIS office.

    F. MiDAS is an online interactive application system that provides an automated means for searching an index to legacy immigrant records opened or indexed prior to 1975. The MiDAS Search Engine includes the Flexoline Index, documenting the issuance of A-Numbers to individuals between August 1940 and 1948, as well as a card index to physical A-Files opened between April 1, 1944 and 1975. MiDAS index data may be used to create or update a CIS record of an A-Number issued or A-File opened prior to 1975. Specific A-File index data elements may include, but are not limited to:

    • A-Number;

    • C-Number;

    • Full name;

    • Date of birth; and

    • Place of birth (city, state, and country).

    RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES:

    Basic information contained in DHS records is supplied by individuals on Department of State (DOS) and DHS applications and forms. Other information comes from publicly available information obtained from the Internet, public records, public institutions, interviewees, commercial data aggregators, inquiries or complaints from members of the general public and members of Congress, referrals of inquiries or complaints directed to the President or Secretary of Homeland Security, information shared through information sharing agreements, reports of investigations, sworn statements, correspondence, official reports, memoranda, and written referrals from other entities, including federal, state, and local governments, various courts and regulatory agencies, foreign government agencies, and international organizations.

    ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND PURPOSES OF SUCH USES:

    Information in this system of records contains information relating to persons who have pending or approved benefit requests for special protected classes and should not be disclosed pursuant to a routine use unless disclosure is otherwise permissible under the confidentiality statutes, regulations, or policies applicable to that information. For example, information relating to persons who have pending or approved benefit requests for protection under the Violence Against Women Act, Seasonal Agricultural Worker or Legalization claims, the Temporary Protected Status of an individual, and information relating to nonimmigrant visas protected under special confidentiality provisions should not be disclosed pursuant to a routine use unless disclosure is otherwise permissible under the confidentiality statutes, regulations, or policies applicable to that information. These confidentiality provisions do not prevent DHS from disclosing information to the DOJ and Offices of the United States Attorney as part of an ongoing criminal or civil investigation.

    In addition to those disclosures generally permitted under 5 U.S.C. 552a(b) of the Privacy Act, all or a portion of the records or information contained in this system may be disclosed outside DHS as a routine use pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(b)(3) as follows:

    A. To DOJ, including Offices of the U.S. Attorneys, or other federal agency conducting litigation or in proceedings before any court, adjudicative, or administrative body, when it is relevant or necessary to the litigation and one of the following is a party to the litigation or has an interest in such litigation:

    1. DHS or any component thereof;

    2. Any employee or former employee of DHS in his/her official capacity;

    3. Any employee or former employee of DHS in his/her individual capacity when DOJ or DHS has agreed to represent the employee; or

    4. The United States or any agency thereof.

    B. To a congressional office from the record of an individual in response to an inquiry from that congressional office made at the request of the individual to whom the record pertains.

    C. To the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) or General Services Administration pursuant to records management inspections being conducted under the authority of 44 U.S.C. 2904 and 2906.

    D. To an agency or organization for the purpose of performing audit or oversight operations as authorized by law, but only such information as is necessary and relevant to such audit or oversight function.

    E. To appropriate agencies, entities, and persons when:

    1. DHS determines that information from this system of records is reasonably necessary and otherwise compatible with the purpose of collection to assist another federal recipient agency or entity in (1) responding to a suspected or confirmed breach or (2) preventing, minimizing, or remedying the risk of harm to individuals, the recipient agency or entity (including its information systems, programs, and operations), the Federal Government, or national security, resulting from a suspected or confirmed breach; or

    2. DHS suspects or has confirmed that there has been a breach of this system of records; and (a) DHS has determined that as a result of the suspected or confirmed breach, there is a risk of harm to individuals, harm to DHS (including its information systems, programs, and operations), the Federal Government, or national security; and (b) the disclosure made to such agencies, entities, and persons is reasonably necessary to assist in connection with DHS's efforts to respond to the suspected or confirmed breach or to prevent, minimize, or remedy such harm.

    F. To contractors and their agents, grantees, experts, consultants, and others performing or working on a contract, service, grant, cooperative agreement, or other assignment for DHS, when necessary to accomplish an agency function related to this system of records. Individuals provided information under this routine use are subject to the same Privacy Act requirements and limitations on disclosure as are applicable to DHS officers and employees.

    G. To an appropriate Federal, State, tribal, local, international, or foreign law enforcement agency or other appropriate authority charged with investigating or prosecuting a violation or enforcing or implementing a law, rule, regulation, or order, when a record, either on its face or in conjunction with other information, indicates a violation or potential violation of law, which includes criminal, civil, or regulatory violations and such disclosure is proper and consistent with the official duties of the person making the disclosure.

    H. To appropriate Federal, State, tribal, local, or foreign governmental agencies or multilateral governmental organizations responsible for investigating or prosecuting the violations of, or for enforcing or implementing, a statute, rule, regulation, order, or license, when DHS believes the information would assist in enforcing applicable civil or criminal laws.

    I. To third parties during the course of a law enforcement investigation to the extent necessary to obtain information pertinent to the investigation.

    J. To an organization or person in either the public or private sector, either foreign or domestic, when there is a reason to believe that the recipient is or could become the target of a particular terrorist activity or conspiracy, or when the information is relevant to the protection of life, property, or other vital interests of a person.

    K. To clerks and judges of courts exercising naturalization jurisdiction for the purpose of granting naturalization and administering naturalization oaths, and to enable such courts to determine eligibility for naturalization or grounds for revocation of naturalization.

    L. To courts, magistrates, administrative tribunals, opposing counsel, parties, and witnesses, in the course of immigration, civil, or criminal proceedings before a court or adjudicative body when it is necessary or relevant to the litigation or proceeding and the following is a party to the proceeding or has an interest in the proceeding:

    1. DHS or any component thereof; or

    2. Any employee of DHS in his or her official capacity; or

    3. Any employee of DHS in his or her individual capacity when the DOJ or DHS has agreed to represent the employee; or

    4. The United States or any agency thereof.

    M. To an attorney or representative (as defined in 8 CFR 1.2) who is acting on behalf of an individual covered by this system of records in connection with any proceeding before USCIS, ICE, or CBP or the DOJ EOIR, as required by law or as deemed necessary in the discretion of the Department.

    N. To DOJ (including Offices of the United States Attorneys) or other federal agency conducting litigation or in proceedings before any court, adjudicative, or administrative body, when necessary to assist in the development of such agency's legal and/or policy position.

    O. To DOS in the processing of petitions or applications for benefits under the INA, and all other immigration and nationality laws including treaties and reciprocal agreements; or when DOS requires information to consider and/or provide an informed response to a request for information from a foreign, international, or intergovernmental agency, authority, or organization about an alien or an enforcement operation with transnational implications.

    P. To appropriate Federal, State, local, tribal, territorial, or foreign governments, as well as to other individuals and organizations during the course of an investigation by DHS or the processing of a matter under DHS's jurisdiction, or during a proceeding within the purview of the immigration and nationality laws, when DHS deems that such disclosure is necessary to carry out its functions and statutory mandates.

    Q. To an appropriate Federal, State, local, tribal, territorial, or foreign government agency or organization, or international organization, lawfully engaged in collecting law enforcement intelligence, whether civil or criminal, or charged with investigating, prosecuting, enforcing, or implementing civil or criminal laws, related rules, regulations, or orders, to enable these entities to carry out their law enforcement responsibilities, including the collection of law enforcement intelligence and the disclosure is appropriate to the proper performance of the official duties of the person receiving the information.

    R. To an appropriate Federal, State, local, tribal, territorial, foreign, or international agency, if the information is relevant to a requesting agency's decision concerning the hiring or retention of an individual, or issuance of a security clearance, license, contract, grant, or other benefit, or if the information is relevant to a DHS decision concerning the hiring or retention of an employee, the issuance of a security clearance, the reporting of an investigation of an employee, the letting of a contract, or the issuance of a license, grant, or other benefit.

    S. To an appropriate Federal, State, local, tribal, territorial, foreign, or international agency, if DHS determines: (1) The information is relevant and necessary to that agency's decision concerning the hiring or retention of an individual, or issuance of a security clearance, license, contract, grant, or other benefit; and (2) failure to disclose the information is likely to create a substantial risk to government facilities, equipment, or personnel; sensitive information; critical infrastructure; or public safety.

    T. To appropriate Federal, State, local, tribal, or foreign governmental agencies or multilateral governmental organizations for the purpose of protecting the vital interests of a data subject or other persons, including to assist such agencies or organizations in preventing exposure to, or transmission of a communicable or quarantinable disease or to combat other significant public health threats; appropriate notice will be provided of any identified health threat or risk.

    U. To an individual's current employer to the extent necessary to determine employment eligibility or to a prospective employer or government agency to verify whether an individual is eligible for a government-issued credential that is a condition of employment.

    V. To a former employee of DHS, in accordance with applicable regulations, for purposes of: Responding to an official inquiry by a federal, state, or local government entity or professional licensing authority; or facilitating communications with a former employee that may be necessary for personnel-related or other official purposes when DHS requires information or consultation assistance from the former employee regarding a matter within that person's former area of responsibility.

    W. To the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in connection with the review of private relief legislation as set forth in OMB Circular No. A-19 at any stage of the legislative coordination and clearance process as set forth in the Circular.

    X. To the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary or the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary when necessary to inform members of Congress about an alien who is being considered for private immigration relief.

    Y. To a Federal, State, tribal, or local government agency and/or to domestic courts to assist such agencies in collecting the repayment of loans, or fraudulently or erroneously secured benefits, grants, or other debts owed to them or to the U.S. Government, or to obtain information that may assist DHS in collecting debts owed to the U.S. Government.

    Z. To an individual or entity seeking to post or arrange, or who has already posted or arranged, an immigration bond for an alien, to aid the individual or entity in (1) identifying the location of the alien; (2) posting the bond; (3) obtaining payments related to the bond; or (4) conducting other administrative or financial management activities related to the bond.

    AA. To a coroner for purposes of affirmatively identifying a deceased individual (whether or not such individual is deceased as a result of a crime).

    BB. Consistent with the requirements of the INA, to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), or to any state or local health authorities, to:

    1. Provide proper medical oversight of DHS-designated Civil Surgeons who perform medical examinations of both arriving aliens and of those requesting status as lawful permanent residents; and

    2. Ensure that all health issues potentially affecting public health and safety in the United States are being or have been, adequately addressed.

    CC. To a Federal, State, local, tribal, or territorial government agency seeking to verify or ascertain the citizenship or immigration status of any individual within the jurisdiction of the agency for any purpose authorized by law.

    DD. To the Social Security Administration (SSA) for the purpose of issuing a SSN and card to an alien who has made a request for a SSN as part of the immigration process and in accordance with any related agreements in effect between the SSA, DHS, and DOS entered into pursuant to 20 CFR 422.103(b)(3), 422.103(c)(3), and 422.106(a), or other relevant laws and regulations.

    EE. To Federal and foreign government intelligence or counterterrorism agencies or components when DHS becomes aware of an indication of a threat or potential threat to national or international security, or when such use is to conduct national intelligence and security investigations or assist in anti-terrorism efforts.

    FF. To third parties to facilitate placement or release of an individual (e.g., at a group home, homeless shelter) who has been or is about to be released from DHS custody, but only such information that is relevant and necessary to arrange housing or continuing medical care for the individual.

    GG. To an appropriate domestic government agency or other appropriate authority for the purpose of providing information about an individual who has been or is about to be released from DHS custody who, due to a condition such as mental illness, may pose a health or safety risk to himself/herself or to the community. DHS will only disclose information about the individual that is relevant to the health or safety risk they may pose and/or the means to mitigate that risk (e.g., the individual's need to remain on certain medication for a serious mental health condition).

    HH. To foreign governments for the purpose of coordinating and conducting the removal of individuals to other nations under the INA; and to international, foreign, and intergovernmental agencies, authorities, and organizations in accordance with law and formal or informal international arrangements.

    II. To a Federal, State, local, territorial, tribal, international, or foreign criminal, civil, or regulatory law enforcement authority when the information is necessary for collaboration, coordination, and de-confliction of investigative matters, prosecutions, and/or other law enforcement actions to avoid duplicative or disruptive efforts and to ensure the safety of law enforcement officers who may be working on related law enforcement matters.

    JJ. To the DOJ Federal Bureau of Prisons and other Federal, State, local, territorial, tribal, and foreign law enforcement or custodial agencies for the purpose of placing an immigration detainer on an individual in that agency's custody, or to facilitate the transfer of custody of an individual from DHS to the other agency. This will include the transfer of information about unaccompanied minor children to HHS to facilitate the custodial transfer of such children from DHS to HHS.

    KK. To Federal, State, local, tribal, territorial, or foreign governmental or quasi-governmental agencies or courts to confirm the location, custodial status, removal, or voluntary departure of an alien from the United States, in order to facilitate the recipients' exercise of responsibilities pertaining to the custody, care, or legal rights (including issuance of a U.S. passport) of the removed individual's minor children, or the adjudication or collection of child support payments or other debts owed by the removed individual.

    LL. To a Federal, State, tribal, territorial, local, international, or foreign government agency or multilateral governmental organization for the purpose of consulting with that agency or entity: (1) To assist in making a determination regarding redress for an individual in connection with the operations of a DHS component or program; (2) for the purpose of verifying the identity of an individual seeking redress in connection with the operations of a DHS component or program; or (3) for the purpose of verifying the accuracy of information submitted by an individual who has requested such redress on behalf of another individual.

    MM. To family members, guardians, committees, friends, or other agents identified by law or regulation to receive notification, decisions, and other papers as provided in 8 CFR 103.8 from DHS or EOIR following verification of a familial or agency relationship with an alien when DHS is aware of indicia of incompetency or when an immigration judge determines an alien is mentally incompetent.

    NN. To the news media and the public, with the approval of the Chief Privacy Officer in consultation with counsel, when there exists a legitimate public interest in the disclosure of the information or when disclosure is necessary to preserve confidence in the integrity of DHS or is necessary to demonstrate the accountability of DHS's officers, employees, or individuals covered by the system, except to the extent the Chief Privacy Officer determines that release of the specific information in the context of a particular case would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    OO. To domestic governmental agencies seeking to determine the immigration status of persons who have applied to purchase/obtain a firearm in the United States, pursuant to checks conducted on such persons under the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act or other applicable laws.

    POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORAGE OF RECORDS:

    Records in this system are stored electronically or on paper in secure facilities in a locked drawer behind a locked door. The records may be stored on magnetic disc, tape, and digital media.

    POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR RETRIEVAL OF RECORDS:

    DHS/USCIS retrieves records by searching in CIS using the following data alone or in any combination:

    • A-Number;

    • Full name;

    • Alias;

    • Sounds-like name with or without date of birth;

    • Certificate of Citizenship or Naturalization Certificate number;

    • Driver's License number;

    • FBI Identification/Universal Control Number;

    • Fingerprint Identification Number;

    • I-94 admission number;

    • Passport number;

    • SSN; or

    • Travel Document number.

    DHS/USCIS retrieves records by searching electronic A-Files in EDMS by any of the following fields alone or in any combination:

    • A-Number;

    • Last name;

    • First name;

    • Middle name;

    • Aliases;

    • Date of birth;

    • Country of birth;

    • Gender; and

    • Through a full text-based search of records contained in the electronic A-File (based on optical character recognition of the scanned images).

    DHS/USCIS retrieves records by searching in USCIS ELIS using the following data alone or in any combination:

    • Full Name;

    • Aliases;

    • A-Number;

    • USCIS Online Account Number;

    • Date of birth;

    • Immigration benefit type and/or agency action requested (e.g., deferred action);

    • Fee receipt data;

    • Date benefit request was filed;

    • Date benefit request was received;

    • Representative name;

    • Preparer name; and

    • Interpreter name.

    DHS/USCIS retrieves the location of A-Files, whether paper or electronic, by searching in NFTS using the following data:

    • A-Number;

    • USCIS Online Account Number; or

    • Receipt File Number.

    DHS/USCIS retrieves genealogy records and requests in MiDAS by searching the following data alone or in any combination:

    • Requestor's first name;

    • Requestor's last name;

    • Requestor's Case and/or Control Number;

    • Record subject's A-Number or immigration case file number;

    • Record subject's first name;

    • Record subject's last name; and

    • Record subject's alias.

    Policies and Practices for Retention and Disposal of Records:

    The official A-File record may take three possible forms: (1) Records contained within the paper A-File; (2) records contained within the electronic record from EDMS or USCIS ELIS; or (3) a combination of paper and electronic records and supporting documentation. A-File records are maintained in accordance with N1-566-08-11. DHS/USCIS transfers A-Files to the custody of NARA 100 years after the individual's date of birth.

    CIS records are maintained in accordance with N1-566-10-01. CIS is an internal DHS-mission critical system that contains records that serve as a finding aid to agency case files. Records in CIS are permanently retained because they are the index of the A-File, summarize the history of an immigrant in the adjudication process, and identify the A-File location(s).

    NFTS records are maintained in accordance with N1-566-06-01. NFTS records are temporary and deleted when they are no longer needed for agency business. NFTS records associated with an A-File will be retained on a permanent basis even after the A-File has been retired to NARA to retain accurate recordkeeping. Other immigration case files with a shorter retention period will have the associated NFTS record destroyed or deleted once the file has been destroyed.

    MiDAS information (data and electronic images) pertaining to correspondence with the public and government requestor is retained and disposed every six years in accordance with the NARA General Records Schedules 4.2 and 14. The immigration case files contained in MiDAS are retained permanently. Records are transferred to NARA after 100 years after the last completed action.

    Records replicated on the unclassified and classified networks for analysis and vetting will follow the same retention schedule.

    Administrative, Technical, and Physical Safeguards:

    DHS/USCIS safeguards records in this system according to applicable rules and policies, including all applicable DHS automated systems security and access policies. USCIS has imposed strict controls to minimize the risk of compromising the information that is being stored. Access to the computer system containing the records in this system is limited to those individuals who have a need to know the information for the performance of their official duties and who have appropriate clearances or permissions.

    Record Access Procedures:

    The Secretary of Homeland Security has exempted this system from the notification, access, and amendment procedures of the Privacy Act, and those of the Judicial Redress Act (JRA) if applicable, because it is a law enforcement system. However, DHS/USCIS will consider individual requests to determine whether or not information may be released. Thus, individuals seeking access to and notification of any record contained in this system of records, or seeking to contest its content, may submit a request in writing to the Chief Privacy Officer and USCIS Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Officer, whose contact information can be found at http://www.dhs.gov/foia under “Contacts Information.” If an individual believes more than one component maintains Privacy Act records concerning him or her, the individual may submit the request to the Chief Privacy Officer and Chief Freedom of Information Act Officer, Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC 20528-0655. Even if neither the Privacy Act nor the Judicial Redress Act provide a right of access, certain records about you may be available under the FOIA.

    When seeking records about yourself from this system of records or any other Departmental system of records, your request must conform with the Privacy Act regulations set forth in 6 CFR part 5. You must first verify your identity, meaning that you must provide your full name, current address, and date and place of birth. You must sign your request, and your signature must either be notarized or submitted under 28 U.S.C. 1746, a law that permits statements to be made under penalty of perjury as a substitute for notarization. While no specific form is required, you may obtain forms for this purpose from the Chief Privacy Officer and Chief Freedom of Information Act Officer, http://www.dhs.gov/foia or 1-866-431-0486. In addition, you should:

    • Explain why you believe the Department would have information on you;

    • Identify which component(s) of the Department you believe may have the information about you;

    • Specify when you believe the records would have been created; and

    • Provide any other information that will help the FOIA staff determine which DHS component agency may have responsive records.

    If your request is seeking records pertaining to another living individual, you must include a statement from that individual certifying his/her agreement for you to access his/her records.

    Without the above information, the component(s) may not be able to conduct an effective search, and your request may be denied due to lack of specificity or lack of compliance with applicable regulations.

    Contesting Record Procedures:

    For records covered by the Privacy Act or covered JRA records, see “access procedures” above.

    Notification Procedures:

    See “Record Access procedure.”

    EXEMPTIONS PROMULGATED FOR THE SYSTEM:

    The Secretary of Homeland Security has exempted this system from the following provisions of the Privacy Act pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2): 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3), (c)(4), (d), (e)(1), (e)(2), (e)(3), (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), (e)(4)(I), (e)(5), (e)(8), (e)(12), (f), (g)(1), and (h). Additionally, the Secretary of Homeland Security has exempted this system from the following provisions of the Privacy Act pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(1) and (k)(2): 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3), (d), (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), (e)(4)(I), and (f).

    When this system receives a record from another system exempted in that source system under 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), DHS will claim the same exemptions for those records that are claimed for the original primary systems of records from which they originated and claims any additional exemptions set forth here.

    History:

    DHS/USCIS/ICE/CBP-001 Alien File, Index, and National File Tracking System of Records, 78 FR 69864 (Nov. 21, 2013); Alien File, Index, and National File Tracking SORN, 76 FR 34233l (Jun. 13, 2011); Alien File (A-File) and Central Index System (CIS) Systems of Records 78 FR 1755 (Jan. 16, 2007).

    Jonathan R. Cantor, Acting Chief Privacy Officer, Department of Homeland Security.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19365 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-97-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement [OMB Control Number 1653-0038] Agency Information Collection Activities: Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS); Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved Collection AGENCY:

    U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security.

    NOTICE:

    60-day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The information collection is published in the Federal Register to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for sixty days until November 17, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments and suggestions regarding items contained in this notice and especially with regard to the estimated public burden and associated response time should be directed the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), PRA Clearance Officer, U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, 801 I Street NW., Mailstop 5800, Washington, DC 20536-5800.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information should address one or more of the following four points:

    (1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

    (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

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

    Overview of This Information Collection

    (1) Type of Information Collection: Extension, without change, of a currently approved information collection.

    (2) Title of the Form/Collection: Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS).

    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department of Homeland Security sponsoring the collection: Forms I-17 and I-20; U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary Non-profit institutions and individuals or households. SEVIS is an Internet-based data-entry, collection and reporting system. It collects information on SEVP-certified schools via the Form I-17, “Petition for Approval of School for Attendance by Nonimmigrant Student,” and collects information on the F and M nonimmigrant students that the SEVP-certified schools admit into their programs of study via the Forms I-20s: “Certificate of Eligibility for Nonimmigrant (F-1) Student Status—For Academic and Language Students” and “Certificate of Eligibility for Nonimmigrant (M-1) Student Status—For Vocational Students”.

    (5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond:

    Number of
  • respondents
  • Form name/Form No. Average burden
  • per response
  • (in hours)
  • 280,000 Certificate of Eligibility for Nonimmigrant (F-1) Student Status—For Academic and Language Students/ICE Form I-20 (Students) 0.5 90,000 Certificate of Eligibility for Nonimmigrant (M-1) Student Status—For Academic and Language Students/ICE Form I-20 (Spouse/Dependents) 0.5 280,000 Optional Practical Training 12 Month Request/No Form 0.083 12,000 Optional Practical Training 17 Month Extension Request/No Form 0.083 5,525 Maintenance of SEVP Certification/ICE Form I-17 4

    (6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: 1,027,884 annual burden hours.

    Dated: September 12, 2017. Scott Elmore, PRA Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19713 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-28-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement [OMB Control Number 1653-NEW] Agency Information Collection Activities: 287(g) Needs Assessment; New Collection AGENCY:

    U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    60-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) will be submitting the following new information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The information collection is published in the Federal Register to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for sixty days until November 17, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    All submissions received must include the OMB Control Number 1653-NEW in the subject box and the agency name. To avoid duplicate submissions, please use only one of the following methods to submit comments:

    (1) Email. Submit comments to [email protected];

    (2) Mail. Submit written comments to DHS, USICE, PRA Clearance Officer, 801 I Street NW., Washington, DC 20536-5800.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information should address one or more of the following four points:

    (1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

    (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

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

    Overview of This Information Collection

    (1) Type of Information Collection: New information collection.

    (2) Title of the Form/Collection: 287(g) Needs Assessment.

    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department of Homeland Security sponsoring the collection: U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: State or Local governments. This questionnaire is used for the purposes of allowing ICE to evaluate a state or local law enforcement agency that has expressed interest in partnering with ICE under Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act so that its officers may be delegated the authority to perform the functions of an immigration officer under a signed memorandum of agreement. The prospective law enforcement agency provides this information to ICE as part of ICE's process to evaluate the agency's suitability to partner with ICE.

    (5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: 50 responses at 60 minutes (1 hour) per response.

    (6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: 50 annual burden hours.

    Dated: September 13, 2017. Scott Elmore, PRA Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19736 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-28-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [17X.LLAZ956000.L14400000.BJ0000.LXSSA225000.241A] Notice of Filing of Plats of Survey; Arizona AGENCY:

    Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of official filing.

    SUMMARY:

    The plats of survey of the following described lands were officially filed in the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Arizona State Office, Phoenix, Arizona, on the dates indicated. Surveys announced in this notice are necessary for the management of lands administered by the agencies indicated.

    ADDRESSES:

    These plats will be available for inspection in the Arizona State Office, Bureau of Land Management, One North Central Avenue, Suite 800, Phoenix, Arizona, 85004-4427. Protests of the survey should be sent to the Arizona State Director at this address.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Gerald Davis, Chief Cadastral Surveyor of Arizona; (602) 417-9558; [email protected] Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1-800-877-8339 to contact the above individual during normal business hours. The FRS is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, to leave a message or question with the above individual. You will receive a reply during normal business hours.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Gila and Salt River Meridian, Arizona

    The supplemental plat, in two sheets, showing the relotting in sections 5 and 6, Township 14 North, Range 10 East, accepted July 13, 2017, and officially filed July 14, 2017, for Group 9110, Arizona.

    This plat was prepared at the request of the United States Forest Service.

    The plat, in two sheets, representing the dependent resurvey of a portion of the Fourth Standard Parallel North (south boundary), a portion of the subdivisional lines, and the meanders of the abandoned left bank of the Colorado River, through sections 20 and 32, the survey of division of accretion lines, the traverse of a portion of the abandoned left bank of the Colorado River through sections 19 and 29, and a portion of the subdivision of section 20, and the survey of the fixed and limiting boundary of the abandoned left bank of the Colorado River through section 31, the subdivision of section 28, the metes-and-bounds survey in the northeast quarter of section 28, the survey of the north and south boundaries of the easement for the Topock Inlet Canal adjacent to the accretions in sections 19, 20 and 29, Township 17 North, Range 21 West, accepted August 2, 2017, and officially filed August 3,2017, for Group 1154, Arizona.

    This plat was prepared at the request of the Bureau of Reclamation.

    The plat representing the dependent resurvey of a portion of the east boundary, and the surveys of the division of accretion line between Ranges 21 and 22 West, and a portion of the meanders of the left bank of the Colorado River in section 24, and the metes-and-bounds survey of the north and south boundaries of the easement for the Topock Inlet Canal adjacent to and within the accretions of section 24, Township 17 North, Range 22 West, accepted August 2, 2017, and officially filed August 3, 2017, for Group 1154, Arizona.

    This plat was prepared at the request of the Bureau of Reclamation.

    The San Bernardino Meridian, Arizona

    The plat representing the dependent resurvey of a portion of the subdivisional lines and the 1883 meanders of the right bank of the Colorado River, and the subdivision of section 4, the survey of an informative traverse and metes-and-bounds survey of the right bank of the abandoned channel of the Colorado River, and the division of accretion line the northeast quarter of section 4, Township 8 North, Range 23 East, accepted August 2, 2017, and officially filed August 3, 2017, for Group 1154, Arizona.

    This plat was prepared at the request of the Bureau of Reclamation.

    The plat, in three sheets, representing the dependent resurvey of a portion of the south boundary, and a portion of the subdivisional lines, and the informative traverses of the 1883 right bank of the Colorado River through sections 33 and 34, the subdivision of section 33, the informative traverse and metes-and-bounds survey of the right bank of the abandoned channel of the Colorado River in sections 33 and 34, the informative traverse of the medial line of the abandoned channel of the Colorado River adjacent to sections 33 and 34, the survey of the north and south boundaries of the Topock Inlet Canal lease within the abandoned channel of the Colorado River, a retracement of a portion of a land description and a survey made part of CV-98-4072, in the Superior Court of Arizona, in and for the County of Mohave, Township 9 North, Range 23 East, accepted August 2, 2017, and officially filed August 3, 2017, for Group 1154, Arizona.

    This plat was prepared at the request of the Bureau of Reclamation.

    A person or party who wishes to protest against any of these surveys must file a written notice of protest within 30 calendar days from the date of this publication with the Arizona State Director, Bureau of Land Management, stating that they wish to protest.

    A statement of reasons for a protest may be filed with the notice of protest to the State Director, or the statement of reasons must be filed with the State Director within thirty (30) days after the protest is filed. Before including your address, or other personal information in your protest, please be aware that your entire protest, including your personal identifying information, may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    Authority:

    43 U.S.C. Chap. 3.

    Gerald T. Davis, Chief Cadastral Surveyor of Arizona.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19761 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-32-P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337-TA-1012] Certain Magnetic Data Storage Tapes and Cartridges Containing the Same; Notice of Request for Statements on the Public Interest AGENCY:

    U.S. International Trade Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that the presiding administrative law judge has issued a Final Initial Determination and Recommended Determination on Remedy and Bonding in the above-captioned investigation. The Commission is soliciting comments on public interest issues raised by the recommended relief, specifically a limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders against respondents Sony Corporation, Sony Corporation of America, and Sony Electronics Inc. This notice is soliciting public interest comments from the public only. Parties are to file public interest submissions pursuant to Commission rules.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Megan M. Valentine, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 708-2301. The public version of the complaint can be accessed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov, and will be available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000.

    General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server (https://www.usitc.gov). The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on (202) 205-1810.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 provides that if the Commission finds a violation it shall exclude the articles concerned from the United States:

    unless, after considering the effect of such exclusion upon the public health and welfare, competitive conditions in the United States economy, the production of like or directly competitive articles in the United States, and United States consumers, it finds that such articles should not be excluded from entry. 19 U.S.C. 1337(d)(1). A similar provision applies to cease and desist orders. 19 U.S.C. 1337(f)(1).

    The Commission is interested in further development of the record on the public interest in these investigations. Accordingly, parties are to file public interest submissions pursuant to pursuant to 19 CFR 210.50(a)(4). In addition, members of the public are hereby invited to file submissions of no more than five (5) pages, inclusive of attachments, concerning the public interest in light of the administrative law judge's Recommended Determination on Remedy and Bonding issued in this investigation on September 12, 2017. Comments should address whether issuance of a limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders in this investigation would affect the public health and welfare in the United States, competitive conditions in the United States economy, the production of like or directly competitive articles in the United States, or United States consumers.

    In particular, the Commission is interested in comments that:

    (i) Explain how the articles potentially subject to the recommended orders are used in the United States;

    (ii) identify any public health, safety, or welfare concerns in the United States relating to the recommended orders;

    (iii) identify like or directly competitive articles that complainant, its licensees, or third parties make in the United States which could replace the subject articles if they were to be excluded;

    (iv) indicate whether complainant, complainant's licensees, and/or third party suppliers have the capacity to replace the volume of articles potentially subject to the recommended exclusion order and/or a cease and desist order within a commercially reasonable time; and

    (v) explain how the limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders would impact consumers in the United States.

    Written submissions from the public must be filed no later than by close of business on October 10, 2017.

    Persons filing written submissions must file the original document electronically on or before the deadlines stated above and submit 8 true paper copies to the Office of the Secretary by noon the next day pursuant to section 210.4(f) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.4(f)). Submissions should refer to the investigation number (“Inv. No. 337-TA-1012”) in a prominent place on the cover page and/or the first page. (See Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures, https://www.usitc.gov/secretary/documents/handbook_on_filing_procedures.pdf). Persons with questions regarding filing should contact the Secretary (202-205-2000).

    Any person desiring to submit a document to the Commission in confidence must request confidential treatment. All such requests should be directed to the Secretary to the Commission and must include a full statement of the reasons why the Commission should grant such treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission is properly sought will be treated accordingly. A redacted non-confidential version of the document must also be filed simultaneously with any confidential filing. All non-confidential written submissions will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Secretary and on EDIS.

    This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and of sections 201.10 and 210.50 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 201.10, 210.50).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: September 13, 2017. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19796 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
    JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES Meeting of the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Rules of Civil Procedure AGENCY:

    Advisory Committee on Rules of Civil Procedure, Judicial Conference of the United States.

    ACTION:

    Notice of open meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Advisory Committee on Rules of Civil Procedure will hold a meeting on November 7, 2017. The meeting will be open to public observation but not participation. An agenda and supporting materials will be posted at least 7 days in advance of the meeting at: http://www.uscourts.gov/rules-policies/records-and-archives-rules-committees/agenda-books.

    DATES:

    November 7, 2017.

    Time: 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building, FJC Training Rooms, One Columbus Circle NE., Washington, DC.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rebecca A. Womeldorf, Rules Committee Secretary, Rules Committee Staff, Administrative Office of the United States Courts, Washington, DC 20544, telephone (202) 502-1820.

    Dated: September 13, 2017. Rebecca A. Womeldorf, Rules Committee Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19820 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 2210-55-P
    JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES Meeting of the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Rules of Appellate Procedure AGENCY:

    Judicial Conference of the United States, Advisory Committee on Rules of Appellate Procedure

    ACTION:

    Notice of open meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Advisory Committee on Rules of Appellate Procedure will hold a meeting on November 9, 2017. The meeting will be open to public observation but not participation. An agenda and supporting materials will be posted at least 7 days in advance of the meeting at: http://www.uscourts.gov/rules-policies/records-and-archives-rules-committees/agenda-books.

    DATES:

    November 9, 2017.

    Time: 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building, Mecham Conference Center, Administrative Office of the United States Courts, One Columbus Circle NE., Washington, DC 20544.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rebecca A. Womeldorf, Rules Committee Secretary, Rules Committee Staff, Administrative Office of the United States Courts, Washington, DC 20544, telephone (202) 502-1820.

    Dated: September 13, 2017. Rebecca A. Womeldorf, Rules Committee Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19819 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 2210-55-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Antitrust Division Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993—Open Platform for NFV Project, Inc.

    Notice is hereby given that, on August 23, 2017, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (“the Act”), Open Platform for NFV Project, Inc. (“Open Platform for NFV Project”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, Institute for Information Industry, Taipei, TAIWAN, has been added as a party to this venture.

    Also, Beijing Internet Institute, Beijing, PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA, has withdrawn as a party to this venture.

    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and Open Platform for NFV Project intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.

    On October 17, 2014, Open Platform for NFV Project filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on November 14, 2014 (79 FR 68301).

    The last notification was filed with the Department on May 30, 2017. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on June 28, 2017 (82 FR 29328).

    Patricia A. Brink, Director of Civil Enforcement, Antitrust Division.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19791 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Antitrust Division Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993—fd.Io Project, Inc.

    Notice is hereby given that, on August 24, 2017, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (“the Act”), fd.io Project, Inc. (“fd.io”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, ARM Ltd., Cambridge, UNITED KINGDOM; Linaro Limited, Cambridge, UNITED KINGDOM; Rubicon Communications LLC dba Netgate, Austin, TX; and CENGN (Centre of Excellence in Next Generation Networks), Ottawa, CANADA, have been added as parties to this venture.

    Also, Brocade Communications Systems, Inc., San Jose, CA, has withdrawn as a party to this venture.

    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and fd.io intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.

    On May 4, 2016, fd.io filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on June 9, 2016 (81 FR 37211).

    The last notification was filed with the Department on May 30, 2017. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on June 28, 2017 (82 FR 29329).

    Patricia A. Brink, Director of Civil Enforcement, Antitrust Division.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19789 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-11-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Bulk Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Application: AMPAC Fine Chemicals LLC ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    DATES:

    Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic classes, and applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33(a) on or before November 17, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/DRW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Attorney General has delegated his authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been redelegated to the Assistant Administrator of the DEA Diversion Control Division (“Assistant Administrator”) pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart R.

    In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33(a), this is notice that on August 16, 2017, AMPAC Fine Chemicals LLC, Highway 50 and Hazel Avenue, Building 05001, Rancho Cordova, California 95670 applied to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of levomethorphan (9210), a basic class of controlled substance in schedule II.

    The company plans to manufacture the listed controlled substance as an intermediate in the bulk manufacture of other controlled substances for distribution to its customers.

    Dated: September 11, 2017. Demetra Ashley, Acting Assistant Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19831 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Importer of Controlled Substances Application: Catalent Centers, LLC ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    DATES:

    Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic classes, and applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a) on or before October 18, 2017. Such persons may also file a written request for a hearing on the application pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.43 on or before October 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/DRW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All requests for hearing must be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: Administrator, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All requests for hearing should also be sent to: (1) Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: Hearing Clerk/LJ, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152; and (2) Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: DEA Federal Register Representative/DRW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Attorney General has delegated his authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been redelegated to the Assistant Administrator of the DEA Diversion Control Division (“Assistant Administrator”) pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart R.

    In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a), this is notice that on July 25, 2017, Catalent Centers, LLC, 10245 Hickman Mills Drive, Kansas City, Missouri 64137 applied to be registered as an importer of the following basic classes of controlled substances:

    Controlled substance Drug code Schedule Gamma Hydroxybutyric Acid 2010 I Marihuana Extract 7350 I Marihuana 7360 I

    The company plans to import finished dosage unit products containing gamma-hydroxybutryic acid and cannabis extracts for clinical trial studies.

    These cannabis extracts compounds are listed under drug code 7350. No other activity for these drug codes is authorized for this registration. Approval of permit applications will occur only when the registrant's business activity is consistent with what is authorized under 21 U.S.C. 952(a)(2). Authorization will not extend to the import of FDA approved or non-approved finished dosage forms for commercial sale.

    Dated: September 11, 2017. Demetra Ashley, Acting Assistant Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19833 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Bulk Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Application: Specgx LLC ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    DATES:

    Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic classes, and applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33(a) on or before November 17, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/DRW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Attorney General has delegated his authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been redelegated to the Assistant Administrator of the DEA Diversion Control Division (“Assistant Administrator”) pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart R.

    In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33(a), this is notice that on August 9, 2017, Specgx LLC, 3600 North Second Street, Saint Louis, Missouri 63147 applied to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of the following basic classes of controlled substances:

    Controlled substance Drug code Schedule Gamma Hydroxybutyric Acid 2010 I Tetrahydrocannabinols 7370 I Codeine-N-oxide 9053 I Dihydromorphine 9145 I Difenoxin 9168 I Morphine-N-oxide 9307 I Normorphine 9313 I Norlevorphanol 9634 I Acetyl Fentanyl (N-(1-phenethylpiperidin-4-yl)-N-phenylacetamide) 9821 I Butyryl Fentanyl 9822 I Amphetamine 1100 II Methamphetamine 1105 II Lisdexamfetamine 1205 II Methylphenidate 1724 II Nabilone 7379 II 4-Anilino-N-phenethyl-4-piperidine (ANPP) 8333 II Codeine 9050 II Dihydrocodeine 9120 II Oxycodone 9143 II Hydromorphone 9150 II Diphenoxylate 9170 II Ecgonine 9180 II Hydrocodone 9193 II Levorphanol 9220 II Meperidine 9230 II Methadone 9250 II Methadone intermediate 9254 II Dextropropoxyphene, bulk (non-dosage forms) 9273 II Morphine 9300 II Oripavine 9330 II Thebaine 9333 II Opium tincture 9630 II Opium, powdered 9639 II Oxymorphone 9652 II Noroxymorphone 9668 II Alfentanil 9737 II Remifentanil 9739 II Sufentanil 9740 II Tapentadol 9780 II Fentanyl 9801 II

    The company plans to manufacture bulk active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) for distribution to its customers.

    Dated: September 13, 2017 Demetra Ashley, Acting Assistant Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19786 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Importer of Controlled Substances Application: Specgx LLC ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    DATES:

    Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic classes, and applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a) on or before October 18, 2017. Such persons may also file a written request for a hearing on the application pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.43 on or before October 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/DRW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All requests for hearing must be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: Administrator, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All request for hearing should also be sent to: (1) Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: Hearing Clerk/LJ, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152; and (2) Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: DEA Federal Register Representative/DRW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Attorney General has delegated his authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been redelegated to the Assistant Administrator of the DEA Diversion Control Division (“Assistant Administrator”) pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart R.

    In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a), this is notice that on August 9, 2017, Specgx LLC, 3600 North Second Street, Saint Louis, Missouri 63147 applied to be registered as an importer of the following basic classes of controlled substances:

    Controlled substance Drug
  • code
  • Schedule
    Marihuana 7360 I Phenylacetone 8501 II Coca Leaves 9040 II Opium, raw 9600 II Poppy Straw Concentrate 9670 II

    The company plans to import the listed controlled substances to bulk manufacture into Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients for distribution to its customers. In reference to drug code 7360 (marihuana) the company plans to import a synthetic cannabidiol. No other activity for this drug code is authorized for this registration. Placement of these drug codes onto the company's registration does not translate into automatic approval of subsequent permit applications to import controlled substances. Approval of permit applications will occur only when the registrant's business activity is consistent with what is authorized under 21 U.S.C. 952(a)(2). Authorization will not extend to the import of FDA approved or non-approved finished dosage forms for commercial sale.

    Dated: September 11, 2017. Demetra Ashley, Acting Assistant Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19784 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Bulk Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Application: Halo Pharmaceutical, Inc. ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    DATES:

    Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic classes, and applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33(a) on or before November 17, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/DRW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Attorney General has delegated his authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been redelegated to the Assistant Administrator of the DEA Diversion Control Division (“Assistant Administrator”) pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart R.

    In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33(a), this is notice that on July 11, 2017, Halo Pharmaceutical, Inc., 30 North Jefferson Road, Whippany, New Jersey 07981 applied to be registered as a bulk manufacturer the following basic classes of controlled substances:

    Controlled substance Drug code Schedule Dihydromorphine 9145 I Hydromorphone 9150 II

    The company plans to manufacture Hydromorphone (9150) for distribution to its customers. Dihydromorphine (9145) is an intermediate in the manufacture of Hydromorphone and is not for commercial distribution.

    Dated: September 11, 2017. Demetra Ashley, Acting Assistant Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19834 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Importer of Controlled Substances Application: Unither Manufacturing LLC ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    DATES:

    Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic classes, and applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a) on or before October 18, 2017. Such persons may also file a written request for a hearing on the application pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.43 on or before October 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/DRW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All requests for hearing must be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: Administrator, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All requests for hearing should also be sent to: (1) Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: Hearing Clerk/LJ, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152; and (2) Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: DEA Federal Register Representative/DRW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Attorney General has delegated his authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been redelegated to the Assistant Administrator of the DEA Diversion Control Division (“Assistant Administrator”) pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart R.

    In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a), this is notice that on April 19, 2017, Unither Manufacturing LLC, 331 Clay Road, Rochester, New York 14623 applied to be registered as an importer of methylphenidate (1724), a basic class of controlled substance listed in schedule II.

    The company plans to import the listed substance solely for updated analytical testing purposes for EU customer requirements. This analysis is required to allow the company to export domestically-manufactured FDF to foreign markets.

    Dated: September 11, 2017. Demetra Ashley, Acting Assistant Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19830 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Importer of Controlled Substances Application: Sharp Clinical Services, Inc. ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    DATES:

    Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic classes, and applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration on or before October 18, 2017. Such persons may also file a written request for a hearing on the application on or before October 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/DRW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All requests for hearing must be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: Administrator, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All requests for hearing should also be sent to: (1) Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: Hearing Clerk/LJ, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152; and (2) Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: DEA Federal Register Representative/DRW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Attorney General has delegated his authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been redelegated to the Assistant Administrator of the DEA Diversion Control Division (“Assistant Administrator”) pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart R.

    In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a), this is notice that on August 23, 2017, Sharp Clinical Services, Inc., 300 Kimberton Road, Phoenixville, Pennsylvania 19460 applied to be registered as an importer of the following basic classes of controlled substances:

    Controlled substance Drug code Schedule Marihuana 7360 I 3,4-Methylenedioxymetham-phetamine 7405 I Psilocybin 7437 I

    The company plans to import the listed controlled substances for analytical research, testing, and clinical trials. No other activity for these drug codes is authorized for this registration. Approval of permit applications will occur only when the registrant's business activity is consistent with what is authorized under 21 U.S.C. 952(a)(2). Authorization will not extend to the import of FDA approved or non-approved finished dosage forms for commercial sale.

    Dated: September 11, 2017. Demetra Ashley, Acting Assistant Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19836 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Importer of Controlled Substances Application: Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc. ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    DATES:

    Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic classes, and applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a) on or before October 18, 2017. Such persons may also file a written request for a hearing on the application pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.43 on or before October 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/DRW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All requests for hearing must be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: Administrator, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All request for hearing should also be sent to: (1) Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: Hearing Clerk/LJ, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152; and (2) Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: DEA Federal Register Representative/DRW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Attorney General has delegated his authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been redelegated to the Assistant Administrator of the DEA Diversion Control Division (“Assistant Administrator”) pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart R.

    In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a), this is notice that on March 24, 2017, Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 2898 Manufacturers Road, Greensboro, North Carolina 27406 applied to be registered as an importer of nabilone (7379), a basic class of controlled substance listed in schedule II.

    The company plans to import the FDA approved drug product in finished dosage form for distribution to its customers. Approval of permit applications will occur only when the registrant's business activity is consistent with what is authorized under 21 U.S.C. 952(a)(2).

    Dated: September 11, 2017. Demetra Ashley, Acting Assistant Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19832 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Federal Bureau of Investigation [OMB Number 1110-NEW] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection, eComments Requested; Crime Data Explorer Feedback Survey AGENCY:

    Federal Bureau of Investigation, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    60-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Criminal Justice Information Services Division (CJIS), will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until November 17, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    All comments, suggestions, or questions regarding additional information, to include obtaining a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions, should be directed to Mrs. Amy C. Blasher, Unit Chief, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Criminal Information Services Division, Module E-3, 1000 Custer Hollow Road, Clarksburg, West Virginia 26306; facsimile (304) 625-3566.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    —Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, including whether the information will have practical utility; —Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; —Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected can be enhanced; and —Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. Overview of This Information Collection

    1. Type of Information Collection: New collection.

    2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Crime Data Explorer Feedback Survey.

    3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection: No form number. The applicable component within the Department of Justice is the Criminal Justice Information Services Division, in the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

    4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: Law enforcement, academia and the general public. Abstract: This survey is needed to collect feedback on the functionality of the CDE in order to make improvements to the application.

    5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: UCR Crime Data Explorer Burden Estimation: It is estimated the CDE will generate 200 feedback responses per year with an estimated response time of 2 minutes per response.

    6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: There are approximately 7 hours, annual burden, associated with this information collection.

    If additional information is required contact: Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., 3E.405A, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: September 13, 2017. Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19814 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Notice of Lodging of Proposed Consent Decree Under the Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act, and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

    On September 12, 2017, the Department of Justice lodged a proposed consent decree with the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania in the lawsuit entitled United States v. StarKist Co. and Starkist Samoa Co., Civil Action No. 2:17-cv-01190-DSC.

    The United States filed this lawsuit under the Clean Water Act (CWA), Clean Air Act (CAA), Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The complaint seeks injunctive relief and civil penalties for violations of these statutes and their implementing regulations at defendants' seafood processing and canning facility in American Samoa. Specifically, the complaint alleges the following CWA violations: (1) Unpermitted discharges of wastewater through an outfall rupture in 2014; (2) violations of terms and conditions of the facility's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit, including effluent limit violations; and (3) violations of the CWA's Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures regulations related to the facility's oil storage tanks. The complaint also alleges violations of the Clean Air Act related to the handling of ammonia, butane, and chlorine at the facility. Finally, the complaint also alleges violations of the CAA, EPCRA, and RCRA that the defendants disclosed to EPA following an audit.

    The proposed consent decree requires the defendants to perform injunctive relief, pay a $6,300,000 civil penalty, and perform a Supplemental Environmental Project benefitting local first responders. The injunctive relief includes: Installing and operating upgrades to the facility's wastewater treatment system; upgrading the facility's oil storage tanks; making improvements to the facility's ammonia refrigeration system to prevent and minimize potential releases; discontinuing use of chlorine gas and a butane filling station at the facility; implementing an environmental management system for the facility; and performing annual third-party compliance audits. The Supplemental Environmental Project requires defendants to purchase and donate certain emergency response equipment to the American Samoa Fire Department.

    The publication of this notice opens a period for public comment on the proposed consent decree. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division, and should refer to United States v. StarKist Co. and Starkist Samoa Co., D.J. Ref. No. 90-5-1-1-11357. All comments must be submitted no later than thirty (30) days after the publication date of this notice. Comments may be submitted either by email or by mail:

    To submit comments: Send them to: By email [email protected] By mail Assistant Attorney General, U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044-7611.

    During the public comment period, the consent decree may be examined and downloaded at this Justice Department Web site: http://www.justice.gov/enrd/consent-decrees. We will provide a paper copy of the consent decree upon written request and payment of reproduction costs. Please mail your request and payment to: Consent Decree Library, U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044-7611.

    Please enclose a check or money order for $11.25 (25 cents per page reproduction cost) payable to the United States Treasury.

    Henry S. Friedman, Assistant Section Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and Natural Resources Division.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19715 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-15-P
    NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION Information Security Oversight Office [NARA-2017-065] National Industrial Security Program Policy Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of advisory committee meeting

    SUMMARY:

    We are announcing an upcoming National Industrial Security Program Policy Advisory Committee (NISPPAC) meeting, in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act and implementing regulation 41 CFR 101-6.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be on November 1, 2017, from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. EST.

    ADDRESS:

    National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), 700 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Archivist's Reception Room, Room 105, Washington, DC 20408.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Robert Tringali, Program Analyst, by mail at ISOO, National Archives Building, 700 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20408, by telephone at (202) 357-5335, or by email at [email protected] Contact ISOO at [email protected] and the NISPPAC at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The purpose of this meeting is to discuss National Industrial Security Program policy matters. The meeting will be open to the public. However, due to space limitations and access procedures, you must submit the name and telephone number of individuals planning to attend to the Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO) no later than Friday, October 27, 2017. ISOO will then provide additional instructions for accessing the meeting's location.

    Patrice Little Murray, Committee Management Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19721 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7515-01-P
    NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION Office of Government Information Services [NARA-2017-064] Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Advisory Committee; meeting AGENCY:

    Office of Government Information Services (OGIS), National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of Federal Advisory Committee meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    We are announcing an upcoming Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Advisory Committee meeting, in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act and the second United States Open Government National Action Plan (NAP) released on December 5, 2013.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be on October 19, 2017, from 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. EDT. You must register for the meeting by 5:00 p.m. EDT on October 17, 2017.

    Location: National Archives and Records Administration (NARA); 700 Pennsylvania Avenue NW.; William G. McGowan Theater, Washington, DC 20408.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Amy Bennett, Designated Federal Officer for this committee, by mail at National Archives and Records Administration; Office of Government Information Services; 8601 Adelphi Road—OGIS; College Park, MD 20740-6001, by telephone at 202-741-5770, or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Agenda and meeting materials: You may find all meeting materials at https://ogis.archives.gov/foia-advisory-committee/2016-2018-term/Meetings.htm. This will be the sixth meeting of the second committee term. The purpose of this meeting will be to review the work of the committee's three subcommittees. https://ogis.archives.gov/foia-advisory-committee/2016-2018-term/Subcommittees.htm.

    Procedures: The meeting is open to the public. Due to access procedures, you must register in advance if you wish to attend the meeting. You will also go through security screening when you enter the building. Registration for the meeting will go live via Eventbrite on September 29, 2017, at 10:00 a.m. EDT. To register for the meeting, please do so at this Eventbrite link: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/freedom-of-information-act-foia-advisory-committee-meeting-october-19-2017-registration-30857701215.

    This program will be live-streamed on the US National Archives' YouTube channel, https://www.youtube.com/user/usnationalarchives/playlists. The webcast will include a captioning option. To request additional accommodations (e.g., a transcript), email [email protected] or call 202-741-5770. Members of the media who wish to register, those who are unable to register online, and those who require special accommodations, should contact Amy Bennett at the phone number, mailing address, or email address listed above.

    Patrice Little Murray, Committee Management Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19720 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7515-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) Meeting of the ACRS Subcommittee on Plant Operations and Fire Protection; Notice of Meeting

    The ACRS Subcommittee on Plant Operations and Fire Protection will hold a meeting on September 20, 2017, at 11545 Rockville Pike, Room T-2B1, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    This meeting will be open to public attendance. The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows:

    Wednesday, September 20, 2017—1:00 a.m. Until 5:00 p.m.

    The Subcommittee will review the Plant Operations and Fire Protection Program for New Reactors and will hear presentations by and hold discussions with the NRC staff and other interested persons regarding this matter. The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the Full Committee.

    Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official (DFO), Quynh Nguyen (Telephone 301-415-5844 or Email [email protected]) five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Thirty-five hard copies of each presentation or handout should be provided to the DFO thirty minutes before the meeting. In addition, one electronic copy of each presentation should be emailed to the DFO one day before the meeting. If an electronic copy cannot be provided within this timeframe, presenters should provide the DFO with a CD containing each presentation at least thirty minutes before the meeting. Electronic recordings will be permitted only during those portions of the meeting that are open to the public. Detailed procedures for the conduct of and participation in ACRS meetings were published in the Federal Register on October 17, 2016, (81 FR 71543).

    Detailed meeting agendas and meeting transcripts are available on the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/acrs. Information regarding topics to be discussed, changes to the agenda, whether the meeting has been canceled or rescheduled, and the time allotted to present oral statements can be obtained from the Web site cited above or by contacting the identified DFO. Moreover, in view of the possibility that the schedule for ACRS meetings may be adjusted by the Chairman as necessary to facilitate the conduct of the meeting, persons planning to attend should check with these references if such rescheduling would result in a major inconvenience.

    If attending this meeting, please enter through the One White Flint North building, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. After registering with Security, please contact Mr. Theron Brown (Telephone 240-888-9835) to be escorted to the meeting room.

    Dated: September 11, 2017. Mark L. Banks, Chief, Technical Support Branch, Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19800 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS); Meeting of the ACRS Subcommittee on Northwest Medical Isotopes; Notice of Meeting

    The ACRS Subcommittee on Northwest Medical Isotopes will hold a meeting on September 21, 2017, at 11545 Rockville Pike, Room T-2B1, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    The meetings will be open to public attendance with the exception of portions that may be closed to protect information that is proprietary pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4). The agenda for the subject meetings shall be as follows:

    Thursday, September 21, 2017—8:30 a.m. Until 1:00 p.m.

    The Subcommittee will review and comment on the Northwest Medical Isotopes construction permit application preliminary safety analysis report and the draft NRC safety evaluation reports for a Mo99 radioisotope production facility.

    The Subcommittee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with the NRC staff and other interested persons regarding this matter. The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the Full Committee.

    Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official (DFO), Kathy Weaver (Telephone 301-415-6236 or Email: [email protected]) five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Thirty-five hard copies of each presentation or handout should be provided to the DFO thirty minutes before the meeting. In addition, one electronic copy of each presentation should be emailed to the DFO one day before the meeting. If an electronic copy cannot be provided within this timeframe, presenters should provide the DFO with a CD containing each presentation at least thirty minutes before the meeting. Electronic recordings will be permitted only during those portions of the meeting that are open to the public. Detailed procedures for the conduct of and participation in ACRS meetings were published in the Federal Register on October 17, 2016, (81 FR 71543).

    Detailed meeting agendas and meeting transcripts are available on the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/acrs. Information regarding topics to be discussed, changes to the agenda, whether the meeting has been canceled or rescheduled, and the time allotted to present oral statements can be obtained from the Web site cited above or by contacting the identified DFO. Moreover, in view of the possibility that the schedule for ACRS meetings may be adjusted by the Chairman as necessary to facilitate the conduct of the meeting, persons planning to attend should check with these references if such rescheduling would result in a major inconvenience.

    If attending this meeting, please enter through the One White Flint North Building, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. After registering with Security, please contact Mr. Theron Brown (Telephone 240-888-9835) to be escorted to the meeting room.

    Dated: September 12, 2017. Mark L. Banks, Chief, Technical Support Branch, Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19801 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    PEACE CORPS Information Collection Request: Submission for OMB Review AGENCY:

    Peace Corps.

    ACTION:

    30-day notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Peace Corps will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. The purpose of this notice is to allow 30 days for public comment in the Federal Register preceding submission to OMB. We are conducting this process in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Submit comments on or before October 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments should be addressed to Denora Miller, FOIA/Privacy Act Officer. Denora Miller can be contacted by telephone at 202-692-1236 or email at [email protected] Email comments must be made in text and not in attachments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Denora Miller at Peace Corps address above.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Peace Corps Response Reference Forms.

    OMB Control Number: 0420-0548.

    Type of Request: Revision of a currently approved collection.

    Affected Public: Individuals.

    Respondents Obligation to Reply: Voluntary.

    Burden to the Public:

    Estimated burden (hours) of the collection of information:

    a. Number of interviewed applicants:* 1000 b. Number of references required per interviewed applicant: 2 c. Estimated number of reference forms received: 2000 d. Frequency of response: One time e. Completion time: 10 minutes f. Annual burden hours: 333 hours

    * Reference information is collected only if an applicant is contacted for an interview.

    General Description of Collection: Peace Corps Response uses the staff, personal and professional reference forms to learn from someone who knows the applicant and his or her background whether the applicant possesses the necessary characteristics and skills to serve as Peace Corps Response Volunteer.

    Request for Comment: Peace Corps invites comments on whether the proposed collections of information are necessary for proper performance of the functions of the Peace Corps, including whether the information will have practical use; the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the information to be collected; and, ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

    This notice is issued in Washington, DC, on September 13, 2017. Denora Miller, FOIA/Privacy Act Officer, Management.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19813 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6051-01-P
    PEACE CORPS Information Collection Request; Submission for OMB Review AGENCY:

    Peace Corps.

    ACTION:

    30-Day notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Peace Corps will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. The purpose of this notice is to allow 30 days for public comment in the Federal Register preceding submission to OMB. We are conducting this process in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).

    DATES:

    Submit comments on or before October 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments should be addressed to Denora Miller, FOIA/Privacy Act Officer. Denora Miller can be contacted by telephone at 202-692-1236 or email at [email protected] Email comments must be made in text and not in attachments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Denora Miller at Peace Corps address above.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Peace Corps Response Application.

    OMB Control Number: 0420-0547.

    Type of Request: Revision of a currently approved collection.

    Affected Public: Individuals.

    Respondents Obligation to Reply: Voluntary.

    Respondents: Potential Volunteers.

    Burden to the Public:

    Estimated burden (hours) of the collection of information:

    a. Number of respondents: 3,500.

    b. Frequency of response: One time.

    c. Completion time: 60 minutes.

    d. Annual burden hours: 3,500 hours.

    General description of collection: The Peace Corps Response Application (hereinafter “the Application”) is necessary to recruit qualified volunteers to serve in Peace Corps Response, which sends Volunteers throughout the world to work in specialized short term projects. Applicants are selected based on their qualifications for a specific Volunteer assignment.

    Request for comment: Peace Corps invites comments on whether the proposed collections of information are necessary for proper performance of the functions of the Peace Corps, including whether the information will have practical use; the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the information to be collected; and, ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

    This notice is issued in Washington, DC, on September 13, 2017. Denora Miller, FOIA/Privacy Act Officer, Management.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19816 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6051-01-P
    PEACE CORPS Information Collection Request; Submission for OMB Review AGENCY:

    Peace Corps.

    ACTION:

    30-Day notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Peace Corps will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. The purpose of this notice is to allow 30 days for public comment in the Federal Register preceding submission to OMB. We are conducting this process in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).

    DATES:

    Submit comments on or before October 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments should be addressed to Denora Miller, FOIA/Privacy Act Officer. Denora Miller can be contacted by telephone at 202-692-1236 or email at [email protected] Email comments must be made in text and not in attachments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Denora Miller at Peace Corps address above.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Peace Corps Response Interview Assessment.

    OMB Control Number: 0420-0556.

    Type of Request: Revision of a currently approved collection.

    Affected Public: Individuals.

    Respondents Obligation to Reply: Voluntary.

    Respondents: Potential Volunteers.

    Burden to the Public:

    Estimated burden (hours) of the collection of information:

    a. Number of respondents: 1,000.

    b. Frequency of response: One time.

    c. Completion time: 60 minutes.

    d. Annual burden hours: 1,000 hours.

    General description of collection: The Peace Corps Response interview is necessary to assess applicants' qualifications and eligibility to serve in Peace Corps Response. The interview is a critical point in the recruitment process, as it is the point when the applicant and the recruitment and placement specialist verbally discuss the nature of the Volunteer assignment.

    Request for comment: Peace Corps invites comments on whether the proposed collections of information are necessary for proper performance of the functions of the Peace Corps, including whether the information will have practical use; the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the information to be collected; and, ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

    This notice is issued in Washington, DC, on September 13, 2017. Denora Miller, FOIA/Privacy Act Officer, Management.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19815 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6051-01-P
    PEACE CORPS Information Collection Request; Submission for OMB Review AGENCY:

    Peace Corps.

    ACTION:

    60-Day notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Peace Corps will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. The purpose of this notice is to allow 60 days for public comment in the Federal Register preceding submission to OMB. We are conducting this process in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Submit comments on or before November 17, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments should be addressed to Denora Miller, FOIA/Privacy Act Officer. Denora Miller can be contacted by telephone at 202-692-1236 or email at [email protected] Email comments must be made in text and not in attachments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Denora Miller at Peace Corps address above.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Rating Tool Interview Form.

    OMB Control Number: 0420-0555.

    Type of Request: Review/Re-Approve.

    Affected Public: Individuals.

    Respondents Obligation to Reply: Voluntary.

    Burden to the Public:

    Estimated burden (hours) of the collection of information:

    a. Number of respondents: 10,000.

    b. Frequency of response: one time.

    c. Completion time: 90 minutes.

    d. Annual burden hours: 15,000 hours.

    General description of collection: The Peace Corps will use the information as an integral part of the selection process to learn whether an applicant possesses the necessary characteristics and skills to serve as a Peace Corps Volunteer. The information will be used to determine if an invitation to serve will be issued.

    Request for comment: Peace Corps invites comments on whether the proposed collections of information are necessary for proper performance of the functions of the Peace Corps, including whether the information will have practical use; the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the information to be collected; and, ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

    This notice is issued in Washington, DC, on September 12, 2017. Denora Miller, FOIA/Privacy Act Officer, Management.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19780 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6051-01-P
    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. CP2017-301] New Postal Products AGENCY:

    Postal Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing for the Commission's consideration concerning a negotiated service agreement. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.

    DATES:

    Comments are due: September 21, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Docketed Proceeding(s) I. Introduction

    The Commission gives notice that the Postal Service filed request(s) for the Commission to consider matters related to negotiated service agreement(s). The request(s) may propose the addition or removal of a negotiated service agreement from the market dominant or the competitive product list, or the modification of an existing product currently appearing on the market dominant or the competitive product list.

    Section II identifies the docket number(s) associated with each Postal Service request, the title of each Postal Service request, the request's acceptance date, and the authority cited by the Postal Service for each request. For each request, the Commission appoints an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in the proceeding, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505 (Public Representative). Section II also establishes comment deadline(s) pertaining to each request.

    The public portions of the Postal Service's request(s) can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (http://www.prc.gov). Non-public portions of the Postal Service's request(s), if any, can be accessed through compliance with the requirements of 39 CFR 3007.40.

    The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's request(s) in the captioned docket(s) are consistent with the policies of title 39. For request(s) that the Postal Service states concern market dominant product(s), applicable statutory and regulatory requirements include 39 U.S.C. 3622, 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR part 3010, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. For request(s) that the Postal Service states concern competitive product(s), applicable statutory and regulatory requirements include 39 U.S.C. 3632, 39 U.S.C. 3633, 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comment deadline(s) for each request appear in section II.

    II. Docketed Proceeding(s)

    1. Docket No(s).: CP2017-301; Filing Title: Notice of United States Postal Service of Filing a Functionally Equivalent Global Expedited Package Services 7 Negotiated Service Agreement and Application for Non-Public Treatment of Materials Filed Under Seal; Filing Acceptance Date: September 11, 2017; Filing Authority: 39 CFR 3015.5; Public Representative: Curtis E. Kidd; Comments Due: September 21, 2017.

    This notice will be published in the Federal Register.

    Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19695 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-81580; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2017-101] Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Amending Rule 6.87-O and Rule 6.65-O September 12, 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 September 1, 2017, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the “Exchange” or “NYSE Arca”) 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.

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 6.87-O (Nullification and Adjustment of Options Transactions including Obvious Errors) and Rule 6.65-O 953NY [sic] (Trading Halts and Suspensions). The proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such statements.

    A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose

    The purpose of this filing is to amend Rule 6.87-O, relating to the adjustment and nullification of erroneous transactions, and Rule 6.65-O, regarding trading halts and suspensions. The Exchange's proposal is based on that of Bats BZX (“BATS”), which the Commission approved on July 6, 2017, and those that the other options exchanges intend to file.4

    Background

    The Exchange and other options exchanges adopted a harmonized rule related to the adjustment and nullification of erroneous options transactions, including a specific provision related to coordination in connection with large-scale events involving erroneous options transactions.5 The Exchange believes that the changes the options exchanges implemented with the harmonized rule have led to increased transparency and finality with respect to the adjustment and nullification of erroneous options transactions. As part of the initial initiative, however, the Exchange and other options exchanges deferred a few specific matters for further discussion.6 Specifically, as described in the Initial Filing, the Exchange and all other options exchanges have been working to further improve the review of potentially erroneous transactions as well as their subsequent adjustment by creating an objective and universal way to determine Theoretical Price in the event a reliable NBBO is not available. Because this initiative required additional exchange and industry discussion as well as additional time for development and implementation, the Exchange and the other options exchanges determined to proceed with the Initial Filing and to undergo an effort to complete any additional improvements to the applicable rule. In this filing, the Exchange proposes to adopt procedures that will lead to a more objective and uniform way to determine Theoretical Price in the event a reliable NBBO is not available. In addition to this change, the Exchange has proposed additional minor changes to its rules.

    Calculation of Theoretical Price Using a Third Party Provider

    Under the harmonized rule, when reviewing a transaction as potentially erroneous, the Exchange needs to first determine the “Theoretical Price” of the option, i.e., the Exchange's estimate of the correct market price for the option. Pursuant to Rule 6.87 (referred to herein simply as Rules 6.87), if the applicable option series is traded on at least one other options exchange, then the Theoretical Price of an option series is the last national best bid (“NBB”) just prior to the trade in question with respect to an erroneous sell transaction or the last national best offer (“NBO”) just prior to the trade in question with respect to an erroneous buy transaction unless one of the exceptions described below exists. Thus, whenever the Exchange has a reliable NBB or NBO, as applicable, just prior to the transaction, the Exchange uses this NBB or NBO as the Theoretical Price.

    The Rule also contains various provisions governing specific situations where the NBB or NBO is not available or may not be reliable. Specifically, the Rule identifies situations in which there are no quotes or no valid quotes for comparison purposes, when the national best bid or offer (“NBBO”) is determined to be too wide to be reliable, and at the open of trading on each trading day. In each of these circumstances because the NBB or NBO is not available or is deemed to be unreliable, the Exchange determines the Theoretical Price. Under the current Rule, when determining Theoretical Price, Exchange personnel generally consult and refer to data such as the prices of related series, especially the closest strikes in the option in question. Exchange personnel may also take into account the price of the underlying security and the volatility characteristics of the option as well as historical pricing of the option and/or similar options. Although the Rule is administered by experienced personnel and the Exchange believes the process is currently appropriate, the Exchange recognizes that it is also subjective and could lead to disparate results for a transaction that spans multiple options exchanges.

    The Exchange proposes new Commentary .06 to specify how the Exchange will determine Theoretical Price when required by sub-paragraphs (b)(1)-(3) of the Rule (i.e., at the open, when there are no valid quotes or when there is a wide quote). In particular, the Exchange has been working with other options exchanges to identify and select a reliable third party vendor (“TP Provider”) that would provide the Theoretical Price to the Exchange whenever one or more transactions is under review pursuant to Rule 6.87 and the NBBO is unavailable or deemed unreliable pursuant to Rule 6.87(b). The Exchange and other options exchanges have selected CBOE Livevol, LLC (“Livevol”) as the TP Provider, as described below.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 15 U.S.C. 78a.

    3 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    4See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 81084 (July 6, 2017), 82 FR 32216 (July 12, 2017) (“BATS Approval Order”); 80709 (May 17, 2017), 82 FR 23684 (May 23, 2017) (“Notice of BATS Filing”) (SR-BatsBZX-2017-35). See also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81348 (August 8, 2017), 82 FR 37910 (August 14, 2017), (SR-BX-2017-038) (immediately effective filing based on BATS Approval Order).

    5See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74921 (May 8, 2015), 80 FR 27747 (May 14, 2015) (SR-NYSEArca-2015-41) (the “Imitial Filing”).

    6 For example, the Exchange, along with other options exchanges that offer complex orders on their options platforms, recently filed proposals related to rules for handling the adjustment and nullification of erroneous complex order transactions, which proposals were approved by the Commission or filed on an immediately effective basis. See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 80040 (February 14, 2017), 82 FR 11248 (February 21, 2017) (granting approval of CBOE proposal related to the nullification and adjustment of complex orders) (SR-CBOE-2016-088); 80496 (April 20, 2017), 82 FR 19282 (April 26, 2017) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness of Exchange proposal related to the nullification and adjustment of complex orders) (SR-NYSEArca-2017-42).

    Pursuant to proposed Commentary .06, when the Exchange must determine Theoretical Price pursuant to the sub-paragraphs (b)(1)-(3) of the Rule, the Exchange will request the Theoretical Price from the third party vendor to which the Exchange and all other options exchanges have subscribed. Thus, as set forth in this proposed language, Theoretical Price would be provided to the Exchange by the TP Provider on request and not through a streaming data feed.7 This proposed language would also make clear that the Exchange and all other options exchanges will use the same TP Provider. As noted above, the proposed TP Provider selected by the Exchange and other options exchanges is Livevol. The Exchange proposes to establish this selection in proposed paragraph (d) to Commentary .06. As such, the Exchange would file a rule proposal and would provide notice to the options industry of any proposed change to the TP Provider. The Exchange and other options exchanges have selected Livevol as the proposed TP Provider after diligence into various alternatives. Livevol has, since 2009, been the options industry leader in providing equity and index options market data and analytics services.8 The Exchange believes that Livevol has established itself within the options industry as a trusted provider of such services and notes that it and all other options exchanges already subscribe to various Livevol services. In connection with this proposal, Livevol will develop a new tool based on its existing technology and services that will supply Theoretical Price to the Exchange and other options exchanges upon request. The Theoretical Price tool will leverage current market data and surrounding strikes to assist in a relative value pricing approach to generating a Theoretical Price. When relative value methods are incapable of generating a valid Theoretical Price, the Theoretical Price tool will utilize historical trade and quote data to calculate Theoretical Price.

    7 Though the Exchange and other options exchanges considered a streaming feed, it was determined that it would be more feasible to develop and implement an on demand service and that such a service would satisfy the goals of the initiative.

    8 The Exchange notes that in 2015, Livevol was acquired by CBOE Holdings, Inc., the ultimate parent company of the Chicago Board Options Exchange (“CBOE”) and C2 Options Exchange (“C2”).

    Because the purpose of the proposal is to move away from a subjective determination by Exchange personnel when the NBBO is unavailable or unreliable, the Exchange intends to use the Theoretical Price provided by the TP Provider in all such circumstances. However, the Exchange believes it is necessary to retain the ability to contact the TP Provider if it believes that the Theoretical Price provided is fundamentally incorrect and to determine the Theoretical Price in the limited circumstance of a systems issue experienced by the TP Provider, as described below.

    As proposed, to the extent an Official 9 of the Exchange believes that the Theoretical Price provided by the TP Provider is fundamentally incorrect and cannot be used consistent with the maintenance of a fair and orderly market, the Official shall contact the TP Provider to notify the TP Provider of the reason the Official believes such Theoretical Price is inaccurate and to request a review and correction of the calculated Theoretical Price. For example, if an Official received from the TP Provider a Theoretical Price of $80 in a series that the Official might expect to be instead in the range of $8 to $10 because of a recent corporate action in the underlying, the Official would request that the TP Provider review and confirm its calculation and determine whether it had appropriately accounted for the corporate action. In order to ensure that other options exchanges that may potentially be relying on the same Theoretical Price that the Official believes to be incorrect, the Exchange also proposes to promptly provide notice to other options exchanges that the TP Provider has been contacted to review and correct the calculated Theoretical Price at issue and to include a brief explanation of the reason for the request.10 Although not directly addressed by the proposed rule, the Exchange expects that all other options exchanges once in receipt of this notification would await the determination of the TP Provider and would use the corrected price as soon as it is available. The Exchange further notes that it expects the TP Provider to cooperate with, but to be independent of, the Exchange and other options exchanges.11

    9 For purposes of the Rule, an Official is an Officer of the Exchange or such other employee designee of the Exchange that is trained in the application of Rule 6.87.

    10See proposed paragraph (b) to Commentary .06.

    11 The Exchange expects any TP Provider selected by the Exchange and other options exchanges to act independently in its determination and calculation of Theoretical Price. With respect to Livevol specifically, the Exchange again notes that Livevol is a subsidiary of CBOE Holdings, Inc., which is also the ultimate parent company of multiple options exchanges. The Exchange expects Livevol to calculate Theoretical Price independent of its affiliated exchanges in the same way it will calculate Theoretical Price independent of non-affiliated exchanges.

    The Exchange believes that the proposal to allow an Exchange Official to contact the TP Provider if he or she believes the provided Theoretical Price is fundamentally incorrect is necessary, particularly because the Exchange and other options exchanges will be using the new process for the first time.12 Although the exchanges have conducted thorough diligence with respect to Livevol as the selected TP Provider and would do so with any potential replacement TP Provider, the Exchange is concerned that certain scenarios could arise where the Theoretical Price generated by the TP Provider does not take into account relevant factors and would result in an unfair result for market participants involved in a transaction. The Exchange notes that if such situations do indeed arise, to the extent practicable the Exchange would also work with the TP Provider and other options exchanges to improve the TP Provider's calculation of Theoretical Price in future situations. For instance, if the Exchange determines that a particular type of corporate action is not being appropriately captured by the TP Provider when such provider is generating Theoretical Price, while the Exchange believes that it needs the ability to request a review and correction of the Theoretical Price in connection with a specific review in order to provide a timely decision to market participants, the Exchange would share information regarding the specific situation with the TP Provider and other options exchanges in an effort to improve the Theoretical Price service for future use. The Exchange notes that it does not anticipate needing to rely on this provision frequently, if at all, but believes the provision is necessary nonetheless to best prepare for all potential circumstances.

    12 To the extent the TP Provider has been contacted by an Official of the Exchange, reviews the Theoretical Price provided but disagrees that there has been any error, then the Exchange would be bound to use the Theoretical Price provided by the TP Provider.

    Pursuant to proposed paragraph (c) to Commentary .06, an Official of the Exchange may determine the Theoretical Price if the TP Provider has experienced a systems issue that has rendered its services unavailable to accurately calculate Theoretical Price and such issue cannot be corrected in a timely manner. The Exchange notes that it does not anticipate needing to rely on this provision frequently, if at all, but believes the provision is necessary nonetheless to best prepare for all potential circumstances. Further, consistent with existing text in Rule 6.87(e)(4), the Exchange has not proposed a specific time by which the service must be available in order to be considered timely.13 The Exchange expects that it would await the TP Provider's services becoming available again so long as the Exchange was able to obtain information regarding the issue and the TP Provider had a reasonable expectation of being able to resume normal operations within the next several hours based on communications with the TP Provider. More specifically with respect to Livevol, Livevol has business continuity and disaster recovery procedures that will help to ensure that the Theoretical Price tool remains available or, in the event of an outage, that service is restored in a timely manner. The Exchange also notes that if a wide-scale event occurred, even if such event did not qualify as a “Significant Market Event” pursuant to Rule 6.87(e), and the TP Provider was unavailable or otherwise experiencing difficulty, the Exchange believes that it and other options exchanges would seek to coordinate to the extent possible. In particular, the Exchange and other options exchanges now have a process, administered by the Options Clearing Corporation, to invoke a discussion amongst all options exchanges in the event of any widespread or significant market events. The Exchange believes that this process could be used if there were an issue with the TP Provider.

    13 In the context of a Significant Market Event, the Exchange may determine, “in consultation with other options exchanges . . . that timely adjustment is not feasible due to the extraordinary nature of the situation.” See Rule 6.87(e)(4).

    The Exchange also proposes language in paragraph (d) of Commentary .06 to Rule 6.87 to disclaim the liability of the Exchange and the TP Provider in connection with the proposed rule, the TP Provider's calculation of Theoretical Price, and the Exchange's use of such Theoretical Price. Specifically, the proposed rule would state that neither the Exchange, the TP Provider, nor any affiliate of the TP Provider (the TP Provider and its affiliates are referred to collectively as the “TP Provider”), makes any warranty, express or implied, as to the results to be obtained by any person or entity from the use of the TP Provider pursuant to Commentary .06. The proposed rule would further state that the TP Provider does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the calculated Theoretical Price and that the TP Provider disclaims all warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose or use with respect to such Theoretical Price. Finally, the proposed rule would state that neither the Exchange nor the TP Provider shall have any liability for any damages, claims, losses (including any indirect or consequential losses), expenses, or delays, whether direct or indirect, foreseen or unforeseen, suffered by any person arising out of any circumstance or occurrence relating to the use of such Theoretical Price or arising out of any errors or delays in calculating such Theoretical Price. This proposed language is modeled after existing language in Exchange Rules regarding “reporting authorities” that calculate indices.14

    14See, e.g., Rule 5.22 (Disclaimers), which relates to index options potentially listed and traded on the Exchange and disclaims liability for a reporting authority and their affiliates.

    In connection with the proposed change described above, the Exchange proposes to modify Rule 6.87 to state that the Exchange will rely on paragraph (b) and Commentary .06 when determining Theoretical Price.

    No Valid Quotes—Market Participant Quoting on Multiple Exchanges

    As described above, one of the times where the NBB or NBO is deemed to be unreliable for purposes of Theoretical Price is when there are no quotes or no valid quotes for the affected series. In addition to when there are no quotes, the Exchange does not consider the following to be valid quotes: (i) All quotes in the applicable option series published at a time where the last NBB is higher than the last NBO in such series (a “crossed market”); (ii) quotes published by the Exchange that were submitted by either party to the transaction in question; and (iii) quotes published by another options exchange against which the Exchange has declared self-help. In recognition of today's market structure where certain participants actively provide liquidity on multiple exchanges simultaneously, the Exchange proposes to add a category of invalid quotes. Specifically, in order to avoid a situation where a market participant has established the market at an erroneous price on multiple exchanges, the Exchange proposes to consider as invalid the quotes in a series published by another options exchange if either party to the transaction in question submitted the quotes in the series representing such options exchange's best bid or offer. Thus, similar to being able to ignore for purposes of the Rule the quotes published by the Exchange if submitted by either party to the transaction in question, the Exchange would be able to ignore for purposes of the rule quotations on other options exchanges by that same market participant.

    In order to continue to apply the Rule in a timely and organized fashion, however, the Exchange proposes to initially limit the scope of this proposed provision in two ways in new paragraph (C) to Rule 6.87(b)(2).15 First, because the process will take considerable coordination with other options exchanges to confirm that the quotations in question on an away options exchange were indeed submitted by a party to a transaction on the Exchange, the Exchange proposes to limit this provision to apply to up to twenty-five (25) total options series (i.e., whether such series all relate to the same underlying security or multiple underlying securities). Second, the Exchange proposes to require the party that believes it established the best bid or offer on one or more other options exchanges to identify to the Exchange the quotes which were submitted by such party and published by other options exchanges. In other words, as proposed, the burden will be on the party seeking that the Exchange disregard their quotations on other options exchanges to identify such quotations. In turn, the Exchange will verify with such other options exchanges that such quotations were indeed submitted by such party.16

    15 In connection with proposed change, the Exchange proposes to re-format Rule 6.87(b)(2) to include sub-paragraphs (A)-(D), inclusive of the new rule in proposed Rule 6.87(b)(2)(C).

    16 The Exchange notes that the proposed text of 6.87(b)(2)(C) differs slightly from BATS Rule 20.6(b)(2)(C), even though the substance of the propsed rule is the same. The Exchange believes its proposed rule text is easier to comprehend.

    Below are examples of both the current rule and the rule as proposed to be amended.

    Example 1—Current Rule, Member Erroneously Quotes on One Exchange Assumptions

    For purposes of this example, assume the following:

    • A Member acting as a Market Maker on the Exchange (“Market Maker A”) is quoting in twenty series of options underlying security ABCD on the Exchange (and only the Exchange).

    • Market Maker A makes an error in calculating the market for options on ABCD, and publishes quotes in all twenty series to buy options at $1.00 and to sell options at $1.05.

    • In fact, options on ABCD in these series are nearly worthless and no other market participant is quoting in such series.

    • Therefore, the NBBO in the twenty series at issue is $1.00 × $1.05 (with the Exchange representing the NBBO based on Market Maker A's quotes).

    • Assume Member A immediately enters sell orders and executes against Market Maker A's quotes at $1.00.

    • Assume Market Maker A submits to the Exchange a timely request for review of the trades with Member A as potentially erroneous transactions to buy.

    Result

    • Based on the Exchange's current rules, the Exchange would identify Market Maker A as a participant to the trades at issue and would consider Market Maker A's quotations invalid pursuant to Rule 6.87(b)(2).

    • As there were no other valid quotes to use as a reference price, the Exchange would then determine Theoretical Price.

    • Assume the Exchange determines a Theoretical Price of $0.05.

    ○ The execution price of $1.00 exceeds the $0.25 minimum amount set forth in the Exchange's table to determine whether an obvious error has occurred (i.e., $0.05 + $0.25 = $0.30) so any execution at or above this price is an obvious error.

    ○ Accordingly, the executions in all series would be adjusted by the Exchange to executions at $0.20 per contract (Theoretical Price of $0.05 plus $0.15) to the extent the incoming orders submitted by Member A were non-Customer orders.

    ○ The executions in all series would be nullified to the extent the incoming orders submitted by Member A were Customer orders.

    Example 2—Current Rule, Member Erroneously Quotes on Multiple Exchanges Assumptions

    For purposes of this example, assume the following:

    • A Member acting as a Market Maker on the Exchange (“Market Maker A”) is quoting in twenty series of options underlying security ABCD on the Exchange and on a second exchange (“Away Exchange”).

    • Market Maker A makes an error in calculating the market for options on ABCD, and publishes quotes on both the Exchange and the Away Exchange in all twenty series to buy options at $1.00 and to sell options at $1.05.

    • In fact, options on ABCD in these series are nearly worthless and no other market participant is quoting in such series.

    • Therefore, the NBBO in the twenty series at issue is $1.00 × $1.05 (with the Exchange and the Away Exchange representing the NBBO based on Market Maker A's quotes).

    • Assume Member A immediately enters sell orders and executes against Market Maker A's quotes at $1.00.

    • Assume Market Maker A submits to the Exchange and to the Away Exchange timely requests for review of the trades with Member A as potentially erroneous transactions to buy.

    Result

    • Based on the Exchange's current rules, the Exchange would identify Market Maker A as a participant to the trades at issue and would consider Market Maker A's quotations on the Exchange invalid pursuant to Rule 6.87(b)(2). The Exchange, however, would view the Away Exchange's quotations as valid, and would thus determine Theoretical Price to be $1.05 (i.e., the NBO in the case of a potentially erroneous buy transaction).

    • The execution price of $1.00 does not exceed the $0.25 minimum amount set forth in the Exchange's table to determine whether an obvious error has occurred (i.e., $1.05 + $0.25 = $1.30) so any execution at or above this price is an obvious error.

    • The transactions on the Exchange would not be nullified or adjusted.

    • As the Exchange and all other options exchanges have identical rules with respect to the process described above, the transactions on the Away Exchange would not be nullified or adjusted.

    Example 3—Proposed Rule, Member Erroneously Quotes on Multiple Exchanges 17

    17 The Exchange notes that its proposed rule will not impact the proposed handling of a request for review where a market participant is quoting only on the Exchange, thus, the Exchange has not included a separate example for such a fact-pattern.

    Assumptions

    • For purposes of this example, assume the following:

    • A Member acting as a Market Maker on the Exchange (“Market Maker A”) is quoting in twenty series of options underlying security ABCD on the Exchange and on a second exchange (“Away Exchange”).18

    18 The Exchange notes that the proposed rule would operate the same if Market Maker A was quoting on more than two exchanges. The Exchange has limited the example to two exchanges for simplicity.

    • Market Maker A makes an error in calculating the market for options on ABCD, and publishes quotes on both the Exchange and the Away Exchange in all twenty series to buy options at $1.00 and to sell options at $1.05.

    • In fact, options on ABCD in these series are nearly worthless and no other market participant is quoting in such series.

    • Therefore, the NBBO in the twenty series at issue is $1.00 × $1.05 (with the Exchange and the Away Exchange representing the NBBO based on Market Maker A's quotes).

    • Assume Member A immediately enters sell orders and executes against Market Maker A's quotes at $1.00.

    • Assume Market Maker A submits to the Exchange and to the Away Exchange timely requests for review of the trades with Member A as potentially erroneous transactions to buy. At the time of submitting the requests for review to the Exchange and the Away Exchange, Market Maker A identifies to the Exchange the quotes on the Away Exchange as quotes also represented by Market Maker A (and to the Away Exchange, the quotes on the Exchange as quotes also represented by Market Maker A).

    Result

    • Based on the proposed rules, the Exchange would identify Market Maker A as a participant to the trades at issue and would consider Market Maker A's quotations on the Exchange invalid pursuant to Rule 6.87(b)(2).

    • The Exchange and the Away Exchange would also coordinate to confirm that the quotations identified by Market Maker A on the other exchange were indeed Market Maker A's quotations. Once confirmed, each of the Exchange and the Away Exchange would also consider invalid the quotations published on the other exchange.

    • As there were no other valid quotes to use as a reference price, the Exchange would then determine Theoretical Price.

    • Assume the Exchange determines a Theoretical Price of $0.05.

    ○ The execution price of $1.00 exceeds the $0.25 minimum amount set forth in the Exchange's table to determine whether an obvious error has occurred (i.e., $0.05 + $0.25 = $0.30) so any execution at or above this price is an obvious error.

    ○ Accordingly, the executions in all series would be adjusted by the Exchange to executions at $0.20 per contract (Theoretical Price of $0.05 plus $0.15) to the extent the incoming orders submitted by Member A were non-Customer orders.

    ○ The executions in all series would be nullified to the extent the incoming orders submitted by Member A were Customer orders.

    • As the Exchange and all other options exchanges would have identical rules with respect to the process described above, as other options exchanges intend to adopt the same rule if the proposed rule is approved, the transactions on the Away Exchange would also be nullified or adjusted as set forth above.

    • If this example was instead modified such that Market Maker A was quoting in 200 series rather than 20, the Exchange notes that Market Maker A could only request that the Exchange consider as invalid their quotations in 25 of those series on other exchanges. As noted above, the Exchange has proposed to limit the proposed rule to 25 series in order to continue to process requests for review in a timely and organized fashion in order to provide certainty to market participants. This is due to the amount of coordination that will be necessary in such a scenario to confirm that the quotations in question on an away options exchange were indeed submitted by a party to a transaction on the Exchange.

    Obvious Error Panel, Appeals—Clean-Up change

    Rule 6.87(k)(1)(B) describes the procedure for appealing decisions relating to obvious errors. The current rule provides, in relevant part, that a “request for review on appeal must be made via facsimile or email within thirty (30) minutes after the party making the appeal is given notification of the initial determination being appealed.” The Exchange proposes to modify this rule to remove reference to “facsimile,” and allow that requests for appeal may only be made via email. The Exchanges believes this proposed change would update the rule to reflect current technology and add transparency to the rule text.

    Trading Halts and Suspensions—Clarifying Change to Rule 6.65-O

    Rule 6.65-O describes the Exchange's authority to declare trading halts in one or more options traded on the Exchange (referred herein simply to as Rule 6.65). Currently, Commentary .04 to Rule 6.65 states that the Exchange shall nullify any transaction that occurs during a trading halt in the affected option on the Exchange. The Exchange proposes to add rule text providing that, with respect to equity options (including options overlaying Exchange Traded Funds (“ETFs”), that it shall nullify any transaction that occurs during a regulatory halt as declared by the primary listing market for the underlying security. Current Commentary .03 to Rule 6.65 defines a Regulatory Halt as one “initiated by a regulatory authority in the primary market.” The Exchange believes this change is necessary to distinguish a declared regulatory halt, where the underlying security should not be actively trading on any venue, from an operational issue on the primary listing exchange where the security may continue to trade on other trading venues. This proposed change would likewise be consistent with the rule of other options exchanges.19

    Implementation

    The Exchange will announce the operative date by Trader Update. The Exchange proposes to delay the operative date of this proposal to a date within ninety (90) days after the BATS Approval Order, dated July 6, 2017. The Exchange will announce the operative date in a Trader Update.

    2. Statutory Basis

    19See supra note 4.

    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”),20 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,21 in particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.

    20 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    21 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    As described above, the Exchange and other options exchanges are seeking to further modify their harmonized rules related to the adjustment and nullification of erroneous options transactions. The Exchange believes that the proposal to utilize a TP Provider in the event the NBBO is unavailable or unreliable will provide greater transparency and clarity with respect to the adjustment and nullification of erroneous options transactions. Particularly, the proposed changes seek to achieve consistent results for participants across U.S. options exchanges while maintaining a fair and orderly market, protecting investors and protecting the public interest. Thus, the Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 22 in that the proposed rule will foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating and facilitating transactions.

    22 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    The Exchange again reiterates that it has retained the standard of the current rule for most reviews of options transactions pursuant to Rule 6.87, which is to rely on the NBBO to determine Theoretical Price if such NBBO can reasonably be relied upon. The proposal to use a TP Provider when the NBBO is unavailable or unreliable is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 23 in that the proposed rule will foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating and facilitating transactions by further reducing the possibility of disparate results between options exchanges and increasing the objectivity of the application of Rule 6.87. Further, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule is transparent with respect to the limited circumstances under which the Exchange will request a review and correction of Theoretical Price from the TP Provider, and has sought to limit such circumstances as much as possible. The Exchange notes that under the current Rule, Exchange personnel are required to determine Theoretical Price in certain circumstances and yet rarely do so because such circumstances have already been significantly limited under the harmonized rule (for example, because the wide quote provision of the harmonized rule only applies if the quote was narrower and then gapped but does not apply if the quote had been persistently wide). Thus, the Exchange believes it will need to request Theoretical Price from the TP Provider only in very rare circumstances and in turn, the Exchange anticipates that the need to contact the TP Provider for additional review of the Theoretical Price provided by the TP Provider will be even rarer. Similarly, the Exchange believes it is unlikely that an Exchange Official will ever be required to determine Theoretical Price, as such circumstance would only be in the event of a systems issue that has rendered the TP Provider's services unavailable and such issue cannot be corrected in a timely manner.

    23 Id.

    The Exchange also believes its proposal to adopt language in paragraph (d) of Commentary .06 to Rule 6.87 to disclaim the liability of the Exchange and the TP Provider in connection with the proposed rule, the TP Provider's calculation of Theoretical Price, and the Exchange's use of such Theoretical Price is consistent with the Act. As noted above, this proposed language is modeled after existing language in Exchange Rules regarding “reporting authorities” that calculate indices,24 and is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 25 in that the proposed rule will foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating and facilitating transactions.

    24 See supra note 14.

    25 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    As described above, the Exchange proposes a modification to the valid quotes provision to also exclude quotes in a series published by another options exchange if either party to the transaction in question submitted the orders or quotes in the series representing such options exchange's best bid or offer. The Exchange believes this proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 26 because the application of the rule will foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating and facilitating transactions by allowing the Exchange to coordinate with other options exchanges to determine whether a market participant that is party to a potentially erroneous transaction on the Exchange established the market in an option on other options exchanges; to the extent this can be established, the Exchange believes such participant's quotes should be excluded in the same way such quotes are excluded on the Exchange. The Exchange also believes it is reasonable to limit the scope of this provision to twenty-five (25) series and to require the party that believes it established the best bid or offer on one or more other options exchanges to identify to the Exchange the quotes which were submitted by that party and published by other options exchanges. The Exchange believes these limitations are consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 27 because they will ensure that the Exchange is able to continue to apply the Rule in a timely and organized fashion, thus fostering cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating and facilitating transactions and also removing impediments to and perfecting the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system.

    26 Id.

    27 Id.

    The proposed change to Rule 6.87(k)(1)(B), to remove reference to sending requests for appeal via facsimile, would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system because the proposed change would update the rule to reflect current technology. This proposed change would also protect investors and the general public because it would add transparency to the rule text.

    Finally, with respect to the proposed modification to the Exchange's trading halt rule, Rule 6.65, the Exchange believes that this proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 28 because it specifically provides for nullification where a trading halt exists with respect to an underlying security across the industry (i.e., a regulatory halt) as distinguished from a situation where the primary exchange has experienced a technical issue but the underlying security continues to trade on other equities platforms. The Exchange notes that a similar provision already exists in the rules of certain other options exchanges, and thus, has been found to be consistent with the Act.29

    28 Id.

    29 See, e.g., BATs Approval Order, supra note 4; Interpretation and Policy .07 to CBOE Rule 6.3.

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section (b)(8) of the Act 30 in that is does not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act as explained below.

    30 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).

    Importantly, the Exchange does not believe that the proposal will impose a burden on intermarket competition but rather that it will alleviate any burden on competition because it is the result of a collaborative effort by all options exchanges to further harmonize and improve the process related to the adjustment and nullification of erroneous options transactions. The Exchange does not believe that the rules applicable to such process is an area where options exchanges should compete, but rather, that all options exchanges should have consistent rules to the extent possible. Particularly where a market participant trades on several different exchanges and an erroneous trade may occur on multiple markets nearly simultaneously, the Exchange believes that a participant should have a consistent experience with respect to the nullification or adjustment of transactions. To that end, the selection and implementation of a TP Provider utilized by all options exchanges will further reduce the possibility that participants with potentially erroneous transactions that span multiple options exchanges are handled differently on such exchanges. Similarly, the proposed ability to consider quotations invalid on another options exchange if ultimately originating from a party to a potentially erroneous transaction on the Exchange represents a proposal intended to further foster cooperation by the options exchanges with respect to market events. The Exchange understands that all other options exchanges either have or intend to file proposals that are substantially similar to this proposal.

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change imposes a burden on intramarket competition because the proposed provisions apply to all market participants equally.

    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 31 and subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.32

    31 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).

    32 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6) requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (i) Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

    IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Comments

    • Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

    • Send an email to [email protected] Please include File Number SR-NYSEArca-2017-101 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-NYSEArca-2017-101. 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 such 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-NYSEArca-2017-101, and should be submitted on or before October 10, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.33

    33 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19710 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-81579; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2017-088] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 4703(a) To Allow Members To Designate When an Order With a RTFY or SCAN Routing Order Attribute Will Be Activated September 12, 2017.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on August 30, 2017, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 4703(a) to allow members to designate when an Order with a RTFY or SCAN routing Order Attribute will be activated.

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

    A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose

    The Exchange is proposing to amend Rule 4703(a) to allow members to designate when an Order with a RTFY or SCAN routing Order Attribute 3 will be activated. RTFY is a routing option available for an order that qualifies as a Designated Retail Order under which orders check the System for available shares only if so instructed by the entering firm and are thereafter routed to destinations on the System routing table.4 If shares remain unexecuted after routing, they are posted to the book.5 Once on the book, should the order subsequently be locked or crossed by another market center, the System will not route the order to the locking or crossing market center.6 RTFY is designed to allow orders to participate in the opening, reopening and closing process of the primary listing market for a security. SCAN is a routing option under which orders check the System for available shares and simultaneously route the remaining shares to destinations on the System routing table. If shares remain un-executed after routing, they are posted on the book.7 Once on the book, should the order subsequently be locked or crossed by another market center, the System will not route the order to the locking or crossing market center.8

    3 The term “Order” means an instruction to trade a specified number of shares in a specified System Security submitted to the Nasdaq Market Center by a Participant. An “Order Type” is a standardized set of instructions associated with an Order that define how it will behave with respect to pricing, execution, and/or posting to the Nasdaq Book when submitted to Nasdaq. An “Order Attribute” is a further set of variable instructions that may be associated with an Order to further define how it will behave with respect to pricing, execution, and/or posting to the Nasdaq Book when submitted to Nasdaq. The available Order Types and Order Attributes, and the Order Attributes that may be associated with particular Order Types, are described in Rules 4702 and 4703. One or more Order Attributes may be assigned to a single Order; provided, however, that if the use of multiple Order Attributes would provide contradictory instructions to an Order, the System will reject the Order or remove non-conforming Order Attributes. See Rule 4701(e).

    4See Rule 4758(a)(1)(A)(v)b.

    5Id.

    6Id.

    7See Rule 4758(a)(1)(A)(iv).

    8Id.

    Rule 4703 provides the various Order Attributes that may be assigned to Orders entered into the System. All Orders have a Time-in-Force,9 during which the Order is active. During Pre-Market Hours,10 the Exchange has historically provided a member two options concerning when an Order with a RTFY or SCAN Order Attribute may become active—upon entry or at single designated time, which is currently 8:00 a.m. ET. Orders with a RTFY or SCAN Order Attribute entered prior to 8:00 a.m. ET that are not designated to activate immediately are held by the System until 8:00 a.m. ET, at which time they become active. During Market Hours 11 and Post-Market Hours,12 Orders with a RTFY or SCAN Order Attribute may only become active upon entry. The Exchange is proposing to provide members with greater control over their Orders with RTFY and SCAN Order Attributes by allowing members to designate when such Orders become active at any point during the trading day. Accordingly, the Exchange is amending Rule 4703(a) and paragraph (7) thereunder to make it clear that Orders with a RTFY or SCAN Order Attribute may either be active upon entry or at a time designated by the member. The Exchange is also clarifying under Rule 4703(a)(7) that Orders with a RTFY or SCAN Order Attribute may be designated to activate at any time during System Hours, which encompasses the full trading day on Nasdaq, on the same day.13 Thus, an Order with a RTFY or SCAN Order Attribute not designated to become active immediately may only be designated to activate during System Hours of the day on which the Order was entered.

    9See Rule 4703(a).

    10 The term “Pre-Market Hours” means the period of time beginning at 4:00 a.m. ET and ending immediately prior to the commencement of Market Hours. The term “Market Hours” means the period of time beginning at 9:30 a.m. ET and ending at 4:00 p.m. ET (or such earlier time as may be designated by Nasdaq on a day when Nasdaq closes early). The term “Post-Market Hours” means the period of time beginning immediately after the end of Market Hours and ending at 8:00 p.m. ET. The term “System Hours” means the period of time beginning at 4:00 a.m. ET and ending at 8:00 p.m. ET (or such earlier time as may be designated by Nasdaq on a day when Nasdaq closes early). See Rule 4701(g).

    11Id.

    12Id.

    13Id.

    The Exchange will implement the proposed changes upon approval by the Commission.

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,14 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,15 in particular, in that it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public interest, by providing members with greater control over their Orders with a RTFY or SCAN Order Attribute and more flexibility to carry out their investment strategies. Currently, market participants are limited by the time at which their RTFY and SCAN Orders may activate—either upon entry or at 8:00 a.m. ET. The proposed rule change removes this limitation by allowing a member to designate the precise time at which it wishes the Order to become active. The Exchange notes that a member may currently replicate what is being proposed by entering an Order with a RTFY or SCAN Order Attribute precisely at the time that they wish it to become active during the trading day. The proposed change merely frees members from having to time their Order entry to achieve their investment goals. Currently, members may cancel an Order with a RTFY or SCAN Order Attribute at any time before it activates at 8 a.m. ET. Under the proposed change, members may cancel their inactive Orders with a RTFY or SCAN Order Attribute at any time, thus allowing them to react to market conditions that may cause them to violate their obligation of best execution to their customers should the Order activate and execute. Similarly, members may cancel their active Orders with RTFY or SCAN and enter new RTFY or SCAN Orders to activate at a time that the members believe will better satisfy their obligation of best execution.

    14 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    15 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    With this change, and as is currently the case, all Nasdaq members may use the SCAN Order Attribute, and all Nasdaq members may use the RTFY Order Attribute if they meet its requirements.16 Thus, the proposed change will benefit all members that may use, or are eligible to use, SCAN or RTFY Order Attributes by removing a limitation, and by providing more choice over their market participation.

    16 As set forth in Rule 4758(a)(1)(A), RTFY is a routing option available for an order that qualifies as a Designated Retail Order. Rule 7018 defines a Designated Retail Order as an agency or riskless principal order that meets the criteria of FINRA Rule 5320.03 and that originates from a natural person and is submitted to Nasdaq by a member that designates it pursuant to this rule, provided that no change is made to the terms of the order with respect to price or side of market and the order does not originate from a trading algorithm or any other computerized methodology.

    The Exchange believes that it is equitable to limit the proposed change to RTFY or SCAN Orders because of the nature of the members that use these Order types with the current order activation delay. Currently, members that enter Orders with a RTFY or SCAN Order Attribute with delayed activation tend to represent customers on an agency basis—for example, individual retail investors.17 The Exchange has become aware that the proposed functionality would ease burdens associated with entering members' agency Orders with these Routing Order Attributes. Consequently, the Exchange is proposing to apply the proposed change to Orders with a RTFY or SCAN Order Attribute. Should the Exchange become aware of other Routing Order Attributes that would also benefit from the flexibility proposed herein, it will consider filing a rule change to expand the time during which such Orders may be designated to become active.

    17 RTFY, by definition, is entered on behalf of retail customers, whereas the Orders with a SCAN Order Attribute are entered on behalf of a wide array of customer, including retail customers. Consequently, although the proposed change will relieve burdens placed on members using both RTFY and SCAN, it will beneficially impact SCAN Orders more so than RTFY Orders.

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. All Nasdaq members may use the SCAN Order Attribute, and Nasdaq members may use the RTFY Order Attribute if they meet its requirements. Any member that may use, or is eligible to use, Orders with RTFY or SCAN Order Attributes may avail itself of the proposed change. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change promotes competition by removing a restriction on the use of two Order Attributes, thereby making the process of entering Orders with RTFY and SCAN Order Attributes more efficient and less burdensome on members. Members may not have functionality that allows them to send large numbers of RTFY and SCAN Orders to the Exchange for execution at a designated time. As discussed above, such members must either enter RTFY and SCAN Orders for immediate execution or send them to the Exchange for execution at 8 a.m. ET, relying on the Exchange to queue and activate these Orders at this single time. The Exchange is proposing to allow such queuing and activation done by the Exchange to occur at any time, since the Exchange can better handle the large number of queued Orders received by certain members. Consequently, the proposed change eliminates the burden that affects these members, but will also allow any other member that currently queues RTFY and SCAN Orders for activation at a precise time to use the Exchange for this functionality instead. Should the Exchange find a similar burden placed on members using other Orders, it may extend the proposed activation functionality to other such Orders through rulemaking. The Exchange notes that providing members greater efficiency and control over their trading may make Nasdaq a more attractive venue, which may, in turn, cause other markets to consider similar changes that would remove unnecessary restrictions to the benefit of their members. For these reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposed change will not impose any burden on competition, but rather will reduce burdens, as described above.

    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:

    (A) By order approve or disapprove the proposed rule change, or

    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved.

    IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Comments

    • Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

    • Send an email to [email protected] Please include File Number SR-NASDAQ-2017-088 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-NASDAQ-2017-088. 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-NASDAQ-2017-088 and should be submitted on or before October 10, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.18

    18 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-19709 Filed 9-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-81595; File No. SR-MSRB-2017-06] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend MSRB Rule G-34, on CUSIP Numbers, New Issue, and Market Information Requirements September 13, 2017.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act” or “Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on August 30, 2017 the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (the “MSRB” or “Board”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC” or “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the MSRB. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The MSRB filed with the Commission a proposed rule change to amend MSRB Rule G-34, on CUSIP numbers, new issue, and market information requirements, (the “proposed rule change”) to more clearly express in the rule language the MSRB's longstanding interpretation that brokers, dealers and municipal securities dealers (collectively, “dealers”) when acting as a placement agent in a private placement of municipal securities are subject to the CUSIP number requirements