Page Range | 50799-51148 | |
FR Document |
Page and Subject | |
---|---|
82 FR 50799 - Continuation of the National Emergency With Respect to Sudan | |
82 FR 50898 - Sunshine Act Meeting; National Science Board | |
82 FR 50870 - Sunshine Act Meeting: Farm Credit Administration Board | |
82 FR 50801 - Prevailing Rate Systems | |
82 FR 50802 - Guaranteed Loanmaking | |
82 FR 50979 - Funding Availability: Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem Program | |
82 FR 50861 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Organization of Scientific Area Committees for Forensic Science (OSAC) Membership Application | |
82 FR 50928 - Sureride Charter Inc.-Acquisition of Control-McClintock Enterprises, Inc. D/B/A Goldfield Stage & Company | |
82 FR 50883 - Request for Nominations on the Pediatric Advisory Committee | |
82 FR 50888 - Notice of Certain Operating Cost Adjustment Factors for 2018 | |
82 FR 50884 - Assessment of Food and Drug Administration Hiring and Retention; Public Meeting; Request for Comments | |
82 FR 50855 - Office of Tribal Relations; Council for Native American Farming and Ranching | |
82 FR 50801 - Black Stem Rust; Additions of Rust-Resistant Species and Varieties | |
82 FR 50855 - Availability of an Environmental Assessment for the Biological Control of Yellow Toadflax | |
82 FR 50869 - Clean Air Act Advisory Committee (CAAAC): Notice of Meeting | |
82 FR 50932 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments; Clearance of a New Information Collection: FAA Aircraft Noise Complaint and Inquiry System (FAA Noise Portal) | |
82 FR 50893 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Evaluation of Strategies Used in the TechHire and Strengthening Working Families Initiative Grant Programs | |
82 FR 50944 - Funding Opportunity Title: Notice of Guarantee Availability (NOGA) Inviting Qualified Issuer Applications and Guarantee Applications for the Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFI) Bond Guarantee Program | |
82 FR 50930 - Projects Rescinded for Consumptive Uses of Water | |
82 FR 50930 - Projects Approved for Consumptive Uses of Water | |
82 FR 50960 - Quarterly Publication of Individuals, Who Have Chosen To Expatriate, as Required by Section 6039G | |
82 FR 50882 - Advisory Committee; Patient Engagement Advisory Committee, Renewal | |
82 FR 50867 - Alaska Electric Light & Power Company: Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment | |
82 FR 50866 - CVR Logistics, LLC; Notice of Request for Temporary Waiver | |
82 FR 50864 - Florida Southeast Connection, LLC; Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Assessment for The Proposed Okeechobee Lateral Pipeline Project, and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues | |
82 FR 50867 - Combined Notice of Filings #1 | |
82 FR 50856 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment Request: Collection of Contact Information of Schools That Participate in the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and Organizations That Participate in the USDA's Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) for Sharing Team Nutrition's Nutrition Education, Training, and Technical Assistance Resources | |
82 FR 50928 - Notice of Determinations; Culturally Significant Object Imported for Exhibition Determinations: “Portraits of the World: Switzerland” Exhibition | |
82 FR 50892 - Certain Audio Processing Hardware, Software, and Products Containing the Same Notice of Request for Statements on the Public Interest | |
82 FR 50927 - Notice of Determinations: Culturally Significant Object Imported for Exhibition Determinations: “Coming Away: Winslow Homer and England” Exhibition | |
82 FR 50863 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals | |
82 FR 50937 - Reports, Forms, and Recordkeeping Requirements; Agency Information Collection Activity Under OMB Review | |
82 FR 50858 - Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 68-El Paso, Texas; Authorization of Production Activity; PGTEX USA, Inc.; (Fiber Glass Fabrics); El Paso, Texas | |
82 FR 50940 - Highway Safety Programs; Conforming Products List of Evidential Breath Alcohol Measurement Devices | |
82 FR 50938 - Reports, Forms, and Recordkeeping Requirements | |
82 FR 50858 - Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Aluminum Foil From the People's Republic of China: Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less-Than-Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination | |
82 FR 50887 - National Institute of Nursing Research; Notice of Closed Meeting | |
82 FR 50888 - National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases; Notice of Closed Meeting | |
82 FR 50887 - Government-Owned Inventions; Availability for Licensing | |
82 FR 50933 - Motorcyclist Advisory Council to the Federal Highway Administration | |
82 FR 50871 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Announcement of Board Approval Under Delegated Authority and Submission to OMB | |
82 FR 50931 - Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received | |
82 FR 50898 - Request for Recommendations for Membership on Stem Education Advisory Panel | |
82 FR 50894 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Ionizing Radiation Standard | |
82 FR 50896 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Fire Brigades Standard | |
82 FR 50895 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Fire Protection in Shipyard Employment Standard | |
82 FR 50896 - Records Schedules; Availability and Request for Comments | |
82 FR 50867 - North American Electric Reliability Corporation; Notice of Filing | |
82 FR 50868 - Notice of Commissioner and Staff Attendance at North American Electric Reliability Corporation Meetings | |
82 FR 50869 - Great Bay Solar I, LLC; Notice of Institution of Section 206 Proceeding and Refund Effective Date | |
82 FR 50868 - Enable Gas Transmission, LLC; Notice of Request Under Blanket Authorization | |
82 FR 50863 - Combined Notice of Filings #2 | |
82 FR 50866 - Combined Notice of Filings #1 | |
82 FR 50862 - Department of Defense Military Family Readiness Council; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Meeting | |
82 FR 50934 - Petition for Waiver of Compliance | |
82 FR 50935 - Petition for Waiver of Compliance | |
82 FR 50937 - Petition for Waiver of Compliance | |
82 FR 50933 - Petition for Waiver of Compliance | |
82 FR 50936 - Petition for Waiver of Compliance | |
82 FR 50839 - Temporary Rule To Establish Management Measures for the Limited Harvest and Possession of South Atlantic Red Snapper in 2017 | |
82 FR 50891 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Tribal Probate Codes | |
82 FR 50909 - Notice of Applications for Deregistration Under Section 8(f) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 | |
82 FR 50885 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Regulations for In Vivo Radiopharmaceuticals Used for Diagnosis and Monitoring | |
82 FR 50893 - Notice of Lodging of Proposed Consent Decree Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) | |
82 FR 50890 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Indian Child Welfare Quarterly and Annual Report | |
82 FR 50871 - Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records Notices | |
82 FR 50910 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq GEMX, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to an Optional Kill Switch Protection | |
82 FR 50921 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To Establish a Nonstandard Expirations Pilot Program on a Pilot Basis, for an Initial Period of Twelve Months From the Date of Approval of This Proposed Rule Change | |
82 FR 50912 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Order Granting Approval of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To List and Trade Shares of the Eaton Vance Oaktree Diversified Credit NextSharesTM | |
82 FR 50926 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Remove References to Nasdaq Options Services | |
82 FR 50907 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq ISE, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to an Optional Kill Switch Protection | |
82 FR 50924 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq MRX, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to an Optional Kill Switch Protection | |
82 FR 50898 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE American LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Exchange Rule 7.10E To Exclude Trading Halt Auctions From Being Reviewed as Clearly Erroneous, Rule 7.11E To Conform to the Limit Up-Limit Down NMS Plan, Rule 7.31E To Add a New Imbalance Only Order, and Rule 7.35E To Enhance the Information Available Before an Auction and Revise Procedures for Trading Halt Auctions | |
82 FR 50916 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Miami International Securities Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend MIAX Options Rule 518 Relating to Derived Orders | |
82 FR 50856 - Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP): Eligibility, Certification, and Employment and Training Provisions of the Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008; Approval of Information Collection Request | |
82 FR 50870 - Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding Company | |
82 FR 50870 - Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies | |
82 FR 50888 - National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Notice of Closed Meetings | |
82 FR 50858 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request | |
82 FR 50928 - In the Matter of the Amendment of the Designation of Abdallah Azzam Brigades (and Other Aliases) as a Foreign Terrorist Organization Pursuant to Section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as Amended | |
82 FR 50927 - In the Matter of the Amendment of the Designation of Abdallah Azzam Brigades (and Other Aliases) as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist | |
82 FR 50927 - Review of the Designation as a Foreign Terrorist Organization of Abdallah Azzam Brigade (and Other Aliases) | |
82 FR 50853 - Air Plan Approval; Illinois; Volatile Organic Compounds Definition | |
82 FR 50844 - Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedures for Electric Motors and Small Electric Motors | |
82 FR 51052 - Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; HHS Notice of Benefit and Payment Parameters for 2019 | |
82 FR 50851 - Air Quality Plans; Pennsylvania; Lebanon County 2012 Fine Particulate Matter Standard Determination of Attainment | |
82 FR 50853 - Air Plan Approval; Michigan Minor New Source Review | |
82 FR 50811 - Air Plan Approval; Illinois; Volatile Organic Compounds Definition | |
82 FR 50807 - Air Plan Approval; Minnesota; State Board Requirements | |
82 FR 50814 - Determination of Attainment by the Attainment Date for the 2008 Ozone Standard; Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE Nonattainment Area | |
82 FR 50820 - Authorization of Radiofrequency Equipment | |
82 FR 50849 - Airworthiness Directives; Agusta S.p.A. Helicopters | |
82 FR 50847 - Airworthiness Directives; AgustaWestland S.p.A. Helicopters | |
82 FR 50802 - Schedule for Rating Disabilities; The Endocrine System | |
82 FR 50988 - FAST Act Modernization and Simplification of Regulation S-K |
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Food and Nutrition Service
Rural Business-Cooperative Service
Rural Utilities Service
Economic Development Administration
Foreign-Trade Zones Board
International Trade Administration
National Institute of Standards and Technology
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Energy Information Administration
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Food and Drug Administration
National Institutes of Health
Indian Affairs Bureau
Federal Aviation Administration
Federal Highway Administration
Federal Railroad Administration
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Community Development Financial Institutions Fund
Internal Revenue Service
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.
In Title 5 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 1 to 699, revised as of January 1, 2017, in Appendix C to Subpart B of part 532: On page 469, under NEW YORK, the wage area listing for Newburgh is removed; and on page 482, under WASHINGTON, in the Southeastern Washington-Eastern Oregon wage area listing,
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
Direct final rule; confirmation of effective date.
On September 5, 2017, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service published a direct final rule. The direct final rule notified the public of our intention to amend the black stem rust quarantine and regulations by adding 15 varieties to the list of rust-resistant
The effective date of the direct final rule published September 5, 2017, at 82 FR 41825-41827, is confirmed as November 6, 2017.
Dr. Richard N. Johnson, National Policy Manager, Black Stem Rust, Pest Management, PHP, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 26, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231; (301) 851-2109.
Black stem rust is one of the most destructive plant diseases of small grains that is known to exist in the United States. The disease is caused by a fungus (
The black stem rust quarantine and regulations, which are contained in 7 CFR 301.38 through 301.38-8 (referred to below as the regulations), quarantine the conterminous 48 States and the District of Columbia and govern the interstate movement of certain plants of the genera
On September 5, 2017, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) published in the
We solicited comments on the rule for 30 days ending October 5, 2017, and indicated that, if we received written adverse comments or written notice of intent to submit adverse comments, we would publish a document in the
We received two comments by that date, neither of which we consider to be adverse. One commenter questioned why rust-resistant plants must be regulated—including being added to the black stem rust quarantine and regulations list, as well as being accompanied by a certificate if moved interstate—if they do not pose a risk of spreading black stem rust.
APHIS' quarantine of the 48 conterminous States and the District of Columbia and restrictions on the interstate movement of
The other commenter questioned the reliability of testing protocols to determine a plant's rust resistance, and requested assurance based on evidence that the sample size used to determine rust resistance is adequate to determine an overall species' resistance.
Testing performed by the Agricultural Research Service of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) at its Cereal Disease Laboratory in St. Paul, MN has been used to effectively determine rust resistance for more than 50 years. Based on our extensive experience with this test, we believe that 12—in any of the combinations described in the direct final rule—is the reliable test sample size on which USDA can make its determination. We do not know of any plant that was subsequently discovered to be rust-susceptible after undergoing the test procedure 12 times and being determined by USDA to be rust-resistant.
Therefore, for the reasons given in the direct final rule and in this document, we are confirming the effective date as November 6, 2017.
7 U.S.C. 7701-7772 and 7781-7786; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.3.
Section 301.75-15 issued under Sec. 204, Title II, Public Law 106-113, 113 Stat. 1501A-293; sections 301.75-15 and 301.75-16 issued under Sec. 203, Title II, Public Law 106-224, 114 Stat. 400 (7 U.S.C. 1421 note).
In Title 7 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 2000 to End, revised as of January 1, 2017, on page 749, § 4279.162 is added to read as follows:
Applicants with projects that support the implementation of strategic economic development and community development plans are encouraged to review and consider 7 CFR part 1980, subpart K, which contains provisions for providing priority to projects that support the implementation of strategic economic development and community development plans on a Multi-jurisdictional basis.
Department of Veterans Affairs.
Final rule.
This document amends the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) by revising the portion of the Schedule that addresses endocrine conditions and disorders of the endocrine system. The effect of this action is to ensure that the VASRD uses current medical terminology and to provide detailed and updated criteria for evaluation of endocrine disorders.
This rule is effective on December 10, 2017.
Ioulia Vvedenskaya, Medical Officer, Part 4 VASRD Regulations Staff (211C), Compensation Service, Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20420,
VA published a proposed rule in the
One commenter asked whether VA would recognize polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) under the VA rating schedule. VA has a mechanism in place to address PCOS under 38 CFR 4.116. Specifically, the rating schedule for Gynecological Conditions and Disorders of the Breast addresses various ovarian conditions under Diagnostic Code (DC) 7615, “Ovary, disease, injury, or adhesions of” and allows VA to rate based on whether symptoms are controlled by or require continuous treatment. In exceptional cases where the schedular evaluation is inadequate, 38 CFR 3.321 allows for extraschedular evaluation. Therefore, VA makes no changes based on this comment.
Two commenters proposed additional modifications to DC 7913, “Diabetes mellitus.” One commenter suggested adding a note to address the issue of regulation of activities. Another commenter suggested not changing the insulin requirements within DC 7913 without considering the other requirements in the DC such as regulation of activities. The same commenter suggested removing the insulin requirement for a 20-percent rating and the regulation of activities requirement at all disability ratings under the DC. The commenter stated that the functional impairment caused by required use of insulin is greater than impairment caused by ingestion of oral medication to control diabetes. As stated in the proposed rule, VA is not proposing any change to the evaluation criteria for DC 7913 at this time other than requiring “one or more daily injection” of insulin for a 20-, 40- or 60-percent rating and instead intends to establish a work group to specifically address this condition. Therefore, these comments are beyond the scope of this rulemaking. However, VA will take these comments into consideration in connection with a possible future rulemaking.
One commenter suggested changing the terminology for a 100-percent rating under DC 7903, “Hypothyroidism” from “myxedema” to “myxedema coma or crisis” because myxedema can be present without causing the requisite level of symptoms for a 100-percent rating. Myxedema is a term used to denote severe hypothyroidism, and myxedema coma or myxedema crisis is a medical emergency and represents a specific rare life-threatening clinical condition. Because the clinical picture of myxedema appears in the most extreme cases of hypothyroidism, we believe that this manifestation of the disability warrants a 100-percent rating (See Greenspan's Basic & Clinical Endocrinology (D.G. Gardner et al. eds., 9th ed. 2011) available at
The same commenter proposed that VA retain a 10-percent minimum evaluation in the DCs for endocrine disabilities because of the need for continuous medication to control the symptoms of these disabilities. VA disagrees. In the absence of symptoms, medical management of chronic endocrine disorders does not present a significant lifestyle adjustment, and it does not result in impairment of earning capacity (see 38 U.S.C. 1155). Therefore, VA makes no changes based on this comment.
The same commenter noted a typographical error in the text of proposed DC 7911. The word “adrenocortical” was misspelled as “adrenalcortical.” VA has changed the spelling of the term based on this comment.
One commenter was supportive of the overall changes and additions to this section of the VASRD, such as additional DCs, clarification of notes on residuals affecting other body systems, instructions to rate some residuals separately, accounting for additional symptoms, and formation of a new work group for diabetes mellitus. The
We first point out that the ratings under DC 7900 and 7903 are for “six months after initial diagnosis” and the rating under DC 7905 is for “three months after initial diagnosis.” Thus, the claimants are likely receiving treatment. In addition, as VA explained in the notice of proposed rulemaking, most symptoms of hyperthyroidism and hypothyroidism are alleviated within six months of treatment (see 80 FR 39011, 39013 (Jul. 8, 2015)).
With regard to residual symptoms, the primary effect of chronic hyperthyroidism, hypothyroidism, and hypoparathyroidism is on body systems regulated by the thyroid. Therefore, in cases where veterans still have symptoms after six months for hyperthyroidism or hypothyroidism or after three months for hypoparathyroidism, VA addresses residual symptoms by rating all residuals based on the specific disability presented under the most appropriate DCs within the appropriate body system(s).
The residuals of endocrine disorders such as uncontrolled thyroid hormone or calcium imbalance produce measurable disability including muscle damage, blood-clotting issues, nerve and kidney damage, depression, and many others. Therefore, VA makes no changes based on this comment.
The commenter also stated that VA has not provided a reasoned argument for eliminating a 10-percent evaluation when continued medication is required under DCs 7900 and 7903. Ratings under the schedule are “based, as far as practicable, upon the average impairments of earning capacity resulting from [specific] injuries” or combination of injuries (see 38 U.S.C. 1155). As detailed above, VA explained in the notice of proposed rulemaking that symptoms of hyperthyroidism and hypothyroidism generally resolve completely within six months after diagnosis and that symptoms of hypoparathyroidism are generally eliminated following treatment with calcium and vitamin D supplementation (see 80 FR 39011, 39012-14 (Jul. 8, 2015)). Because symptoms are generally eliminated or minimal once a patient receives appropriate medication, there is no impairment of earning capacity and therefore no need to retain the 10-percent rating under DCs 7900, 7903, and 7905. As explained above, any disabling residuals may be rated under the most appropriate rating code. Further, if medication is discontinued and symptoms reappear, the disability could again be rated under the schedule for rating disabilities of the endocrine system.
The same commenter suggested that proposed DC 7912 should account for residuals of common treatment procedures such as the Whipple procedure, which is also used for the treatment of pancreatic cancer. VA regulations allow for secondary service connection for disabilities that are proximately due to or the result of a service-connected disease or injury (see 38 CFR 3.310(a)). Disabilities that are secondarily service connected and have distinguishable symptoms, to include disabilities that arise from the treatment of a service-connected disability, are rated separately under the VA rating schedule. Therefore, VA makes no changes based on this comment.
The same commenter proposed that VA amend DCs 7901 and 7902 to account for the specific characteristics of disfigurement due to thyroid enlargement rather than rating such disfigurement under DC 7800 because the criteria in DC 7800 do not match the features of thyroid enlargement. The commenter provided two examples of this alleged inconsistency, cystic thyroid nodules requiring draining and soft swelling of the neck. If disfigurement related to thyroid enlargement does not satisfy the criteria in DC 7800, the disfigurement does not result in impairment of earning capacity and is not compensable (see 38 U.S.C. 1155). Therefore, VA makes no changes based on these comments.
VA appreciates the comments submitted in response to the proposed rule. Based on the rationale stated in the proposed rule and in this document, the proposed rule is adopted with the change noted.
We are additionally adding updates to 38 CFR part 4, Appendices A, B, and C, to reflect changes to the endocrine system rating criteria made by this rulemaking. The appendices are tools for users of the VASRD and do not contain substantive content regarding evaluation of disabilities. As such, we believe it is appropriate to include these updates in this final rule.
The change to the proposed rule will not alter the estimated costs provided in the previous Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) personnel utilize the Veterans Benefit Management System for Rating (VBMS-R) to process disability compensation claims that involve disability evaluations made under the VASRD. In order to ensure that there is no delay in processing veterans' claims, VA must coordinate the effective date of this final rule with corresponding VBMS-R system updates. As such, this final rule will apply effective December 10, 2017, the date VBMS-R system updates related to this final rule will be complete.
Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity). Executive Order 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review) emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting flexibility. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) defines a “significant regulatory action,” requiring review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), unless OMB waives such review, as “any regulatory action that is likely to result in a rule that may: (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities; (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or
The economic, interagency, budgetary, legal, and policy implications of this final rule have been examined, and have been determined not to be a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. VA's impact analysis can be found as a supporting document at
The Secretary hereby certifies that this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities as they are defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612. This final rule will not directly affect any small entities. Only certain VA beneficiaries could be directly affected. Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), this rulemaking is exempt from the initial and final regulatory flexibility analysis requirements of sections 603 and 604.
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires, at 2 U.S.C. 1532, that agencies prepare an assessment of anticipated costs and benefits before issuing any rule that may result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year. This final rule will have no such effect on State, local, and tribal governments, or on the private sector.
This final rule contains no provisions constituting a collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521).
The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance program numbers and titles for this rule are 64.009, Veterans Medical Care Benefits; 64.104, Pension for Non-Service-Connected Disability for Veterans; 64.109, Veterans Compensation for Service-Connected Disability; and 64.110, Veterans Dependency and Indemnity Compensation for Service-Connected Death.
The Secretary of Veterans Affairs, or designee, approved this document and authorized the undersigned to sign and submit the document to the Office of the Federal Register for publication electronically as an official document of the Department of Veterans Affairs. Gina S. Farrisee, Deputy Chief of Staff, Department of Veterans Affairs, approved this document on April 19, 2017, for publication.
Disability benefits, Pensions, Veterans.
This document was received for publication at the Office of the Federal Register on October 19, 2017.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Department of Veterans Affairs amends 38 CFR part 4 as set forth below:
38 U.S.C. 1155, unless otherwise noted.
The revisions and addition read as follows:
The revisions and addition read as follows:
The revisions and addition read as follows:
The additions and revision read as follows:
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Final rule.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a state implementation plan (SIP) submission from Minnesota addressing the state board requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA). EPA is also approving elements of Minnesota's submission addressing the infrastructure requirements relating to state boards for the 1997 ozone, 1997 fine particulate (PM
This final rule is effective on December 4, 2017.
EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-2016-0327. All documents in the docket are listed on the
Eric Svingen, Environmental Engineer, Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-4489,
Throughout this document whenever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean EPA. This
This rulemaking addresses a SIP submission from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) dated May 26, 2016, which addresses CAA requirements relating to the state board requirements under section 128, as well as infrastructure requirements of section 110 relating to state boards for the 1997 ozone, 1997 PM
The requirement for states to make infrastructure SIP submissions arises out of CAA section 110(a)(1). Pursuant to section 110(a)(1), states must make SIP submissions “within 3 years (or such shorter period as the Administrator may prescribe) after the promulgation of a national primary ambient air quality standard (or any revision thereof),” and these SIP submissions are to provide for the “implementation, maintenance, and enforcement” of such NAAQS. The statute directly imposes on states the duty to make these SIP submissions, and the requirement to make the submissions is not conditioned upon EPA's taking any action other than promulgating a new or revised NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of specific elements that “[e]ach such plan” submission must address.
EPA has historically referred to these SIP submissions made for the purpose of satisfying the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(1) and (2) as “infrastructure SIP” submissions. Although the term “infrastructure SIP” does not appear in the CAA, EPA uses the term to distinguish this particular type of SIP submission from submissions that are intended to satisfy other SIP requirements under the CAA. This specific rulemaking is only taking action on the CAA 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) element of these infrastructure SIP requirements.
EPA's guidance relating to infrastructure SIP submissions can be found in a guidance document entitled “Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-hour Ozone and PM
Pursuant to section 110(a), states must provide reasonable notice and opportunity for public hearing for all infrastructure SIP submissions. MPCA provided public notice for the SIP revision on April 4, 2016, commenced a public comment period on April 5, 2016, and closed the public comment period on May 5, 2016. No comments were received nor were there any requests for a public hearing.
Minnesota provided a detailed synopsis of how various components of its SIP meet each of the applicable requirements in sections 128 and 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for the 1997 ozone, 1997 PM
On July 17, 2017 (82 FR 32669), EPA published a proposed rule that would approve these submissions into Minnesota's SIP. This proposed rule contained a detailed evaluation of how Minnesota's submission satisfies certain requirements under CAA sections 110 and 128. No comments were received. Therefore, EPA is finalizing this rule as proposed.
EPA is taking final action to incorporate Minn. Stat. 10A.07, Minn. Stat. 10A.09, and Minn. R. 7000.0300 into Minnesota's SIP. EPA is further approving this submission as meeting CAA obligations under section 128, as well as 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for the 1997 ozone, 1997 PM
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 the Minnesota Regulations described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth below. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents generally available through
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 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
• 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
• Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described
• 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 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).
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801
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 January 2, 2018. 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)).
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
42 U.S.C. 7401
The additions and revisions read as follows:
(c) * * *
(e) * * *
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Direct final rule.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a state submission as a revision to the Illinois state implementation plan (SIP) for ozone. The revision, submitted on May 30, 2017, incorporates changes to the Illinois Administrative Code (IAC) definition of volatile organic material, otherwise known as volatile organic compound (VOC). The revision removes recordkeeping and reporting requirements related to the use of t-butyl acetate (also known as tertiary butyl acetate) as a VOC, and is in response to an EPA rulemaking that occurred in 2016. Illinois also added information to provide clarity to the list of compounds excluded from the definition of VOC.
This direct final rule will be effective January 2, 2018, unless EPA receives adverse comments by December 4, 2017. If adverse comments are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the
Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-2017-0323 at
Charles Hatten, Environmental Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-3031,
Throughout this document whenever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information section is arranged as follows:
The Clean Air Act (CAA) requires the regulation of VOC for various purposes. Section 302(s) of the CAA specifies that EPA has the authority to define the meaning of “VOC,” and what compounds shall be treated as VOC for regulatory purposes.
Tropospheric ozone, commonly known as smog, is formed when VOC
EPA uses the reactivity of ethane as the threshold for determining whether a compound makes a negligible contribution to tropospheric ozone formation. Compounds that are less reactive than, or equally reactive to, ethane under certain assumed conditions may be deemed negligibly reactive and, therefore, suitable for exemption by EPA from the regulatory definition of VOC. EPA lists compounds it has determined to be negligibly reactive in its regulations as being excluded from the regulatory definition of VOC in 40 CFR 51.100(s).
Illinois' SIP includes a definition of VOC at 35 IAC Part 211, Subpart B, Section 7150 (35 IAC 211.7150), which conforms to EPA's regulatory definition of VOC. Subsection (a) of 35 IAC 211.7150 includes a list of compounds excluded from the regulatory definition of VOC, which reflect the compounds EPA has excluded in 40 CFR 51.100(s) on the basis that they make a negligible contribution to tropospheric ozone formation.
On May 30, 2017, Illinois submitted, as a SIP revision, a change to the definition of VOC at 35 IAC 211.7150 in response to an EPA rulemaking in 2016 that updated an existing exemption for the compound tertiary butyl acetate. Illinois also submitted corrections to chemical names and revisions to chemical identifiers included in the list of excluded compounds at 35 IAC 211.7150(a).
The Illinois SIP currently excludes tertiary butyl acetate for purposes of VOC emissions limitations or VOC content requirements. However, the Illinois SIP includes the compound as a VOC for purposes of all recordkeeping, emissions reporting, photochemical dispersion modeling and inventory requirements which apply to VOC.
In response to an EPA rulemaking in 2016 (discussed further below), Illinois is revising its SIP to remove the recordkeeping, emissions reporting, photochemical dispersion modeling and inventory requirements related to the use of t-butyl acetate as a VOC by deleting subsection (e) of 35 IAC 211.7150.
Additionally, Illinois amended the list of excluded compounds by adding the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) names
For example, tertiary butyl acetate bears the IUPAC name “1,1-dimethyl ethyl acetic acid ester” and CAS number 540-88-5. EPA lists this compound as “t-butyl acetate” in 40 CFR 51.100(s)(1). Illinois continues to identify the compound as tertiary butyl acetate, and parenthetically added the IUPAC name and CAS number in 35 IAC 211.7150(a).
Finally, Illinois made an administrative change by deleting the words “of this Section” in 35 IAC 211.7150(d), which discusses appropriate testing methods and includes a reference to subsection (b) of 35 IAC 211.7150.
Effective April 25, 2016, EPA amended the regulatory definition of VOC to remove applicable recordkeeping, emissions reporting, photochemical dispersion modeling and inventory requirements for the compound tertiary butyl acetate. (81 FR 9339).
EPA had previously excluded tertiary butyl acetate from the definition of VOC for purposes of VOC emissions limitations and VOC content requirements on the basis that it makes a negligible contribution to tropospheric ozone formation. However, EPA continued to define tertiary butyl acetate as a VOC for purposes of all recordkeeping, emissions reporting, photochemical dispersion modeling and inventory requirements that apply to VOC.
In 2016, EPA removed the recordkeeping and reporting requirements related to tertiary butyl acetate as a VOC in response to a petition. In removing these requirements, EPA stated that the primary objective of the recordkeeping and reporting requirements for tertiary butyl acetate was to address the cumulative impacts of “negligibly reactive” compounds, and had suggested that future exempt compounds may also be subject to such requirements. However, these requirements had not been included in any other proposed or final VOC exemptions since the tertiary butyl acetate rule in 2004. EPA found that having high quality data on tertiary butyl acetate emissions alone is unlikely to be very useful in assessing the cumulative impacts of negligibly reactive compounds on ozone formation, and therefore the requirements were not achieving their primary objective to inform more accurate photochemical modeling in support of SIP submissions.
EPA concluded that there was no evidence that tertiary butyl acetate was being used at levels that would cause concern for ozone formation. Additionally, the recordkeeping and reporting requirements, which were unique among all VOC-exempt compounds, were of limited utility because they did not provide sufficient information to judge the cumulative impacts of exempted compounds, and because the data had not been consistently collected and reported by states. As a result, EPA amended 40 CFR 51.100(s)(5) by removing the recordkeeping, emissions reporting, photochemical dispersion modeling and inventory requirements for tertiary butyl acetate as a VOC. This action did not affect the existing exclusion of tertiary butyl acetate from the regulatory definition of VOC for purposes of emission limits and control requirements found in 40 CFR 51.100(s)(1). 81 FR 9339 (February 25, 2016).
Illinois' SIP revision is consistent with EPA's action amending the definition of VOC at 40 CFR 51.100(s)(5) to exclude recordkeeping and reporting requirements for tertiary butyl acetate. Additionally, this revision did not affect the existing exclusion of this compound from the regulatory definition of VOC for purposes of emission limits and control requirements in 35 IAC 211.7150(a).
Furthermore, Illinois' addition of IUPAC names and CAS registry
EPA is approving revisions to 35 IAC 211.7150 contained in the May 30, 2017, submittal into the Illinois SIP. We are publishing this action without prior proposal because we view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this
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 the Illinois Regulations described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth below. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents generally available through
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 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);
• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under Executive Order 12866.
• Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
• 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
• 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 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).
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801
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 January 2, 2018. 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. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules section of today's
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
42 U.S.C. 7401
(c) * * *
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Final rule.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is making a final determination that the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE marginal ozone nonattainment area (the Philadelphia Area) has attained the 2008 ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) by the July 20, 2016 attainment date. This final determination is based on complete, certified, and quality assured ambient air quality monitoring data for the Philadelphia Area for the 2013-2015 monitoring period. The effect of this determination of attainment (DOA) is that the Philadelphia Area will not be bumped up or reclassified as a moderate nonattainment area. The determination of attainment is not equivalent to a redesignation, and the States in the Philadelphia Area must still meet the statutory requirements for redesignation in order to be redesignated to attainment. This determination is also not a clean data determination. This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA).
This final rule is effective on December 4, 2017.
EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID EPA-R03-OAR-2016-0638. All documents in the docket are listed on the
Gregory Becoat, (215) 814-2036, or by email at
On April 18, 2017 (82 FR 18268), EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) for the Philadelphia Area. The Philadelphia Area consists of Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery and Philadelphia Counties in Pennsylvania; Atlantic, Burlington, Camden, Cape May, Cumberland, Gloucester, Mercer, Ocean and Salem Counties in New Jersey; Cecil County, Maryland; and New Castle County in Delaware.
Section 181(b)(2)(A) of the CAA requires that EPA determine whether an area has attained the NAAQS by its attainment date based on complete and certified air quality data from the three full calendar years preceding an area's attainment date. The 2008 ozone NAAQS is 0.075 parts per million (ppm). Consistent with the requirements contained in 40 CFR part 50, Appendix P, which set forth how to compute whether monitoring sites and nonattainment areas are attaining the ozone NAAQS, EPA reviewed the ozone ambient air quality monitoring data for the monitoring period from 2013 through 2015 for the Philadelphia Area, as recorded in the air quality system (AQS) database. State and local agencies responsible for ozone air monitoring networks supplied and quality assured the data. EPA determined that the monitoring sites with valid data had design values equal to or less than 0.075 ppm based on the 2013-2015 monitoring period. Therefore, based on 2013-2015 certified air quality data, EPA concludes that the Philadelphia Area has attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
Other specific requirements of this determination of attainment by the attainment date and the rationale for EPA's final action are explained in the NPR and will not be restated here. EPA received comments that are addressed in Section III of this rulemaking action.
EPA received adverse comments from the Center for Biological Diversity (Center), Sierra Club, and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (Delaware). The comments are excerpted and/or summarized and addressed in this section:
This regression analysis relied on ambient data—measured ozone levels at a nearby certified ozone monitor—to predict ozone levels at monitors with missing data. This type of analysis is only appropriate where readings from a nearby certified ozone monitor closely correlate with readings from the monitors with missing data. In this case, EPA examined the two other air quality monitors located in the same county as the Brandywine and MLK monitors, compared recorded ozone readings of all four monitors on days and found that the Bellefonte2 monitor (AQS ID 10-003-1013), which is located five miles from both Brandywine and MLK, correlated most closely with those monitors. As explained in more detail in the TSD, the Bellefonte2 monitor is strongly correlated with both the Brandywine and MLK monitors (TSD at pp. 8-10). Using this information, EPA determined a separate linear regression equation for each of the Brandywine and MLK monitors. These two equations allowed calculation of predicted ozone
EPA also used a third method—a data substitution analysis—as a further check on the validity of the first two methods on the Brandywine and MLK monitors. When any of the four monitors in New Castle County, Delaware, was missing a valid day of data during the 2013-2015 ozone seasons, EPA looked at ambient data in the form of actual recorded ozone values at the other New Castle County monitors and substituted the highest recorded ozone value for the missing value(s) at the other monitor(s). After adding these substituted data values, a 2013-2015 “test design value” was calculated for all four monitors. None of the four monitors' calculated test design values, including Brandywine and MLK, exceeded the ozone standard of 75 ppb.
(1) Camalier, L., Cox, W., and Dolwick, P. (2007). The effects of meteorology in urban areas and their use in assessing ozone trends. Atmospheric Environment, Volume 41, Issue 33, pages 7127-7137; (2) Cox, W. and Chu, S (1996). Assessment of interannual ozone variation in urban areas from a climatological perspective. Atmospheric Environment, Volume 30, Issue 14, pages 2615-2615; (3) U.S. EPA (2016). Trends in Ozone Concentrations Adjusted for Weather Conditions.
(1) The January 25, 2012 proposed determination of attainment and clean data determination for the 1997 ozone NAAQS for the New York-New Jersey-Connecticut Nonattainment Area (NY-NJ-CT NAA) at 77 FR 3720; and
(2) The July 18, 2012 final determination of attainment and clean data determination for the NY-NJ-CT NAA at 77 FR 36163; and
(3) The May 15, 2014 proposal to rescind the clean data determination for the NY-NJ-CT NAA at 79 FR 27830.
The January 25, 2012 proposal cited by Commenter contains both a determination of attainment by the attainment date
Similarly, the June 18, 2012
EPA is making a final determination, in accordance with its obligations under section 181(b)(2)(A) of the CAA and 40 CFR 51.1103, that the Philadelphia Area attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the applicable attainment date of July 20, 2016. This determination of attainment does not constitute a redesignation to attainment, and is also not a clean data determination.
This rulemaking action finalizes a determination of attainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS based on air quality and does not impose additional requirements. For that reason, this determination of attainment:
• 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);
• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under Executive Order 12866.
• Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
• 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
• 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, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801
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 January 2, 2018. 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 determining that the Philadelphia Area attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS by its July 20, 2016 attainment date may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
42 U.S.C. 7401
(d) Based upon EPA's review of the air quality data for the 3-year period 2013 to 2015, Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE marginal ozone nonattainment area has attained the 2008 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) by the applicable attainment date of July 20, 2016. Therefore, EPA has met the requirement pursuant to CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) to determine, based on the area's air quality as of the attainment date, whether the area attained the standard. EPA also determined that the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE marginal ozone nonattainment area will not be reclassified for failure to attain by its
(j) Based upon EPA's review of the air quality data for the 3-year period 2013 to 2015, Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE marginal ozone nonattainment area has attained the 2008 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) by the applicable attainment date of July 20, 2016. Therefore, EPA has met the requirement pursuant to CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) to determine, based on the area's air quality as of the attainment date, whether the area attained the standard. EPA also determined that the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE marginal ozone nonattainment area will not be reclassified for failure to attain by its applicable attainment date pursuant to section 181(b)(2)(A).
(d) Based upon EPA's review of the air quality data for the 3-year period 2013 to 2015, Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE marginal ozone nonattainment area has attained the 2008 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) by the applicable attainment date of July 20, 2016. Therefore, EPA has met the requirement pursuant to CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) to determine, based on the area's air quality as of the attainment date, whether the area attained the standard. EPA also determined that the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE marginal ozone nonattainment area will not be reclassified for failure to attain by its applicable attainment date pursuant to section 181(b)(2)(A).
(o) Based upon EPA's review of the air quality data for the 3-year period 2013 to 2015, Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE marginal ozone nonattainment area has attained the 2008 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) by the applicable attainment date of July 20, 2016. Therefore, EPA has met the requirement pursuant to CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) to determine, based on the area's air quality as of the attainment date, whether the area attained the standard. EPA also determined that the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE marginal ozone nonattainment area will not be reclassified for failure to attain by its applicable attainment date pursuant to section 181(b)(2)(A).
Federal Communications Commission.
Final rule.
The Federal Communications Commission (Commission) amends its equipment authorization regulations, increasing the Commission's agility to respond to changes in technology and industry standards. This rule consolidates, simplifies, and streamlines certain procedures, and removes the requirement to file the import declaration FCC Form 740 under certain circumstances.
Effective November 2, 2017.
The incorporation by reference listed in the rule was approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of November 2, 2017.
FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554 for full text of “First Report and Order, FCC 17-93” (also at
Brian Butler, Office of Engineering and Technology, (202) 418-2702, email:
This is a summary of the Commission's
1. On July 17, 2015, the Commission adopted a
2. Supplier's Declaration of Conformity. The Commission adopted its proposal to replace two of the existing equipment authorization procedures (Declaration of Conformity (DoC) and verification) with a single process—“Supplier's Declaration of Conformity” (SDoC). Verification and DoC are both self-approval processes under which the party responsible for the compliance of the RF device has been required to take the necessary steps (testing or analysis) to ensure that
3. The Commission determined that, with the advancement in testing technologies, equipment and standards, there is no longer a need to require DoC devices to be tested for compliance by accredited test laboratories. It further noted that without the requirement for laboratory accreditation, the DoC and verification procedures are quite similar. The Commission concluded that adoption of SDoC as single self-approval process would simplify the equipment authorization requirements and reduce confusion as to which process may apply to any given device, while continuing to adequately ensure compliance with its rules. Under SDoC, the responsible party for equipment will test equipment for compliance to specified standards or requirements and supply a statement with the product that certifies that the equipment complies with the rules and identifies the responsible party. This information can be included with other information provided to the user instead of being displayed on the device itself.
4. The Commission found the few arguments against merging DoC and verification (primarily that the Commission should not relax its testing requirements) did not diminish its overall confidence in the adopted SDoC process or its belief that streamlining the procedures by eliminating selected elements would not appreciably raise the risk of harmful interference from devices so approved.
5.
6.
7. The Commission had initially proposed not to require a specific logo be placed on the device (an element of the existing DoC requirements). It declined the suggestion of several commenters to allow the FCC logo to be used in lieu of the compliance statement, finding that the compliance statement conveys specific information about a product that a consumer cannot independently ascertain from the FCC logo, and that continuing to require the FCC logo would create an unnecessary burden on device manufacturers. Accordingly, it adopted a rule that allows the FCC logo to be physically placed on a device at the discretion of the responsible party consistent with the practices currently specified in §§ 15.19 and 18.209, and only if its device complies with the applicable equipment authorization rules. While the use of such a logo may provide conveniences for the responsible party, its presence will not obviate the need to provide required compliance information or maintain pertinent records related to device testing.
8.
9.
10. Under parts 15 and 18 of its rules, a responsible party can choose to use the certification process in lieu of DoC for the approval of certain unintentional radiators. The Commission explicitly provided in the SDoC rules that parties may opt to undergo the more rigorous certification process for the equipment authorization for any device. This regulatory option places no burdens on a responsible party, as it is only an option, and parties can later decide to revert to the SDoC procedures, if, for example they decide that the costs associated with certification outweighs the benefits.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21. The Commission stated that while the E-LABEL Act did not specifically prescribe the use of temporary external labels, it did not directly proscribe them either. It noted that the Act's legislative history stated that the purpose of the bill was “to promote the non-exclusive use of electronic labeling for certain [RF] devices.” It continued that, while the statutory language generically refers to physical labels, the legislative history makes it clear that Congress did not intend to frustrate or disrupt the underlying purpose of the equipment authorization program. Toward this end the Commission asserted that a temporary physical label would support ongoing oversight and provide everyone in the supply chain, including
22. The Commission accordingly adopted a limited version of its original labeling proposal, specifically requiring a device or its packaging be labeled such that the device can be identified as complying with the FCC's equipment authorization requirements. This could be accomplished via stick-on label, printing on the packaging, or other similar means. In many cases, the label might simply display be the FCC ID, or it can also be sufficient to identify the device by model or name, if the Web page with the relevant regulatory information is readily identifiable. The Commission found that this requirement would afford parties with considerably more flexibility than its existing rules—many of which require external labeling to be readily visible—as well as the existing KDB guidance and it would significantly reduce the potential burdens that parties had identified in the original proposal.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27. The responsible party can be the importer or the consignee or the customs broker. The Commission noted that customs brokers have the ability to decline to broker shipments for which no other party will take responsibility, and they can take added steps to ensure that their clients follow our rules for shipments they broker (
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37. In accordance with OFR's requirements, the discussion in this section summarizes ANSI standards. They can be viewed during normal business hours at the Commission address found in
38. (1) ANSI C63.26-2015, “American National Standard for Compliance Testing of Transmitters Used in Licensed Radio Services,” ANSI approved December 11, 2015, IBR approved for § 2.1041.
39. This standard, ANSI C63.26-2015, covers the procedures for testing a wide variety of licensed transmitters; including but not limited to transmitters operating under parts 22, 24, 25, 27, 90, 95 and 101 of the FCC Rules, transmitters subject to the general procedures in part 2 of the FCC Rules and procedures for transmitters not covered in the FCC Rules. The standard also addresses specific topics;
40. (2) ANSI C63.4-2014: “American National Standard for Methods of Measurement of Radio-Noise Emissions from Low-Voltage Electrical and Electronic Equipment in the Range of 9 kHz to 40 GHz,” ANSI approved June 13, 2014, IBR approved for § 15.35(a).
41. This standard, ANSI C63.4-2014, contains methods, instrumentation, and facilities for measurement of radiofrequency (RF) signals and noise emitted from electrical and electronic devices in the frequency range of 9 kHz to 40 GHz, as usable, for example, for compliance testing to U.S. (47 CFR part 15) and Industry Canada (ICES-003) regulatory requirements.
1. This document contains modified information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. On August 11, 2017, the Office of Management and Budget determined that the rule changes made in the
2. The Commission will send a copy of the
3. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) requires that an agency prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis for notice and comment rulemakings, unless the agency certifies that “the rule will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.” Accordingly, the Commission has prepared a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA), set forth in Appendix B of the
4. Accordingly,
5.
6.
Incorporation by reference, Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Telecommunications.
Communications equipment, Incorporation by reference, Labeling, Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Business and industry, Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Communications equipment, Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Communications equipment, Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Television.
Cable television, Television, Communications equipment, Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Communications equipment, Marine safety, Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Vessels.
Air transportation, Communications equipment, Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Administrative practice and procedure, Business and industry, Common carriers, Communications equipment, Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Communications equipment, Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission amends 47 CFR parts 2, 15, 18, 73, 74, 78, 80, 87, 90, and 101 as follows:
47 U.S.C. 154, 302a, 303, and 336, unless otherwise noted.
(b) * * *
(2) For devices subject to authorization under Supplier's Declaration of Conformity in accordance with the rules in subpart J of this part, the device complies with all applicable technical, labeling, identification and administrative requirements; or
(a) In order to carry out its responsibilities under the Communications Act and the various treaties and international regulations, and in order to promote efficient use of the radio spectrum, the Commission has developed technical standards for radio frequency equipment and parts or components thereof. The technical standards applicable to individual types of equipment are found in that part of the rules governing the service wherein the equipment is to be operated. In addition to the technical standards provided, the rules governing the service may require that such equipment be authorized under Supplier's Declaration of Conformity or receive a grant of certification from a Telecommunication Certification Body.
(b) Sections 2.906 through 2.1077 describe the procedure for a Supplier's Declaration of Conformity and the procedures to be followed in obtaining certification and the conditions attendant to such a grant.
(a) Supplier's Declaration of Conformity (SDoC) is a procedure where the responsible party, as defined in § 2.909, makes measurements or completes other procedures found acceptable to the Commission to ensure that the equipment complies with the appropriate technical standards. Submittal to the Commission of a sample unit or representative data demonstrating compliance is not required unless specifically requested pursuant to § 2.945.
(b) Supplier's Declaration of Conformity is applicable to all items subsequently marketed by the manufacturer, importer, or the responsible party that are identical, as defined in § 2.908, to the sample tested and found acceptable by the manufacturer.
(c) The responsible party may, if it desires, apply for Certification of a device subject to the Supplier's Declaration of Conformity. In such cases, all rules governing certification will apply to that device.
(a) In the case of equipment that requires the issuance of a grant of certification, the party to whom that grant of certification is issued is responsible for the compliance of the equipment with the applicable standards. If the radio frequency equipment is modified by any party other than the grantee and that party is not working under the authorization of the grantee pursuant to § 2.929(b), the party performing the modification is responsible for compliance of the product with the applicable administrative and technical provisions in this chapter.
(b) For equipment subject to Supplier's Declaration of Conformity the party responsible for the compliance of the equipment with the applicable standards, who must be located in the United States (see § 2.1077), is set forth as follows:
(1) The manufacturer or, if the equipment is assembled from individual component parts and the resulting system is subject to authorization under Supplier's Declaration of Conformity, the assembler.
(2) If the equipment by itself, or, a system is assembled from individual parts and the resulting system is subject to Supplier's Declaration of Conformity and that equipment or system is imported, the importer.
(3) Retailers or original equipment manufacturers may enter into an agreement with the responsible party designated in paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this section to assume the responsibilities to ensure compliance of equipment and become the new responsible party.
(4) If the radio frequency equipment is modified by any party not working under the authority of the responsible party, the party performing the modifications, if located within the U.S., or the importer, if the equipment
(c) If the end product or equipment is subject to both certification and Supplier's Declaration of Conformity (
(d) If, because of modifications performed subsequent to authorization, a new party becomes responsible for ensuring that a product complies with the technical standards and the new party does not obtain a new equipment authorization, the equipment shall be labeled, following the specifications in § 2.925(d), with the following: “This product has been modified by [insert name, address and telephone number or internet contact information of the party performing the modifications].”
(e) In the case of transfer of control of equipment, as in the case of sale or merger of the responsible party, the new entity shall bear the responsibility of continued compliance of the equipment.
The addition reads as follows:
(c) * * *
(3) ANSI C63.26-2015, “American National Standard of Procedures for Compliance Testing of Transmitters Used in Licensed Radio Services,” ANSI approved December 11, 2015, IBR approved for § 2.1041(b).
(a) Each equipment covered in an application for equipment authorization shall bear a label listing the following:
(3) The information required may be provided electronically pursuant to § 2.935.
(b) Any device subject to more than one equipment authorization procedure may be assigned a single FCC Identifier. However, a single FCC Identifier is required to be assigned to any device consisting of two or more sections assembled in a common enclosure, on a common chassis or circuit board, and with common frequency controlling circuits. Devices to which a single FCC Identifier has been assigned shall be identified pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section.
(1) Separate FCC Identifiers may be assigned to a device consisting of two or more sections assembled in a common enclosure, but constructed on separate sub-units or circuit boards with independent frequency controlling circuits. The FCC Identifier assigned to any transmitter section shall be preceded by the term
(2) Where terminal equipment subject to part 68 of this chapter, and a radiofrequency device subject to equipment authorization requirements are assembled in a common enclosure, the device shall be labeled in accordance with the Hearing Aid Compatibility-related requirements in part 68 of this chapter and the requirements published by the Administrative Council for Terminal Attachments, and shall also display the FCC Identifier in the format specified in paragraph (a) of this section.
(3) For a transceiver, the receiver portion of which is subject to Supplier's Declaration of Conformity pursuant to § 15.101 of this chapter, and the transmitter portion is subject to certification, the FCC Identifier required for the transmitter portion shall be preceded by the term FCC ID.
(f) The FCC Identifier including the term “
(e) No FCC Identifier may be used on equipment to be marketed unless that specific identifier has been validated by a grant of equipment certification. This shall not prohibit placement of an FCC identifier on a transceiver which includes a receiver subject to Suppliers Declaration of Conformity pursuant to § 15.101 of this chapter, provided that the transmitter portion of such transceiver is covered by a valid grant of certification. The FCC Identifier is uniquely assigned to the grantee and may not be placed on the equipment without authorization by the grantee. See § 2.803 for conditions applicable to the display at trade shows of equipment which has not been granted equipment authorization where such grant is required prior to marketing. Labeling of such equipment may include model or type numbers, but shall not include a purported FCC Identifier.
(a) A grant of certification is valid only when the device is labeled in accordance with § 2.925 and remains effective until set aside, revoked or withdrawn, rescinded, surrendered, or a termination date is otherwise established by the Commission.
(a) The responsible party warrants that each unit of equipment marketed under its grant of certification and bearing the identification specified in the grant will conform to the unit that was measured and that the data (design and rated operational characteristics) filed with the application for certification continues to be representative of the equipment being produced under such grant within the variation that can be expected due to quantity production and testing on a statistical basis.
(b)-(c) [Reserved]
(d) In determining compliance for devices subject to Supplier's Declaration of Conformity, the responsible party warrants that each unit of equipment marketed under Supplier's Declaration of Conformity will be identical to the unit tested and found acceptable with the standards and that the records maintained by the responsible party continue to reflect the equipment being produced under such Supplier's Declaration of Conformity within the variation that can be expected due to quantity production and testing on a statistical basis.
(e) For equipment subject to Supplier's Declaration of Conformity,
(a) Any radiofrequency device equipped with an integrated electronic display screen, or a radiofrequency device without an integrated screen that can only operate in conjunction with a device that has an electronic display screen, may display on the electronic display the FCC Identifier, any warning statements, or other information that the Commission's rules would otherwise require to be shown on a physical label attached to the device.
(b) Devices displaying their FCC Identifier, warning statements, or other information electronically must make this information readily accessible on the electronic display. Users must be provided with prominent instructions on how to access the information in the operating instructions, inserts in packaging material, or other easily accessible format at the time of purchase. The access instructions may also be provided via the product-related Web site, if such a Web site exists; the packaging material must provide specific instructions on how to locate the Web site information, and a copy of these instructions must be included in the application for equipment certification.
(c) Devices displaying their FCC Identifier, warning statements, or other information electronically must permit access to the information without requiring special codes, accessories or permissions and the access to this information must not require more than three steps from the device setting menu. The number of steps does not include those steps for use of screen locks, passcodes or similar security protection designed to control overall device access.
(d) The electronically displayed FCC Identifier, warning statements, or other information must be displayed electronically in a manner that is clearly legible without the aid of magnification;
(e) The necessary label information must be programmed by the responsible party and must be secured in such a manner that third-parties cannot modify it.
(f) Devices displaying their FCC Identifier, warning statements, or other information electronically must also be labeled, either on the device or its packaging, with the FCC Identifier or other information (such as a model number and identification of a Web page that hosts the relevant regulatory information) that permits the devices to be identified at the time of importation, marketing, and sales as complying with the FCC's equipment authorization requirements. Devices can be labeled with a stick-on label, printing on the packaging, a label on a protective bag, or by similar means. Any removable label shall be of a type intended to survive normal shipping and handling and must only be removed by the customer after purchase.
(a) For equipment subject to the equipment authorization procedures in this part, the responsible party shall maintain the records listed as follows:
(1) A record of the original design drawings and specifications and all changes that have been made that may affect compliance with the standards and the requirements of § 2.931.
(2) A record of the procedures used for production inspection and testing to ensure conformance with the standards and the requirements of § 2.931.
(3) A record of the test results that demonstrate compliance with the appropriate regulations in this chapter.
(b) For equipment subject to Supplier's Declaration of Conformity, the responsible party shall, in addition to the requirements in paragraph (a) of this section, maintain a record of the measurements made on an appropriate test site that demonstrates compliance with the applicable regulations in this chapter. The record shall:
(1) Indicate the actual date all testing was performed;
(2) State the name of the test laboratory, company, or individual performing the testing. The Commission may request additional information regarding the test site, the test equipment or the qualifications of the company or individual performing the tests;
(3) Contain a description of how the device was actually tested, identifying the measurement procedure and test equipment that was used;
(4) Contain a description of the equipment under test (EUT) and support equipment connected to, or installed within, the EUT;
(5) Identify the EUT and support equipment by trade name and model number and, if appropriate, by FCC Identifier and serial number;
(6) Indicate the types and lengths of connecting cables used and how they were arranged or moved during testing;
(7) Contain at least two drawings or photographs showing the test set-up for the highest line conducted emission and showing the test set-up for the highest radiated emission. These drawings or photographs must show enough detail to confirm other information contained in the test report. Any photographs used must clearly show the test configuration used;
(8) List all modifications, if any, made to the EUT by the testing company or individual to achieve compliance with the regulations in this chapter;
(9) Include all of the data required to show compliance with the appropriate regulations in this chapter;
(10) Contain, on the test report, the signature of the individual responsible for testing the product along with the name and signature of an official of the responsible party, as designated in § 2.909; and
(11) A copy of the compliance information, as described in § 2.1077, required to be provided with the equipment.
(c) The provisions of paragraph (a) of this section shall also apply to a manufacturer of equipment produced under an agreement with the original responsible party. The retention of the records by the manufacturer under these circumstances shall satisfy the grantee's responsibility under paragraph (a) of this section.
(d) For equipment subject to more than one equipment authorization procedure, the responsible party must retain the records required under all applicable provisions of this section.
(e) For equipment subject to rules that include a transition period, the records must indicate the particular transition provisions that were in effect when the equipment was determined to be compliant.
(f) For equipment subject to certification, records shall be retained for a one year period after the marketing of the associated equipment has been permanently discontinued, or until the conclusion of an investigation or a proceeding if the responsible party (or, under paragraph (c) of this section, the manufacturer) is officially notified that an investigation or any other administrative proceeding involving its equipment has been instituted. For all other records kept pursuant to this section, a two-year period shall apply.
(g) If radio frequency equipment is modified by any party other than the original responsible party, and that party is not working under the authorization of the original responsible party, the party performing the modifications is not required to obtain the original design drawings specified
(b) * * *
(1) The Commission may request that the responsible party or any other party marketing equipment subject to this chapter submit a sample of the equipment, or provide a voucher for the equipment to be obtained from the marketplace, to determine the extent to which production of such equipment continues to comply with the data filed by the applicant or on file with the responsible party for equipment subject to Supplier's Declaration of Conformity. The Commission may request that a sample or voucher to obtain a product from the marketplace be submitted to the Commission, or in the case of equipment subject to certification, to the TCB that certified the equipment.
(c)
(a) * * *
(3) Any measurement procedure acceptable to the Commission may be used to prepare data demonstrating compliance with the requirements of this chapter. Advisory information regarding measurement procedures can be found in the Commission's Knowledge Database, which is available at
(c) In the case of equipment requiring measurement procedures not specified in the references set forth in paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this section, the applicant shall submit a detailed description of the measurement procedures actually used.
(f) A composite system is a system that incorporates different devices contained either in a single enclosure or in separate enclosures connected by wire or cable. If the individual devices in a composite system are subject to different technical standards, each such device must comply with its specific standards. In no event may the measured emissions of the composite system exceed the highest level permitted for an individual component. Testing for compliance with the different standards shall be performed with all of the devices in the system functioning. If the composite system incorporates more than one antenna or other radiating source and these radiating sources are designed to emit at the same time, measurements of conducted and radiated emissions shall be performed with all radiating sources that are to be employed emitting.
(g) For each technical requirement in this chapter, the test report shall provide adequate test data to demonstrate compliance for the requirement, or in absence of test data, justification acceptable to the Commission as to why test data is not required.
(a) Equipment authorized under the certification procedure shall be tested at a laboratory that is accredited in accordance with paragraph (e) of this section.
(b) A laboratory that makes measurements of equipment subject to an equipment authorization under the certification procedure or Supplier's Declaration of Conformity shall compile a description of the measurement facilities employed.
(3) The description of the measurement facilities shall be retained by the party responsible for authorization of the equipment and provided to the Commission upon request.
(i) The party responsible for authorization of the equipment may rely upon the description of the measurement facilities retained by an independent laboratory that performed the tests. In this situation, the party responsible for authorization of the equipment is not required to retain a duplicate copy of the description of the measurement facilities.
(ii) No specific site calibration data is required for equipment that is authorized for compliance based on measurements performed at the installation site of the equipment. The description of the measurement facilities may be retained at the site at which the measurements were performed.
(e) A laboratory that has been accredited with a scope covering the measurements required for the types of equipment that it will test shall be deemed competent to test and submit test data for equipment subject to certification. Such a laboratory shall be accredited by a Commission recognized accreditation organization based on the International Organization for Standardization/International Electrotechnical Commission International Standard ISO/IEC 17025, (incorporated by reference, see § 2.910). The organization accrediting the laboratory must be recognized by the Commission's Office of Engineering and Technology, as indicated in § 0.241 of this chapter, to perform such accreditation based on International Standard ISO/IEC 17011 (incorporated by reference, see § 2.910). The frequency for reassessment of the test facility and the information that is required to be filed or retained by the testing party shall comply with the requirements established by the accrediting organization, but shall occur on an interval not to exceed two years.
(i) Radio frequency devices that would have been considered eligible for authorization under either the verification or Declaration of Conformity procedures that were in effect prior to November 2, 2017 may continue to be authorized until November 2, 2018 under the appropriate procedure in accordance with the requirements that were in effect immediately prior to November 2, 2017.
(j) All radio frequency devices that were authorized under the verification or Declaration of Conformity procedures prior to November 2, 2017 must continue to meet all requirements associated with the applicable procedure that were in effect immediately prior to November 2, 2017. If any changes are made to such devices
(a) For equipment operating under parts 15 and 18, the measurement procedures are specified in the rules governing the particular device for which certification is requested.
(b) For equipment operating in the authorized radio services, measurements are required as specified in §§ 2.1046, 2.1047, 2.1049, 2.1051, 2.1053, 2.1055 and 2.1057. The measurement procedures in ANSI C63.26-2015 (incorporated by reference, see § 2.910) are acceptable for performing compliance measurements for equipment types covered by the measurement standard. See also § 2.947 for acceptable measurement procedures.
The general provisions of this subpart shall apply to equipment subject to Supplier's Declaration of Conformity.
(a) Supplier's Declaration of Conformity signifies that the responsible party, as defined in § 2.909, has determined that the equipment has been shown to comply with the applicable technical standards if no unauthorized change is made in the equipment and if the equipment is properly maintained and operated. Compliance with these standards shall not be construed to be a finding by the responsible party with respect to matters not encompassed by the Commission's rules.
(b) Supplier's Declaration of Conformity by the responsible party, as defined in § 2.909, is effective until a termination date is otherwise established by the Commission.
(c) No person shall, in any advertising matter, brochure, etc., use or make reference to Supplier's Declaration of Conformity in a deceptive or misleading manner or convey the impression that such Supplier's Declaration of Conformity reflects more than a determination by the manufacturer, importer, integrator, or responsible party, as defined in § 2.909, that the device or product has been shown to be capable of complying with the applicable technical standards of the Commission's rules.
(a) Devices subject only to Supplier's Declaration of Conformity shall be uniquely identified by the party responsible for marketing or importing the equipment within the United States. However, the identification shall not be of a format which could be confused with the FCC Identifier required on certified equipment. The responsible party shall maintain adequate identification records to facilitate positive identification for each device.
(b) Devices subject to authorization under Supplier's Declaration of Conformity may be labeled with the following logo on a voluntary basis as a visual indication that the product complies with the applicable FCC requirements. The use of the logo on the device does not alleviate the requirement to provide the compliance information required by § 2.1077.
(a) If a product must be tested and authorized under Supplier's Declaration of Conformity, a compliance information statement shall be supplied with the product at the time of marketing or importation, containing the following information:
(1) Identification of the product,
(2) A compliance statement as applicable,
(3) The identification, by name, address and telephone number or Internet contact information, of the responsible party, as defined in § 2.909. The responsible party for Supplier's Declaration of Conformity must be located within the United States.
(b) If a product is assembled from modular components (
(1) Identification of the assembled product,
(2) Identification of the modular components used in the assembly. A modular component authorized under Supplier's Declaration of Conformity shall be identified as specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section. A modular component authorized under a grant of certification shall be identified by name and model number (if applicable) along with the FCC Identifier number.
(3) A statement that the product complies with part 15 of this chapter.
(4) The identification, by name, address and telephone number or Internet contact information, of the responsible party who assembled the product from modular components, as defined in § 2.909. The responsible party for Supplier's Declaration of Conformity must be located within the United States.
(5) Copies of the compliance information statements for each modular component used in the system that is authorized under Supplier's Declaration of Conformity.
(c) The compliance information statement shall be included in the user's manual or as a separate sheet. In cases where the manual is provided only in a form other than paper, such as on a computer disk or over the Internet, the information required by this section may be included in the manual in that alternative form, provided the user can reasonably be expected to have the capability to access information in that form. The information may be provided electronically as permitted in § 2.935.
(b) The rules in this subpart set out the conditions under which radio frequency devices as defined in § 2.801 that are capable of causing harmful
The provisions of this subpart do not apply to the importation of:
(a) Unintentional radiators that are exempted from technical standards and other requirements as specified in § 15.103 of this chapter or utilize low level battery power and that do not contain provisions for operation while connected to AC power lines.
(b) Radio frequency devices manufactured and assembled in the U.S.A. that meet applicable FCC technical standards and that have not been modified or received further assembly.
(c) Radio frequency devices previously properly imported that have been exported for repair and re-imported for use.
(d) Subassemblies, parts, or components of radio frequency devices unless they constitute an essentially completed device which requires only the addition of cabinets, knobs, speakers, or similar minor attachments before marketing or use. This exclusion does not apply to computer circuit boards that are actually peripheral devices as defined in § 15.3(r) of this chapter and all devices that, by themselves, are subject to FCC marketing rules.
(a) No radio frequency device may be imported into the Customs territory of the United States unless the importer or ultimate consignee, or their designated customs broker, determines that the device meets one of the conditions for entry set out in § 2.1204.
(b) Failure to satisfy at least one of the entry conditions for importation of radio frequency devices may result in refused entry, refused withdrawal for consumption, required redelivery to the Customs port, and other administrative, civil and criminal remedies provided by law.
(c) Whoever makes a determination pursuant to § 2.1203(a) must provide, upon request made within one year of the date of entry, documentation on how an imported radio frequency device was determined to be in compliance with Commission requirements.
(a) * * *
(4) * * *
(i) 400 or fewer devices.
(ii) Prior to importation of a greater number of units than shown above, written approval must be obtained from the Chief, Office of Engineering and Technology, FCC.
(iii) Distinctly different models of a product and separate generations of a particular model under development are considered to be separate devices.
(7) Three or fewer radio frequency devices are being imported for the individual's personal use and are not intended for sale. Unless exempted otherwise in this chapter, the permitted devices must be from one or more of the following categories:
(i) Unintentional radiator as defined in part 15 of this chapter which may include radio receivers, computers or other Class B digital devices in part 15 of this chapter.
(ii) Consumer ISM equipment as defined in part 18 of this chapter.
(iii) Intentional radiators subject to part 15 rules only if they can be used in client modes as specified in § 15.202 of this chapter.
(iv) Transmitters operating under rules which require a station license as subscribers permitted under § 1.903 of this chapter and operated under the authority of an operator license issued by the Commission.
47 U.S.C. 154, 302a, 303, 304, 307, 336, 544a, and 549.
(c) Unless specifically exempted, the operation or marketing of an intentional or unintentional radiator that is not in compliance with the administrative and technical provisions in this part, including prior equipment authorization, as appropriate, is prohibited under section 302 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and subpart I of part 2 of this chapter. The equipment authorization procedures are detailed in subpart J of part 2 of this chapter.
(a) In addition to the requirements in part 2 of this chapter, a device subject to certification, or Supplier's Declaration of Conformity shall be labeled as follows:
(1) Receivers associated with the operation of a licensed radio service,
This device complies with part 15 of the FCC Rules. Operation is subject to the condition that this device does not cause harmful interference.
(2) A stand-alone cable input selector switch, shall bear the following statement in a conspicuous location on the device:
This device complies with part 15 of the FCC Rules for use with cable television service.
(3) All other devices shall bear the following statement in a conspicuous location on the device:
This device complies with part 15 of the FCC Rules. Operation is subject to the following two conditions: (1) This device may not cause harmful interference, and (2) this device must accept any interference received, including interference that may cause undesired operation.
(4) Where a device is constructed in two or more sections connected by wires and marketed together, the statement specified under paragraph (a) of this section is required to be affixed only to the main control unit.
(5) When the device is so small or for such use that it is impracticable to label it with the statement specified under paragraph (a) of this section in a font that is four-point or larger, and the device does not have a display that can show electronic labeling, then the information required by this paragraph shall be placed in the user manual and must also either be placed on the device packaging or on a removable label attached to the device.
(b) [Reserved]
(b) At least two units of the kit shall be assembled in exact accordance with the instructions supplied with the product to be marketed. If all components required to fully complete the kit (other than those specified in paragraph (a) of this section that are needed for compliance with the
(1) The measurement data required for a TV interface device subject to certification shall be obtained for each of the two units and submitted with an application for certification pursuant to subpart J of part 2 of this chapter.
(2) The measurement data required for a TV interface device subject to Supplier's Declaration of Conformity shall be obtained for the units tested and retained on file pursuant to the provisions of subpart J of part 2 of this chapter.
(c) A copy of the exact instructions that will be provided for assembly of the device shall be submitted with an application for certification. Those parts that are not normally furnished shall be detailed in the application for certification.
(a) Equipment marketed to a consumer must be capable of complying with the necessary regulations in the configuration in which the equipment is marketed. Where special accessories, such as shielded cables and/or special connectors, are required to enable an unintentional or intentional radiator to comply with the emission limits in this part, the equipment must be marketed with,
(d) The Commission, from time to time, may request the party responsible for compliance, including an importer, to submit to the FCC Laboratory in Columbia, Maryland, various equipment to determine that the equipment continues to comply with the applicable standards. Shipping costs to the Commission's Laboratory and return shall be borne by the responsible party. Testing by the Commission will be performed using the measurement procedure(s) that was in effect at the time the equipment was authorized.
(a) * * *
(4) * * *
Digital devices tested to show compliance with the provisions of § 15.109(g)(2) must be tested following the ANSI C63.4-2014 procedure described in paragraph (a)(4) of this section.
(b) All parties making compliance measurements on equipment subject to the requirements of this part are urged to use these measurement procedures. Any party using other procedures should ensure that such other procedures can be relied on to produce measurement results compatible with the FCC measurement procedures. The description of the measurement procedure used in testing the equipment for compliance and a list of the test equipment actually employed shall be made part of an application for certification or included with the data required to be retained by the party responsible for devices authorized pursuant to Supplier's Declaration of Conformity.
(d) Field strength measurements shall be made, to the extent possible, on an open area test site. Test sites other than open area test sites may be employed if they are properly calibrated so that the measurement results correspond to what would be obtained from an open area test site. In the case of equipment for which measurements can be performed only at the installation site, such as perimeter protection systems, carrier current systems, and systems employing a “leaky” coaxial cable as an antenna, measurements for Supplier's Declaration of Conformity or for obtaining a grant of equipment authorization shall be performed at a minimum of three installations that can be demonstrated to be representative of typical installation sites.
(f) * * *
(4) The applicant for a grant of certification shall specify the extrapolation method used in the application filed with the Commission. For equipment subject to Supplier's Declaration of Conformity, this information shall be retained with the measurement data.
(h) A composite system, as defined in § 2.947(f) of this chapter, that incorporates a carrier current system shall be tested as if the carrier current system were incorporated in a separate device; that is, the device shall be tested for compliance with whatever rules would apply to the device were the carrier current system not incorporated, and the carrier current system shall be tested for compliance with the rules applicable to carrier current systems.
(j) If the equipment under test consists of a central control unit and an external or internal accessory(ies) (peripheral) and the party declaring compliance of the equipment or applying for a grant of equipment authorization manufactures or assembles the central control unit and at least one of the accessory devices that can be used with that control unit, testing of the control unit and/or the accessory(ies) must be performed using the devices manufactured or assembled by that party, in addition to any other needed devices which the party does not manufacture or assemble. If the party declaring compliance of the equipment or applying for a grant of equipment authorization does not manufacture or assemble the central control unit and at least one of the accessory devices that can be used with that control unit or the party can demonstrate that the central control unit or accessory(ies) normally would be
(k) Composite systems (
Power supplies and CPU boards used with personal computers and for which separate authorizations are required to be obtained shall be tested in accordance with the specific procedures published or otherwise authorized by the Commission.
The conducted and radiated emission limits shown in this part are based on the following, unless otherwise specified in this part:
(a) On any frequency or frequencies below or equal to 1000 MHz, the limits shown are based on measuring equipment employing a CISPR quasi-peak detector function and related measurement bandwidths, unless otherwise specified. The specifications for the measuring instrumentation using the CISPR quasi-peak detector can be found in ANSI C63.4-2014, clause 4 (incorporated by reference, see § 15.38). As an alternative to CISPR quasi-peak measurements, the responsible party, at its option, may demonstrate compliance with the emission limits using measuring equipment employing a peak detector function as long at the same bandwidth as indicated for CISPR quasi-peak measurements are employed.
(b) Unless otherwise specified, on any frequency or frequencies above 1000 MHz, the radiated emission limits are based on the use of measurement instrumentation employing an average detector function. Unless otherwise specified, measurements above 1000 MHz shall be performed using a minimum resolution bandwidth of 1 MHz. When average radiated emission measurements are specified in this part, including average emission measurements below 1000 MHz, there also is a limit on the peak level of the radio frequency emissions. Unless otherwise specified,
(c) Unless otherwise specified,
(c) All radio frequency devices that are authorized on or after July 12, 2004 under the certification, or Supplier's Declaration of Conformity procedures (or the prior verification or declaration of conformity procedures, as applicable) shall comply with the conducted limits specified in § 15.107 or § 15.207 as appropriate. All radio frequency devices that are manufactured or imported on or after July 11, 2005 shall comply with the conducted limits specified in § 15.107 or § 15.207, as appropriate. Equipment authorized, imported or manufactured prior to these dates shall comply with the conducted limits specified in § 15.107 or § 15.207, as appropriate, or with the conducted limits that were in effect immediately prior to September 9, 2002.
(g) * * *
(1) ANSI C63.4-2014: “American National Standard for Methods of Measurement of Radio-Noise Emissions from Low-Voltage Electrical and Electronic Equipment in the Range of 9 kHz to 40 GHz,” ANSI approved June 13, 2014, IBR approved for § 15.35(a).
(a) Except as otherwise exempted in §§ 15.23, 15.103, and 15.113, unintentional radiators shall be authorized prior to the initiation of marketing, pursuant to the procedures for certification or Supplier's Declaration of Conformity (SDoC) given in subpart J of part 2 of this chapter, as follows:
(b) Only those receivers that operate (tune) within the frequency range of 30-960 MHz, CB receivers and radar detectors are subject to the authorizations shown in paragraph (a) of this section. Receivers operating above 960 MHz or below 30 MHz, except for radar detectors and CB receivers, are exempt from complying with the technical provisions of this part but are subject to § 15.5.
(c) Personal computers shall be authorized in accordance with one of the following methods:
(1) The specific combination of CPU board, power supply and enclosure is tested together and authorized under Supplier's Declaration of Conformity or a grant of certification;
(2) The personal computer is authorized under Supplier's Declaration of Conformity or a grant of certification, and the CPU board or power supply in that computer is replaced with a CPU board or power supply that has been separately authorized under Supplier's Declaration of Conformity or a grant of certification; or
(3) The CPU board and power supply used in the assembly of a personal computer have been separately authorized under Supplier's Declaration of Conformity or a grant of certification; and
(4) Personal computers assembled using either of the methods specified in paragraphs (c)(2) or (c)(3) of this section must, by themselves, also be authorized under Supplier's Declaration of Conformity if they are marketed. However, additional testing is not required for this Supplier's Declaration of Conformity, provided the procedures in § 15.102(b) are followed.
(d) Peripheral devices, as defined in § 15.3(r), shall be authorized under Supplier's Declaration of Conformity, or a grant of certification, as appropriate, prior to marketing. Regardless of the provisions of paragraphs (a) or (c) of this section, if a CPU board, power supply, or peripheral device will always be marketed with a specific personal computer, it is not necessary to obtain a separate authorization for that product provided the specific combination of personal computer, peripheral device, CPU board and power supply has been authorized under Supplier's Declaration of Conformity or a grant of certification as a personal computer.
(1) No authorization is required for a peripheral device or a subassembly that is sold to an equipment manufacturer for further fabrication; that manufacturer is responsible for obtaining the necessary authorization prior to further marketing to a vendor or to a user.
(2) Power supplies and CPU boards that have not been separately authorized and are designed for use with personal computers may be imported and marketed only to a personal computer equipment manufacturer that has indicated, in writing, to the seller or importer that they will obtain Supplier's Declaration of Conformity or a grant of certification for the personal computer employing these components.
(e) Subassemblies to digital devices are not subject to the technical standards in this part unless they are marketed as part of a system in which case the resulting system must comply with the applicable regulations. Subassemblies include:
(1) Devices that are enclosed solely within the enclosure housing the digital device, except for: Power supplies used in personal computers; devices included under the definition of a peripheral device in § 15.3(r); and personal computer CPU boards, as defined in § 15.3(bb);
(2) CPU boards, as defined in § 15.3(bb), other than those used in personal computers, that are marketed without an enclosure or power supply; and
(3) Switching power supplies that are separately marketed and are solely for use internal to a device other than a personal computer.
(b) * * *
(4) If the system is marketed, the resulting equipment combination is authorized under Supplier's Declaration of Conformity pursuant to § 15.101(c)(4) and a compliance information statement, as described in § 2.1077(b) of this chapter, is supplied with the system. Marketed systems shall also comply with the labeling requirements in § 15.19 and must be supplied with the information required under §§ 15.21, 15.27 and 15.105; and
(c) * * *
(3) Subsequent to the testing of its initial unidirectional digital cable product model, a manufacturer or importer is not required to have other
(5) * * *
(iii) Subsequent to the successful testing of its initial M-UDCP, a manufacturer or importer is not required to have other M-UDCP models tested at a qualified test facility for compliance with M-UDCP-PICS-I04-080225, “Uni-Directional Cable Product Supporting M-Card: Multiple Profiles; Conformance Checklist: PICS,” February 25, 2008 (incorporated by reference, see § 15.38) unless the first model tested was not a television, in which event the first television shall be tested as provided in paragraph (c)(5)(i) of this section. The manufacturer or importer shall ensure that all subsequent models of M-UDCPs comply with M-UDCP-PICS-I04-080225, “Uni-Directional Cable Product Supporting M-Card: Multiple Profiles; Conformance Checklist: PICS,” February 25, 2008 (incorporated by reference, see § 15.38) and all other applicable rules and standards. The manufacturer or importer shall maintain records indicating such compliance in accordance with Supplier's Declaration of Conformity requirements in part 2, subpart J of this chapter. For each M-UDCP model, the manufacturer or importer shall further submit documentation demonstrating compliance with M-UDCP-PICS-I04-080225, “Uni-Directional Cable Product Supporting M-Card: Multiple Profiles; Conformance Checklist: PICS,” February 25, 2008 (incorporated by reference, see § 15.38) to the qualified test facility.
(a) Intentional radiators operated as carrier current systems, devices operated under the provisions of §§ 15.211, 15.213, and 15.221, and devices operating below 490 kHz in which all emissions are at least 40 dB below the limits in § 15.209 are subject to Suppliers Declaration of Conformity pursuant to the procedures in subpart J of part 2 of this chapter prior to marketing.
(b) Except as otherwise exempted in paragraph (c) of this section and in § 15.23, all intentional radiators operating under the provisions of this part shall be certified by the Telecommunication Certification Bodies pursuant to the procedures in subpart J of part 2 of this chapter prior to marketing.
(c) For devices such as perimeter protection systems which, in accordance with § 15.31(d), are required to be measured at the installation site, each application for certification must be accompanied by a statement indicating that the system has been tested at three installations and found to comply at each installation. Until such time as certification is granted, a given installation of a system that was measured for the submission for certification will be considered to be in compliance with the provisions of this chapter, including the marketing regulations in subpart I of part 2 of this chapter, if tests at that installation show the system to be in compliance with the relevant technical requirements. Similarly, where measurements must be performed on site for equipment subject to Supplier's Declaration of Conformity, a given installation that has been found compliant with the applicable standards will be considered to be in compliance with the provisions of this chapter, including the marketing regulations in subpart I of part 2 of this chapter.
(a) * * *
(4) The manufacturer and type of Access BPL equipment and its associated FCC ID number, or, in the case of Access BPL equipment that has not been subject to certification in the past, the Trade Name and Model Number, as specified on the equipment label.
47 U.S.C. 4, 301, 302, 303, 304, 307.
(a) Consumer ISM equipment, unless otherwise specified, must be authorized under either the Supplier's Declaration of Conformity or the certification procedure prior to use or marketing. An application for certification shall be filed with a Telecommunication Certification Body (TCB), pursuant to the relevant sections in part 2, subpart J of this chapter.
(b) Consumer ultrasonic equipment generating less than 500 watts and operating below 90 kHz, and non-consumer ISM equipment shall be subject to Supplier's Declaration of Conformity, in accordance with the relevant sections of part 2, subpart J of this chapter.
(c) Grants of equipment authorization issued, as well as on-site certifications performed, before March 1, 1986, remain in effect and no further action is required.
Each device for which a grant of equipment authorization is issued under this part shall be identified pursuant to the applicable provisions of subpart J of part 2 of this chapter.
(a) Equipment authorized under Supplier's Declaration of Conformity shall include a compliance statement that contains the information set forth in § 2.1077 of this chapter and a statement identical or similar to the following: “
(b) The compliance information may be placed in the instruction manual, on a separate sheet, on the packaging, or electronically as permitted under § 2.935 of this chapter. There is no specific format for this information.
The measurement techniques used to determine compliance with the technical requirements of this part are set out in FCC MP-5, “FCC Methods of Measurements of Radio Noise Emissions from Industrial, Scientific, and Medical equipment,” or compliance measurements made in accordance with the specific procedures otherwise authorized by the Commission.
47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 309, 310, 334, 336, and 339.
The revisions read as follows:
(a) Antenna monitors shall be approved with Supplier's Declaration of Conformity that demonstrates compliance with the technical requirements in this section. The procedure for Supplier's Declaration of Conformity is specified in subpart J of part 2 of this chapter.
The verification procedure has been replaced by Supplier's Declaration of Conformity. Antenna monitors previously authorized under subpart J of part 2 of this chapter may remain in use. See § 2.950 of this chapter.
(b) * * *
(10) Complete and correct schematic diagrams and operating instructions shall be retained by the party responsible for Supplier's Declaration of Conformity of the equipment and submitted to the FCC upon request. For the purpose of equipment authorization, these diagrams and instructions shall be considered as part of the monitor.
The revisions read as follows:
(a)(1) An AM, FM, or TV transmitter shall be approved for compliance with the requirements of this part following the Supplier's Declaration of Conformity procedures described in subpart J of part 2 of this chapter.
the verification procedure has been replaced by Supplier's Declaration of Conformity. AM, FM, and TV transmitters previously authorized under subpart J of part 2 of this chapter may remain in use. See § 2.950(j) of this chapter.
(2) An LPFM transmitter shall be certified for compliance with the requirements of this part following the procedures described in part 2 of this chapter.
(b) A permittee or licensee planning to modify a transmitter which has been certified or approved with Supplier's Declaration of Conformity must follow the requirements contained in § 73.1690.
(e) Additional rules covering certification and Supplier's Declaration of Conformity, modification of authorized transmitters, and withdrawal of a grant of authorization are contained in part 2 of this chapter.
The revision reads as follows:
(c) A licensee may, without further authority or notification to the FCC, replace an existing main transmitter or install additional main transmitter(s) for use with the authorized antenna if the replacement or additional transmitter(s) has been approved with Supplier's Declaration of Conformity. Within 10 days after commencement of regular use of the replacement or additional transmitter(s), equipment performance measurements, as prescribed for the type of station are to be completed.
The verification procedure has been replaced by Supplier's Declaration of Conformity. Transmitters previously authorized under subpart J of this chapter may remain in use. See § 2.950 of this chapter.
Pending the availability of AM broadcast transmitters that are authorized for use in the 1605-1705 kHz band, transmitters that are approved or verified for use in the 535-1605 kHz band may be utilized in the 1605-1705 kHz band if it is shown that the requirements of § 73.44 have been met. Equipment authorization for the transmitter will supersede the applicability of this note.
47 U.S.C. 154, 302a, 303, 307, 309, 310, 336 and 554.
(d) * * *
(4) Stations licensed pursuant to an application filed before March 17, 2005, using equipment not conforming with the emission limitations specified above, may continue to operate indefinitely in accordance with the terms of their current authorizations, subject to periodic renewal. existing equipment and equipment of product lines in production before April 16, 2003, authorized via certification or Declaration of Conformity before March 17, 2005, for equipment not conforming to the emission limitations requirements specified above, may continue to be manufactured and/or marketed, but may not be authorized for use under a station license except at stations licensed pursuant to an application filed before March 17, 2005. Any non-conforming equipment authorized under a station license, and replaced on or after March 17, 2005, must be replaced by conforming equipment.
the Declaration of Conformity procedure has been replaced by the Supplier's Declaration of Conformity procedure. See § 2.950 of this chapter.
Each authorization for aural broadcast STL, ICR, and booster stations shall require the use of equipment which has received a grant of certification or authorized under a Supplier's Declaration of Conformity. Equipment which has not been approved under the equipment authorization program and which was in service prior to July 1, 1993, may be retained solely for temporary uses necessary to restore or maintain regular service provided by approved equipment, because the main or primary unit has failed or requires servicing. Such temporary uses may not interfere with or impede the establishment of other aural broadcast auxiliary links and may not occur during more than 720 cumulative hours per year. Should interference occur, the
The Declaration of Conformity procedure has been replaced by Supplier's Declaration of Conformity. Equipment previously authorized under subpart J of part 2 of this chapter may remain in use. See § 2.950 to this chapter.
Consistent with the note to § 74.502(a), grandfathered equipment in the 942-944 MHz band and STL/ICR users of these frequencies in Puerto Rico are also required to come into compliance by July 1, 1993. The backup provisions described above apply to these stations also.
The revision reads as follows:
(c) * * *
(4) Stations licensed pursuant to an application filed before March 17, 2005, using equipment not conforming with the emission limitations specified above, may continue to operate indefinitely in accordance with the terms of their current authorizations, subject to periodic renewal. Existing equipment and equipment of product lines in production before April 16, 2003, authorized via certification or Declaration of Conformity before March 17, 2005, for equipment not conforming to the emission limitations requirements specified above, may continue to be manufactured and/or marketed, but may not be authorized for use under a station license except at stations licensed pursuant to an application filed before March 17, 2005. Any non-conforming equipment authorized under a station license, and replaced on or after March 17, 2005, must be replaced by conforming equipment.
The Declaration of Conformity procedure has been replaced by Supplier's Declaration of Conformity. See § 2.950 of this chapter.
The revisions read as follows:
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, all transmitting equipment first marketed for use under this subpart or placed into service after October 1, 1981, must be authorized under the certification procedure or Declaration of Conformity procedure, as detailed in paragraph (f) of this section. Equipment which is used at a station licensed prior to October 1, 1985, which has not been authorized as detailed in paragraph (f) of this section, may continue to be used by the licensee or its successors or assignees, provided that if operation of such equipment causes harmful interference due to its failure to comply with the technical standards set forth in this subpart, the FCC may, at its discretion, require the licensee to take such corrective action as is necessary to eliminate the interference. However, such equipment may not be further marketed or reused under part 74 after October 1, 1985.
The verification procedure has been replaced by Supplier's Declaration of Conformity. Equipment previously authorized under subpart J of part 2 of this chapter may remain in use. See § 2.950 of this chapter.
(b) Certification or Supplier's Declaration of Conformity is not required for transmitters used in conjunction with TV pickup stations operating with a peak output power not greater than 250 mW. Pickup stations operating in excess of 250 mW licensed pursuant to applications accepted for filing prior to October 1, 1980 may continue operation subject to periodic renewal. If operation of such equipment causes harmful interference the FCC may, at its discretion, require the licensee to take such corrective action as is necessary to eliminate the interference.
(d) Any manufacturer of a transmitter to be used in this service may authorize the equipment under the certification or Supplier's Declaration of Conformity procedures, as appropriate, following the procedures set forth in subpart J of part 2 of this chapter.
(f) Transmitters designed to be used exclusively for a TV STL station, a TV intercity relay station, a TV translator relay station, or a TV microwave booster station, shall be authorized under Supplier's Declaration of Conformity. All other transmitters will be authorized under the certification procedure.
The revision and addition read as follows:
The Declaration of Conformity procedure has been replaced by Supplier's Declaration of Conformity. See § 2.950 of this chapter.
(a) FM translator and booster transmitting apparatus, and exciters employed to provide a locally generated and modulated input signal to translator and booster equipment, used by stations authorized under the provisions of this subpart must be certified upon the request of any manufacturer of transmitters in accordance with this section and subpart J of part 2 of this chapter. In addition, FM translator and booster stations may use FM broadcast transmitting apparatus authorized via Supplier's Declaration of Conformity or approved under the provisions of part 73 of this chapter.
The Declaration of Conformity procedure has been replaced by Supplier's Declaration of Conformity.
(c) The following requirements must be met before translator, booster or exciter equipment will be certified in accordance with this section:
47 U.S.C. 2, 3, 4, 301, 303, 307, 308, 309, 48 Stat., as amended, 1064, 1065, 1066, 1081, 1082, 1083, 1084, 1085; 47 U.S.C. 152, 153, 154, 301, 303, 307, 308, 309.
(a) Applications for new cable television relay stations, other than fixed stations, will not be accepted unless the equipment specified therein has been certified in accordance with subpart J of part 2 of this chapter. In the case of fixed stations, the equipment must be authorized under Supplier's Declaration of Conformity for use pursuant to the provisions of this subpart. Transmitters designed for use in the 31.0 to 31.3 GHz band shall be authorized under Supplier's Declaration of Conformity.
The verification procedure has been replaced by Supplier's Declaration of Conformity. Equipment previously authorized under subpart J of part 2 of this chapter may remain in use. See § 2.950 of this chapter.
(2) Neither certification nor Supplier's Declaration of Conformity is required for the following transmitters:
Secs. 4, 303, 307(e), 309, and 332, 48 Stat. 1066, 1082, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 307(e), 309, and 332, unless otherwise noted. Interpret or apply 48 Stat. 1064-1068, 1081-1105, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 151-155, 301-609; 3 UST 3450, 3 UST 4726, 12 UST 2377.
(a) Each transmitter authorized in a station in the maritime services after September 30, 1986, except as indicated in paragraphs (g), (h) and (i) of this section, must be certified by the Commission for part 80 operations. The procedures for certification are contained in part 2 of this chapter. Transmitters of a model that have received equipment authorization before October 1, 1986 will be considered acceptable for use in ship or coast stations as appropriate.
(f) Transmitters certified for single sideband suppressed carrier radiotelephone transmissions may be used for facsimile transmissions without filing for a certification modification provided the transmitters retain certification and comply with the applicable standards in this part.
(g) Manufacturers of ship earth station transmitters intended for use in the INMARSAT space segment are subject to Supplier's Declaration of Conformity pursuant to the procedures given in subpart J of part 2 of this chapter. Such equipment must be approved in accordance with the technical requirements provided by INMARSAT and must be type approved by INMARSAT for use in the INMARSAT space segment. The ship earth station input/output parameters, the data obtained when the equipment is integrated in system configuration and the pertinent method of test procedures that are used for type approval of the station model which are essential for the compatible operation of that station in the INMARSAT space segment must be disclosed by the manufacturer upon request of the FCC. Witnessing of the type approval tests and the disclosure of the ship earth station equipment design or any other information of a proprietary nature will be at the discretion of the ship earth station manufacturer.
The verification procedure has been replaced by Supplier's Declaration of Conformity. Equipment previously authorized under subpart J of part 2 of this chapter may remain in use. See § 2.950 of this chapter.
(l) Ship station transmitters may be certified for emissions not shown in § 80.205. However, such emissions are not authorized for use in the United States or for communications with U.S. coast stations.
(m) * * *
(2) A transmitter and any internal device capable of transmitting a synthesized voice message must be certified as an integral unit.
(a) All equipment specified in § 80.1101 must be certified in accordance with subpart J of part 2 of this chapter specifically for GMDSS use, except for equipment used in the INMARSAT space segment which must be type-approved by INMARSAT and are subject to Supplier's Declaration of Conformity pursuant to the procedures in subpart J of part 2 of this chapter specifically for GMDSS use. The technical parameters of the equipment must conform to the performance standards as specified in § 80.1101. For emergency position-indicating radiobeacons operating on 406.0-406.1 MHz (406.0-406.1 MHz EPIRBs) that were authorized prior to April 15, 1992, and meet the requirements of § 80.1101, the manufacturer may attest by letter that the equipment (indicate FCC ID#) meets the requirements of § 80.1101 and request that it be denoted as approved for GMDSS use.
(c) Applicants using Supplier's Declaration of Conformity must attest that the equipment complies with performance standards as specified in § 80.1101 and, where applicable, that measurements have been made that demonstrate the necessary compliance. Submission of representative data demonstrating compliance is not required unless requested by the Commission. An application must include the items listed in §§ 2.931 and 2.938 of this chapter and a copy of the type-approval certification indicating that equipment meets GMDSS standards and includes all peripheral equipment associated with the specific unit under review.
The verification procedure has been replaced by Supplier's Declaration of Conformity. Equipment previously authorized under subpart J of part 2 of this chapter may remain in use. See § 2.950 of this chapter.
47 U.S.C. 154, 303 and 307(e), unless otherwise noted.
(e) Supplier's Declaration of Conformity for ELTs capable of operating on the frequency 406.0-406.1 MHz must include sufficient documentation to show that the ELT meets the requirements of § 87.199(a). A letter notifying the FAA of the ELT Supplier's Declaration of Conformity must be mailed to: FAA, Office of Spectrum Policy and Management, ASR-1, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591.
The verification procedure has been replaced by Supplier's Declaration of Conformity. Equipment previously authorized under subpart J of part 2 of this chapter may remain in use. See § 2.950 of this chapter.
(c) As part of its Supplier's Declaration of Conformity a 406.0-406.1 MHz ELT, the ELT must be certified by a test facility recognized by one of the COSPAS/SARSAT Partners that the equipment satisfies the design characteristics associated with the COSPAS/SARSAT document COSPAS/SARSAT 406 MHz Distress Beacon Type Approval Standard (C/S T.007). Additionally, an independent test facility must certify that the ELT complies with the electrical and environmental standards associated with the RTCA Recommended Standards.
The verification procedure has been replaced by Supplier's Declaration of Conformity. Equipment previously authorized under subpart J of part 2 of this chapter may remain in use. See § 2.950 of this chapter.
(d) The procedures for Supplier's Declaration of Conformity are contained in subpart J of part 2 of this chapter.
Sections 4(i), 11, 303(g), 303(r), and 332(c)(7) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 161, 303(g), 303(r), and 332(c)(7), and Title VI of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, Pub. L. 112-96, 126 Stat. 156.
The revisions read as follows:
(a) Except as specified in paragraphs (b) and (l) of this section, each transmitter utilized for operation under this part and each transmitter marketed as set forth in § 2.803 of this chapter must be of a type which has been certified for use under this part.
(e) Except as provided in paragraph (g) of this section, transmitters designed to operate above 25 MHz shall not be certified for use under this part if the operator can program and transmit on frequencies, other than those programmed by the manufacturer, service or maintenance personnel, using the equipment's external operation controls.
(g) * * *
(2) Requires the transmitter to be programmed for frequencies through controls normally inaccessible to the operator; or
(j) * * *
(7) Transmitters designed only for one-way paging operations may be certified with up to a 25 kHz bandwidth and are exempt from the spectrum efficiency requirements of paragraphs (j)(3) and (j)(5) of this section.
(l) Ocean buoy and wildlife tracking transmitters operating in the band 40.66-40.70 MHz or 216-220 MHz under the provisions of § 90.248 shall be authorized under Supplier's Declaration of Conformity pursuant to subpart J of part 2 of this chapter.
The verification procedure has been replaced by Supplier's Declaration of Conformity. Equipment previously authorized under subpart J of part 2 of this chapter may remain in use. See § 2.950 of this chapter.
47 U.S.C. 154, 303.
(a) Unless specified otherwise, transmitters used in the private operational fixed and common carrier fixed point-to-point microwave and point-to-multipoint services under this part must be a type that has been approved for compliance under Supplier's Declaration of Conformity.
The verification procedure has been replaced by Supplier's Declaration of Conformity. Equipment previously authorized under subpart J of part 2 of this chapter may remain in use. See § 2.950 of this chapter.
(b) Any transmitter to be produced for use under the rules of this part may be approved under the equipment authorization procedures set forth in part 2 of this chapter.
(d) A transmitter presently shown on an instrument of authorization, which operates on an assigned frequency in the 890-940 MHz band and has not received a grant of certification, may continue to be used by the licensee without certification provided such transmitter continues otherwise to comply with the applicable requirements of this chapter.
(e) Certification or Supplier's Declaration of Conformity is not required for portable transmitters operating with peak output power not greater than 250 mW. If operation of such equipment causes harmful interference the FCC may, at its discretion, require the licensee to take such corrective action as is necessary to eliminate the interference.
(g) * * *
(1) The 0.001% frequency tolerance requirement for digital systems in § 101.107(a) or the 0.03-0.003% frequency tolerance for analog systems; and
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Temporary rule; emergency action.
NMFS issues this final temporary rule to establish management measures to allow for the limited harvest and possession of red snapper in or from the South Atlantic exclusive economic zone (EEZ) in 2017 by changing the process used to set the annual catch limit (ACL), as requested by the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council). This rule also announces the opening and closing dates of the 2017 recreational fishing season and the opening date for the 2017 commercial fishing season for red snapper. The intended effect of this temporary rule is to reduce, to the extent practicable, existing adverse socio-economic impacts to fishermen and fishing communities that utilize the red snapper portion of the snapper-grouper fishery, without allowing overfishing or preventing the stock from rebuilding. Additionally, limited commercial and recreational harvest of red snapper in 2017 will provide an opportunity to collect fishery-dependent data that will be useful for future red snapper stock assessments and management decisions.
This temporary rule is effective November 2, 2017, through December 31, 2017. The recreational red snapper season opens at 12:01 a.m., local time, on November 3, 2017, and closes at 12:01 a.m., local time, on November 6, 2017; then reopens at 12:01 a.m., local time, on November 10, 2017, and closes at 12:01 a.m., local time, on November 13, 2017. The commercial red snapper season opens at 12:01 a.m., local time, November 2, 2017.
Electronic copies of the documents in support of this temporary rule, which include an environmental assessment, may be obtained from the Southeast Regional Office Web site at
Nikhil Mehta, Southeast Regional Office, NMFS, telephone: 727-824-5305, email:
NMFS and the Council manage South Atlantic snapper-grouper including red snapper under the Fishery Management Plan for the Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the South Atlantic Region (FMP). The Council prepared the FMP and NMFS implements the FMP through regulations at 50 CFR part 622 under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). The Magnuson-Stevens Act provides the legal authority for the promulgation of emergency regulations under section 305(c) (16 U.S.C. 1855(c)).
Harvest of red snapper from South Atlantic Federal waters was prohibited in 2010 through a temporary interim rule and then through Amendment 17A to the FMP when the stock was determined to be overfished and undergoing overfishing (Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review (SEDAR) 15, 2009) (74 FR 63673, December 4, 2009; 75 FR 76874, December 9, 2010). Amendment 17A also implemented a 35-year red snapper rebuilding plan that began in 2010, and set the red snapper ACL at zero. Amendment 28 to the FMP established a process that allowed red snapper harvest (ACL greater than zero) if total removals (landings plus dead discards) were less than the acceptable biological catch (ABC) in the previous fishing year (78 FR 44461, July 24, 2013). Limited harvest of red snapper was allowed in 2012, 2013, and 2014. However, because the estimated total removals of red snapper exceeded the ABC in 2014, 2015, and 2016 due to estimates of red snapper discards that were incidentally harvested as bycatch while targeting other species, there was no allowable harvest in 2015, 2016, and 2017.
The process established through Amendment 28 specifies that harvest would begin in July, and specifies when the commercial and recreational seasons would open and close and the applicable fishing regulations during any open season. The commercial red snapper season closes when the commercial ACL is met or projected to be met. The length of the recreational red snapper season is projected and announced before the start of the season, based on catch rate estimates from previous years. The NMFS Regional Administrator (RA) has the authority to delay the opening of red snapper fishing seasons in the event of a tropical storm or hurricane affecting the area of the Council's jurisdiction. Additionally, there is no minimum size limit for either the commercial or recreational sector; the commercial trip limit is 75 lb (34 kg), gutted weight, and the recreational bag limit is one fish per person per day.
This temporary rule will allow limited commercial and recreational harvest of red snapper in 2017 by implementing a total ACL of 42,510 fish, based on the landings observed during the limited red snapper season in 2014. The total ACL is divided into a commercial ACL of 124,815 lb (56,615 kg), round weight, and a recreational ACL of 29,656 fish, based the current sector allocation ratio developed by the Council for red snapper (28.07 percent commercial and 71.93 percent recreational). The commercial sector's ACL is set in pounds of fish because the commercial sector reports landings in weight and therefore weight is a more accurate representation of commercial landings. In this temporary rule, for the commercial sector, one red snapper is equivalent to 9.71 lb (4.40 kg), round weight. ACLs for the recreational sector are specified in numbers of fish because numbers of fish are a more reliable estimate for that sector than specifying the ACL in weight of fish. Surveys that estimate recreational landings collect information on numbers of fish and convert those numbers to weights using limited biological samples, so there is considerable uncertainty in estimates of recreational landings by weight.
The recreational bag limit will be one fish per person per day and the commercial trip limit will be 75 lb (34 kg), gutted weight. There will not be a minimum size limit set for either sector. The commercial sector will close when the commercial ACL is projected to be met during the limited 2017 fishing season. The opening and closing of the recreational sector is being specified before the recreational season begins and consists of two weekends only (Friday, Saturday, Sunday). The effectiveness of this temporary rule is only for the 2017 fishing year and does not authorize any harvest after December 31, 2017.
The most recent stock assessment for South Atlantic red snapper, SEDAR 41 (2017), was completed in 2016 and revised in 2017. SEDAR 41 (2017) evaluated data through 2014 and determined the red snapper stock was overfished and that overfishing was
In May 2016, the Council's Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) stated that SEDAR 41 (2017) was based on the best scientific information available, but noted the assessment findings were highly uncertain regarding to what extent overfishing was occurring (
The projections of yield streams used in SEDAR 41 (2017) included both landings and dead discards, which were added to get an estimate of the total removals. However, red snapper is primarily a discards-only fishery as a result of the harvest prohibitions. Therefore, the Council determined that discard-only projections (zero landings) would be more informative for management. In January 2017, the Council requested the NMFS Southeast Fishery Science Center (SEFSC) provide red snapper projections under the assumption that all fish caught are subsequently discarded. Following the request, the SEFSC advised the Council in February 2017 that the requested projections were not appropriate for management use because uncertainty in the assessment was already large, and the uncertainty would increase with a more complete evaluation of the effect of the upcoming changes to Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP). Recreational catch and effort data, including discards, are monitored through MRIP, which is currently transitioning from the current Coastal Household Telephone Survey to a new mail survey design for estimating marine recreational shore and private boat fishing effort, known as the Fishing Effort Survey. NMFS expects that the Fishing Effort Survey will result in a more efficient representation of recreational fishing effort, including that of discards; however, in order for a new survey method to be implemented, historical catch statistics will need to be converted into the same `currency' as the new estimates. This process is underway.
Additionally, in their February 2017 response, the SEFSC also advised the Council that the uncertainty in the stock assessment inhibits the ability to set an ABC that can be effectively monitored. The SEFSC further stated in an April 2017 letter to the Council, that the use of an ABC based primarily on fishery discards for monitoring the effectiveness of management action is likely ineffective due to the high level of uncertainty in measures of discards and the change in the effort estimation methodology that will be implemented in the MRIP survey.
NMFS informed the Council in a letter, dated March 3, 2017, that, based on the results of SEDAR 41 (2017) using data through 2014, the red snapper stock was still overfished but was rebuilding in accordance with the rebuilding plan. Further, NMFS stated that sufficient steps had been taken to address overfishing of red snapper while continuing to rebuild the stock through harvest prohibitions in 2015 and 2016. This determination is supported by an increase in stock biomass since 2010, and increasing abundance of older age classes (SEDAR 41 2017).
The intended effect of this temporary rule is to minimize adverse socio-economic effects to fishermen and fishing communities that utilize red snapper as part of the snapper-grouper fishery. Fishing seasons that prohibit the harvest of red snapper incur lost opportunities to fish among both the commercial and recreational sectors. NMFS and the Council expect that increased fishing opportunities resulting from these temporary measures should provide direct benefits to fishermen in the form of additional revenue and recreational opportunities, in addition to indirect benefits to businesses that provide supplies for fishing trips. NMFS expects the total aggregate increase in the 2017 fishing season ex-vessel revenues to commercial vessels as a result of these temporary measures would range from $176,940-$236,279 (2016 dollars), and that up to 658 federally permitted commercial snapper-grouper vessels could participate in this harvest in 2017. The recreational consumer surplus to anglers as a result of a limited 2017 harvest could increase by about $2,402,136 (in total; assuming that each of the 29,656 recreational fish is harvested by an individual angler). The potential also exists for revenues and profits generated by charter vessels and headboats (for-hire vessels) and fishing support businesses to increase, but such effects cannot be estimated with the current information.
NMFS determined that allowing limited harvest of red snapper in 2017 is not likely to result in overfishing, or prevent continued stock rebuilding. This determination is based on the uncertainty in the assessment associated with: The stock-recruitment relationship, natural mortality at age, the age structure of the unfished population, and the composition and magnitude of recreational discards inhibiting the ability of the SEFSC to project ABC into the future. Additional support comes from fishery-independent information collected through the Southeast Reef Fish Survey (SERFS) program, and the East Coast Fisheries Independent Monitoring information conducted by Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC), presented to the Council at their June and September 2017 meetings, respectively. According to the SERFS, relative abundance (CPUE) of red snapper has increased since 2009, reaching the highest level observed in the entire time series (1990-2016) in 2016. According to the results of FWCC's study, CPUE for red snapper for hook gear (surveyed in 2012, 2014, 2016, and 2017) and the standardized index of abundance (surveyed from 2014-2017) was highest in 2017. The FWCC data also showed a greater number of large red snapper and a broader range of ages in recent years, which suggests rebuilding progress of the red snapper stock. The Council's SSC noted a red snapper population increase in their April 2017 report, stating that “. . . a continuing upward trend in the fishery-independent index has a high probability of reflecting increases in population size.” As noted by the new information presented to the Council in June and September 2017, the increase in relative abundance of red snapper indicated by the fishery-independent CPUE indices has taken place despite landings during the limited seasons in 2012-2014 and despite the large number of estimated
NMFS' Policy Guidelines for the Use of Emergency Rules (62 FR 44421, August 21, 1997) list three criteria for determining whether an emergency exists, and this temporary rule is promulgated under these criteria. Specifically, NMFS' policy guidelines require that an emergency:
(1) Result from recent, unforeseen events or recently discovered circumstances; and
(2) Present serious conservation or management problems in the fishery; and
(3) Can be addressed through emergency regulations for which the immediate benefits outweigh the value of advance notice, public comment, and deliberative consideration of the impacts on participants to the same extent as would be expected under the normal rulemaking process.
NMFS has determined that allowing harvest in 2017 meets the three criteria required for an emergency rule. The new red snapper abundance and CPUE information collected through the SERFS program and FWCC's study constitutes recently discovered circumstances, since it was presented to the Council at their June 2017 and September 2017 meetings. In addition, the continued harvest prohibition of South Atlantic red snapper poses significant management problems to NMFS and the Council. Fishery closures result in the limited collection of fishery-dependent data, and that negatively impacts the stock assessment process. Additionally, the harvest prohibition of red snapper results in adverse socio-economic effects to fishermen and fishing communities through lost opportunities among the commercial and recreational sectors to fish for and possess red snapper during the fishing year. Input from fishers also indicates that they are increasingly frustrated with the perceived waste of the red snapper resource resulting from the continued discarding of red snapper when they target co-occurring species. Finally, the immediate benefits of implementing a limited red snapper commercial and recreational fishing season in 2017 outweigh the value of providing advance notice and public comment under the normal rulemaking process. Public comments on this action at the September 2017 Council meeting indicated that many fishermen favored a limited 2017 season. The Council considered these public comments when they recommended that NMFS proceed with a temporary rule for emergency action at their September 2017 meeting. Further, the time it would take to complete public notice and solicit public comments through rulemaking would not allow adequate time for a fishing season to take place in 2017.
Additionally, while harvest restrictions remain in place, fishers report they are encountering large numbers of red snapper, which is further supported by the long-term SERFS fishery-independent CPUE index. Allowing a limited amount of harvest in 2017 through this temporary emergency action would allow commercial and recreational fishermen to harvest this species, and would also generate revenue for businesses within these sectors. Also, limited commercial and recreational harvest of red snapper in 2017 will provide an opportunity to collect fishery-dependent data including catch, fishing effort estimates, and life history information that will be useful for future red snapper stock assessments and management decisions.
This temporary rule implements management measures to authorize the limited harvest and possession of red snapper in or from the South Atlantic EEZ in the 2017 fishing year. The 2017 commercial ACL is set at 124,815 lb (56,615 kg), round weight, and the 2017 recreational ACL is set at 29,656 fish. These ACLs are based on the total 2017 ACL, as determined by NMFS, of 42,510 fish and following the current allocation ratio for red snapper (28.07 percent commercial and 71.93 percent recreational).
NMFS and the Council are establishing several management measures that function as accountability measures to constrain red snapper harvest to these ACLs, including the establishment of limited commercial and recreational red snapper seasons for 2017. The recreational season will open for two consecutive weekends made up of Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays. The recreational season opens at 12:01 a.m., local time, on November 3, 2017, and closes at 12:01 a.m., local time, on November 6, 2017; then reopens at 12:01 a.m., local time, on November 10, 2017, and closes at 12:01 a.m., local time, on November 13, 2017. The commercial season opens at 12:01 a.m., local time, November 2, 2017. NMFS will monitor commercial landings in-season and if commercial landings reach or are projected to reach the commercial ACL, then NMFS will file a notification with the Office of the Federal Register to close the commercial sector for red snapper for the remainder of the 2017 fishing year. NMFS notes that if the commercial ACL has not been met or been projected to have been met by December 31, 2017, no commercial harvest would be allowed through this temporary rule after 11:59 p.m., local time, on December 31, 2017. Harvest will additionally be constrained through the implementation of commercial and recreational management measures such as trip limits and bag limits.
During these limited 2017 fishing seasons, the commercial sector will have a 75 lb (34 kg), gutted weight, daily commercial trip limit and the recreational sector will have a 1 fish per person daily recreational bag limit. The 1 fish per person recreational bag limit is included in the 10-fish aggregate snapper bag limit. No size limits are implemented for either sector through this temporary rule in an effort to decrease regulatory discards (fish returned to the water because they are below the minimum size limit). If severe weather conditions exist, the RA has the authority to modify these opening and closing dates. The RA will determine when severe weather conditions exist, the duration of the severe weather conditions, and which geographic areas are deemed affected by severe weather conditions. If severe weather conditions exist or if NMFS determines the 2017 commercial or recreational ACLs were not harvested and a reopening of either or both sectors in 2017 is possible, the RA will file a notification to that effect with the Office of the Federal Register, and announce via NOAA Weather Radio and in a Fishery Bulletin any change in or reopening of the red snapper fishing seasons.
The Council is currently developing both Amendment 43 and Amendment 46 to the FMP. Amendment 43 contains actions to establish commercial and recreational ACLs and associated revisions to management measures for red snapper that would allow for a specific level of harvest each year. At its September 2017 meeting, the Council took final action and approved Amendment 43 and will submit the amendment to the Secretary for subsequent rulemaking and implementation during the 2018 fishing
This action is issued pursuant to section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, 16 U.S.C. 1855(c). The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA (AA), has determined that this temporary rule is necessary to promote an economic opportunity for South Atlantic snapper-grouper fishermen that otherwise would be foregone and is consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable laws.
This action is being taken pursuant to the emergency provision of MSA and is exempt from OMB review.
The AA finds good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) to waive prior notice and the opportunity for public comment because they are contrary to the public interest. This temporary rule promotes an economic opportunity for South Atlantic snapper-grouper fishermen that would otherwise be forgone if harvest in 2017 were not to occur. Limited harvest and possession of red snapper in 2017 is expected to result in revenue increases to commercial vessels and benefit increases to recreational anglers, in addition to providing opportunity to for-hire vessels in booking more trips that could increase their revenues and profits. At the September 2017 Council meeting, South Atlantic snapper-grouper fishermen discussed the merits of opening red snapper in the South Atlantic for a short time period in 2017. Fishermen will be able to keep a limited number of the red snapper that they are currently required to discard. As previously discussed, commercial fishermen should be able to increase their revenues in 2017 by being able to sell a highly marketable fish during the limited opening. Additionally, short red snapper seasons will provide an opportunity to collect fishery-dependent data that likely may be useful for future stock assessments. Currently, the lack of available red snapper data hinders the ability to assess the status of the stock. Delaying the implementation of this rulemaking to provide prior notice and the opportunity for public comment would reduce the likelihood of opening the red snapper component of the snapper-grouper fishery in the 2017 fishing year. As a result of the recent receipt of scientific information indicating that harvest in 2017 is possible, there is insufficient time for NMFS to implement these measures earlier in this fishing year and/or possibly allow for prior notice and opportunity for public comment on the rulemaking. The harvest allowed in 2017 in this rule is not expected to result in overfishing or impede rebuilding of the stock.
For these same reasons, the AA also finds good cause to waive the 30-day delay in effectiveness of the actions under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).
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
Fisheries, Fishing, Red snapper, South Atlantic.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 622 is amended as follows:
16 U.S.C. 1801
(c) * * *
(2)
(b) * * *
(9)
(ii) If the RA determines tropical storm or hurricane conditions exist, or are projected to exist, in the South Atlantic, during a commercial or recreational fishing season, the RA may modify the opening and closing dates of the fishing season by filing a notification to that effect with the Office of the Federal Register, and announcing via NOAA Weather Radio and a Fishery Bulletin any change in the dates of the red snapper commercial or recreational fishing season.
(b) * * *
(12)
(a) * * *
(13)
(aa)
(2)
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy.
Notice of petition and request for public comments.
This notice announces receipt and publishes petitions from the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) and UL LLC (UL) requesting that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) incorporate the IEC 60034-2-1:2014 (2014) test methods 2-1-1A and 2-1-1B as alternative test methods in addition to the existing test methods referenced in its regulations for determining the energy efficiency of certain electric motors and small electric motors: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) standards 112-2004 Method B (2004) and 114-2010 (2010); and Canadian Standards Association standards (CSA) C390-10 (2010) and C747-09 (2009). NEMA found IEC 60034-2-1:2014 Method 2-1-1B to be equivalent to IEEE 112-2004 Method B and CSA C390-10 UL testing found IEC 60034-2-1:2004 Method 2-1-1B results to be in close agreement with those of CSA C390-10, and noted that the respective methodologies of IEC 60034-2-1:2014 Method 2-1-1A and CSA C747 were also in accord. DOE solicits comments, data, and information concerning NEMA's and UL's petitions.
Written comments and information are requested and will be accepted on or before January 2, 2018.
Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
1.
2.
3.
4.
No telefacsimilies (faxes) will be accepted. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on this process, see section IV of this document.
The docket Web page can be found at
Mr. Jeremy Dommu, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Office, EE-5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-9870. Email:
Ms. Mary Greene, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-1817. Email:
For further information on how to submit a comment or review other public comments and the docket, contact the Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 586-6636 or by email:
Electric motors are included in the list of “covered equipment” for which DOE is authorized to establish and amend energy conservation standards and test procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(A)). Additionally, EPCA directed DOE, subject to a determination of feasibility and justification, to establish energy conservation standards and test procedure for small electric motors. (42 U.S.C. 6317(b)) DOE's test procedures for electric motors are prescribed at appendix B to subpart B of part 431. DOE's test procedures for small electric motors are prescribed at 10 CFR part 431, subpart X.
DOE test procedures reference IEEE 112-2004 Method B
Additionally, DOE's small electric motors test procedures at subpart X of part 431 reference: (1) IEEE 114-2010
On July 31, 2017, DOE published a request for information (the “July 2017 RFI”) initiating a data collection process to consider whether to amend DOE's test procedure for small electric motors and electric motors, and whether new test procedures are needed for motors beyond those subject to the existing Federal test procedures. 82 FR 35468. The petitions of NEMA and UL request modifications to the current test procedures for small electric motors and electric motors, and accordingly, DOE is entering this petition into the same docket that houses the July 2017 RFI. The docket is available at:
NEMA submitted a petition letter requesting that DOE incorporate the IEC 60034-2-1:2014 Method 2-1-1B
NEMA's petition letter claimed that the results of the Hydro-Quebec Research Institute testing typically showed a loss deviation of less than ±2 percent. The NEMA petition letter also stated a loss difference of 2 percent is: (1) Within the variation of two tests performed using the same motor and test equipment but with different operators and at different times of day; and (2) well below the typical variation of 10 percent of losses when different labs are used to test the same motor.
UL submitted a petition letter
First, UL requested that IEC 60034-2-1:2014 test method 2-1-1B be approved for appendix B to subpart B of part 431 and section 431.444 of subpart X of part 431 (as an alternative to CSA C390-10). Regarding the first request, the petition further included two papers comparing the respective test standards.
The first paper,
The second paper
UL's petition letter claimed that the test results of the Cao paper testing aligned with UL's own, firsthand testing experience using the same methods. UL's own comparison testing found a difference in calculated efficiency of less than 0.1 percentage points, when using measurements from a single test to reduce variability.
Second, UL requested that IEC 60034-2-1:2014 test method 2-1-1A be approved for section 431.444 of subpart X of part 431 (as an alternative to CSA C747-09). UL stated that the IEC and CSA standards use the same method, but that the IEC equipment specifications are more rigorous. UL did not provide a quantitative test result comparison to support the similarity between the standards.
DOE solicits comments from interested parties on any aspect of the petition. In particular, DOE seeks
DOE seeks comment on the differences among IEC 60034-2-1:2014 Method 2-1-1B, IEEE 112-2004 Method B, and CSA C390-10, and data characterizing the degree to which choice of test procedure alters measured efficiency.
DOE seeks comment on the differences among IEC 60034-2-1:2014 Method 2-1-1A, IEEE 114-2010, and CSA C747-09 and data characterizing the degree to which choice of test procedure alters measured efficiency.
DOE seeks comment regarding whether IEC 60034-2-1:2014 Method 2-1-1B should be considered as an alternate for testing certain small electric motors under 10 CFR part 431, subpart X. DOE also seeks comment on whether the comparison test results presented in the petitions, which concern the test procedures under 10 CFR part 431, subpart B, would also apply to testing of certain small electric motors under Subpart X of 10 CFR 431.
DOE seeks comment on NEMA's claims: (1) That the Hydro-Quebec test results support a typical loss deviation between IEEE 112-2004 Method B and IEC 60034-2-1:2004 Method 2-1-1B of less than ±2 percent, (2) that a 2 percent loss deviation is characteristic of substituting a test operator with the test equipment unchanged, and (3) that a 10 percent loss deviation is characteristic of testing the same motor at different laboratories.
DOE seeks comment on whether Angers
DOE seeks comment on UL's claims that the difference in calculated efficiency between IEC 60034-2-1:2014 Method 2-1-1B and IEEE 112-2004 method B is less than 0.1 percentage points, if using measurements from the same test.
DOE seeks comment regarding similarity in methods, differences in equipment specifications, and expected efficiency percentage point differences between the test results of IEEE 114-2010, CSA C747-09, and IEC 60034-2-1:2004, Method 2-1-1A.
DOE invites all interested parties to submit in writing by January 2, 2018, comments and information on matters addressed in this notice and on other matters relevant to DOE's consideration of amended test procedures for electric and small electric motors. These comments and information will aid in the development of a test procedure NOPR for electric and small electric motors if DOE determines that amended test procedures may be appropriate for these products.
Submitting comments via
However, your contact information will be publicly viewable if you include it in the comment or in any documents attached to your comment. Any information that you do not want to be publicly viewable should not be included in your comment, nor in any document attached to your comment. Persons viewing comments will see only first and last names, organization names, correspondence containing comments, and any documents submitted with the comments.
Do not submit to
DOE processes submissions made through
Submitting comments via email, hand delivery, or mail. Comments and documents submitted via email, hand delivery, or mail also will be posted to
Include contact information each time you submit comments, data, documents, and other information to DOE. If you submit via mail or hand delivery, please provide all items on a CD, if feasible. It is not necessary to submit printed copies. No facsimiles (faxes) will be accepted.
Comments, data, and other information submitted to DOE electronically should be provided in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format. Provide documents that are not secured, written in English and free of any defects or viruses. Documents should not contain special characters or any form of encryption and, if possible, they should carry the electronic signature of the author.
Campaign form letters. Please submit campaign form letters by the originating organization in batches of between 50 to 500 form letters per PDF or as one form letter with a list of supporters' names compiled into one or more PDFs. This reduces comment processing and posting time.
Confidential Business Information. According 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, postal mail, or hand delivery 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. Submit these documents via email or on a CD, if feasible. 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
It is DOE's policy that all comments may be included in the public docket, without change and as received, including any personal information provided in the comments (except information deemed to be exempt from public disclosure).
DOE considers public participation to be a very important part of the process for developing test procedures and energy conservation standards. DOE actively encourages the participation and interaction of the public during the comment period in each stage of this process. Interactions with and between members of the public provide a balanced discussion of the issues and assist DOE in the process. Anyone who wishes to be added to the DOE mailing list to receive future notices and information about this process should contact Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 586-6636 or via email at
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain AgustaWestland S.p.A. (AgustaWestland) Model AW189 helicopters. This proposed AD would require replacing the seal and filler wedges of all emergency exit windows. The proposed actions are prompted by a report that some windows were improperly glued when installed. The actions of this proposed AD are intended to correct an unsafe condition on these products.
We must receive comments on this proposed AD by January 2, 2018.
You may send comments by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at
For service information identified in this proposed rule, contact Leonardo S.p.A. Helicopters, Matteo Ragazzi, Head of Airworthiness, Viale G.Agusta 520, 21017 C.Costa di Samarate (Va) Italy; telephone +39-0331-711756; fax +39-0331-229046; or at
Martin R. Crane, Aviation Safety Engineer, Regulations & Policy Section, Rotorcraft Standards Branch, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone (817) 222-5110; email
We invite you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting written comments, data, or views. We also invite comments relating to the economic, environmental, energy, or federalism impacts that might result from adopting the proposals in this document. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. To ensure the docket does not contain duplicate comments, commenters should send only one copy of written comments, or if comments are filed electronically, commenters should submit only one time.
We will file in the docket all comments that we receive, as well as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this proposal, we will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing date for comments. We will consider comments filed after the comment period has closed if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay. We may change this proposal in light of the comments we receive.
EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD No. 2016-0216, dated October 28, 2016, to correct an unsafe condition for Leonardo Helicopters (previously Finmeccanica S.p.A., previously AgustaWestland) Model AW189 helicopters, serial numbers 49007 through 49021, 49023, 49029, 49033, 49035, 89001, 89003, 89004, 92001, 92003, and 92005. The EASA AD does not apply to windows that have been reinstalled at least once since helicopter delivery and windows that are part of bubble window kit part number (P/N) 8G5620F00111.
EASA advises that during a scheduled replacement of emergency exit window seals on helicopters in service, an excessively high level of pushing force was required to jettison some of the windows. According to EASA, further investigation determined the windows were installed with glue applied in locations that were not in accordance with the approved design.
This condition, if not corrected, could prevent the jettisoning of helicopter emergency exit windows, possibly affecting the evacuation of crew and passengers during an emergency situation, EASA advises. EASA consequently requires replacement of the seal and the filler wedges of the
The FAA is in the process of updating AgustaWestland's name change to Leonardo Helicopters on its type certificate. Because this name change is not yet effective, this proposed AD specifies AgustaWestland.
These helicopters have been approved by the aviation authority of Italy and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with Italy, EASA, its technical representative, has notified us of the unsafe condition described in its AD. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all known relevant information and determined that an unsafe condition is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.
We reviewed Leonardo Helicopters Bollettino Tecnico No. 189-118, dated October 20, 2016. This service information specifies replacing the seal and filler wedges on all cockpit door and cabin emergency exit windows of Model AW189 helicopters, except on those windows that have been replaced or that are part of bubble window kit P/N 8G5620F00111.
This proposed AD would require within 75 hours time-in-service, replacing the seal and filler wedges on all emergency exit windows installed in the cockpit doors and cabin.
We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 2 helicopters of U.S. Registry and that labor costs average $85 per work-hour. Based on these estimates, we expect that removing and replacing the window seals and fillers would require 40 work-hours and parts would cost about $834, for a total cost of $4,234 per helicopter and $8,468 for the U.S. fleet.
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.
We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
For the reasons discussed, I certify this proposed regulation:
1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent that it justifies making a regulatory distinction; and
4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This AD applies to Model AW189 helicopters, serial number 49007 through 49021, 49023, 49029, 49033, 49035, 89001, 89003, 89004, 92001, 92003, and 92005, certificated in any category.
This AD defines the unsafe condition as improperly glued emergency exit windows. This condition could result in the window failing to jettison, preventing the occupants from exiting the helicopter during an emergency.
We must receive comments by January 2, 2018.
You are responsible for performing each action required by this AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been accomplished prior to that time.
Within 75 hours time-in-service, replace the seal and filler wedges of each cabin and cockpit door emergency exit window, except bubble windows installed in accordance with bubble window kit part number 8G5620F00111.
(1) The Manager, Safety Management Section, Rotorcraft Standards Branch, FAA, may approve AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: Martin R. Crane, Aviation Safety Engineer, Regulations & Policy Section, Rotorcraft Standards Branch, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone (817) 222-5110; email
(2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office or certificate holding district office before operating any aircraft complying with this AD through an AMOC.
(1) Leonardo Helicopters Bollettino Tecnico No. 189-118, dated October 20, 2016, which is not incorporated by reference, contains additional information about the subject of this AD. For service information identified in this AD, contact Leonardo S.p.A. Helicopters, Matteo Ragazzi, Head of Airworthiness, Viale G.Agusta 520, 21017 C.Costa di Samarate (Va) Italy; telephone +39-0331-711756; fax +39-0331-229046; or at
(2) The subject of this AD is addressed in European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD No. 2016-0216, dated October 28, 2016. You may view the EASA AD on the Internet at
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for Agusta S.p.A. (Agusta) Model AW189 helicopters. This proposed AD would require inspecting and altering the emergency flotation system (EFS). This proposed AD is prompted by a report of punctured EFS kits. The actions of this proposed AD are intended to prevent an unsafe condition on these helicopters.
We must receive comments on this proposed AD by January 2, 2018.
You may send comments by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at
For service information identified in this proposed rule, contact Leonardo S.p.A. Helicopters, Matteo Ragazzi, Head of Airworthiness, Viale G.Agusta 520, 21017 C.Costa di Samarate (Va) Italy; telephone +39-0331-711756; fax +39-0331-229046; or at
Martin R. Crane, Aviation Safety Engineer, Regulations and Policy Section, Rotorcraft Standards Branch, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone (817) 222-5110; email
We invite you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting written comments, data, or views. We also invite comments relating to the economic, environmental, energy, or federalism impacts that might result from adopting the proposals in this document. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. To ensure the docket does not contain duplicate comments, commenters should send only one copy of written comments, or if comments are filed electronically, commenters should submit only one time.
We will file in the docket all comments that we receive, as well as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this proposal, we will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing date for comments. We will consider comments filed after the comment period has closed if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay. We may change this proposal in light of the comments we receive.
EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD No. 2016-0263-E, dated December 24, 2016 (AD 2016-0263-E), to correct an unsafe condition for Leonardo S.p.A. Helicopters (previously Agusta) Model AW189 helicopters. EASA advises that during the first scheduled maintenance of an EFS kit, float bags were found punctured. According to EASA, an investigation revealed the damage was caused by protruding parts of the pressure relief/topping valves that were not adequately protected. EASA further states that this condition could result in a partial loss of buoyancy of the EFS float bags, possibly resulting in injury to the helicopter's occupants in a ditching event. To prevent this unsafe condition, EASA AD 2016-0263-E requires a one-time inspection of the EFS, repair of any discrepancies found, replacing the pressure relief/topping valve O-ring with a gasket, and replacing the inflate/deflate protection with a new design inflate/deflate protection.
The FAA is in the process of updating Agusta's name change to Leonardo Helicopters on its type certificate. Because this name change is not yet effective, this proposed AD specifies Agusta.
These helicopters have been approved by the aviation authority of Italy and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with Italy, EASA, its technical representative, has notified us of the unsafe condition described in its AD. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all known relevant information and determined that an unsafe condition is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.
We reviewed Leonardo S.p.A. Bollettino Tecnico No. 189-135, dated December 20, 2016 (BT 189-135), and Aero Sekur Service Bulletin No. SB-189-25-003, dated November 30, 2016 (SB-189-25-003), which is attached to BT 189-135 as Annex 1. BT 189-135 specifies following the procedures in SB-189-25-003 to inspect and modify certain EFS kits installed on AW189 helicopters.
This proposed AD would require, within 120 hours time-in-service (TIS), inspecting each float bag for punctures, replacing the pressure relief/topping (PRT) valve O-ring part number (P/N) P-G10025 with a PRT valve gasket P/N 316683A, and replacing the inflate/deflate protection P/N 304694A with inflate/deflate protection P/N 304694B.
The EASA AD requires compliance within 15 hours TIS or 10 days for helicopters flying overwater above sea state 4 or within 120 hours or 60 days for helicopters operating overwater up to sea state 4. The proposed AD would require compliance within 120 hours TIS regardless of sea state conditions.
We estimate that this proposed AD would affect two helicopters of U.S. Registry. We estimate that operators may incur the following costs in order to comply with this AD. Inspecting each float bag, replacing the PRT valve gasket, and replacing the inflate/deflate protection would require about 40 work-hours, and required parts would cost about $500, for a cost per helicopter of $3,900 and a total cost of $7,800 for the U.S. fleet. If required, repairing a float bag would require about 2 work-hours, and required parts would cost $90, for a cost per float bag of $260.
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.
We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
For the reasons discussed, I certify this proposed regulation:
1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent that it justifies making a regulatory distinction; and
4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This AD applies to Agusta S.p.A. (Agusta) Model AW189 helicopters, certificated in any category, with an emergency float system (EFS) float assembly part number (P/N) 8G9560V00131, serial number (S/N) 066 or lower; P/N 8G9560V00231, S/N 068 or lower; P/N 8G9560V00331, S/N 068 or lower; or P/N 8G9560V00431, S/N 067 or lower, installed.
This AD defines the unsafe condition as a punctured EFS float bag. This condition could result in loss of buoyancy of an EFS float bag being used in an emergency water ditching and subsequent injury to helicopter occupants.
We must receive comments by January 2, 2018.
You are responsible for performing each action required by this AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been accomplished prior to that time.
(1) Within 120 hours time-in-service:
(i) Unfold and inspect each float bag assembly for any cuts, tears, punctures, or abrasion. If there is a cut, tear, puncture, or any abrasion, before further flight, repair the float bag assembly.
(ii) Replace each O-ring P/N S-B10104 with a pressure relief/topping (PRT) valve gasket P/N 316683A.
(iii) Install each PRT valve P/N P-G10025 and apply a torque of 4.5 to 5.5 Nm (39.8 to 48.6 inch-pounds).
(iv) Replace each inflate/deflate protection P/N 304694A with a PRT valve protection P/N 304694B.
(iv) Install a piece of tape approximately 220 millimeters long over each PRT valve protection P/N 304694B.
(2) After the effective date of this AD, do not install an EFS float assembly P/N 8G9560V00131, S/N 066 or lower; P/N 8G9560V00231, S/N 068 or lower; P/N 8G9560V00331, S/N 068 or lower; or P/N 8G9560V00431, S/N 067 or lower on any helicopter unless you have complied with the actions in paragraph (e)(1) of this AD.
(1) The Manager, Safety Management Section, FAA, may approve AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: Martin R. Crane, Aviation Safety Engineer, Regulations and Policy Section, Rotorcraft Standards Branch, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone (817) 222-5110; email
(2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office or certificate holding district office before operating any aircraft complying with this AD through an AMOC.
(1) Leonardo S.p.A. Bollettino Tecnico No. 189-135, dated December 20, 2016, and Aero Sekur Service Bulletin No. SB-189-25-003, dated November 30, 2016, which are not incorporated by reference, contain additional information about the subject of this AD. For service information identified in this AD, contact Leonardo S.p.A. Helicopters, Matteo Ragazzi, Head of Airworthiness, Viale G.Agusta 520, 21017 C.Costa di Samarate (Va) Italy; telephone +39-0331-711756; fax +39-0331-229046; or at
(2) The subject of this AD is addressed in European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD No. 2016-0263-E, dated December 24, 2016. You may view the EASA AD on the Internet at
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Proposed rule.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to determine that the Lebanon County, Pennsylvania nonattainment area (the Lebanon County Area) has attained the 2012 annual fine particulate matter (PM
Written comments must be received on or before December 4, 2017.
Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0479 at
Maria A. Pino, (215) 814-2181, or by email at
On December 14, 2012, EPA promulgated a revised primary annual PM
Under EPA's longstanding Clean Data Policy,
In EPA's Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards: State Implementation Plan Requirements (81 FR 58010, August 24, 2016), EPA reaffirmed the Clean Data Policy at 40 CFR 51.1015. The rule states that, upon a determination by EPA that a moderate PM
Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 50, § 50.18 and appendix N, the annual primary PM
By letter dated May 17, 2017, Pennsylvania certified its 2016 ambient air quality monitoring data. EPA issued final 2014-2016 design values on July 27, 2017. There is one PM
Consistent with the requirements contained in 40 CFR part 50, EPA has reviewed the PM
As shown in Table 2, all but one quarter in 2014-2016 is complete, reporting data capture rates of at least 75%. The second quarter in 2015 had a data capture rate of 70%. However, EPA can calculate a valid design value for a monitor that doesn't meet the 75% capture rate each quarter, as long as there is at least 50% data capture in each quarter. In that case, EPA can perform a data substitution test, known as the maximum quarter test, pursuant to 40 CFR part 50, appendix N, section 4.1(c)(ii). EPA routinely performs this test for monitors with deficient quarters (
In this case, the second quarter in 2015 was deficient. The monitor recorded 64 out of the 91 possible daily values in that quarter, which included April, May, and June of 2015. Therefore, EPA looked at data recorded at the Lebanon monitor in the second quarters of 2014, 2015, and 2016, and identified the highest daily value, which was 30.5 μg/m
EPA is proposing to determine that the Lebanon County Area has attained the 2012 annual PM
EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this document. These comments will be considered before taking final action.
This rulemaking action proposes to make a determination of attainment of the 2012 PM
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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 proposed rule to determine that the Lebanon County Area attained the 2012 PM
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
42 U.S.C. 7401
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Proposed rule.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a state submission as a revision to the Illinois state implementation plan (SIP) for ozone. The revision, submitted on May 30, 2017, incorporates changes to the Illinois Administrative Code definition of volatile organic material, otherwise known as volatile organic compounds (VOC). The revision removes recordkeeping and reporting requirements related to the use of t-butyl acetate (also known as tertiary butyl acetate) as a VOC, and is in response to an EPA rulemaking that occurred in 2016. Illinois also added information to provide clarity to the list of compounds excluded from the definition of VOC.
Comments must be received on or before December 4, 2017.
Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-2017-0323 at
Charles Hatten, Environmental Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6031,
In the Final Rules section of this issue of the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Proposed rule; reopening of the comment period.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is reopening the comment period for a proposed Clean Air Act rule published August 15, 2017. Multiple commenters requested additional time to provide comments; therefore, EPA is reopening the comment period for 30 days.
Comments must be received on or before December 4, 2017.
Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-2007-1092 at
Rachel Rineheart, Environmental Engineer, Air Permits Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-7017,
Throughout this document whenever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean the EPA.
On August 15, 2017, EPA proposed to approve certain changes to Michigan's minor new source review program which is contained in Part 2 of the Michigan Administrative Code. Specifically, EPA proposed to approve 336.1209, effective 07/26/1995; 336.1201a, 336.1203, 336.1204, 336.1206, 336.1212, 336.1216, effective 07/01/2003; 336.1201, 336.1202, 336.1207, 336.1219, 336.1240, 336.1241, 336.1278, 336.1299, effective 06/20/2008; and 336.1278a, 336.1280, 336.1281, 336.1282, 336.1283, 336.1284, 336.1285, 336.1286, 336.1287, 336.1288, 336.1289, 336.1290, effective 12/20/2016. Multiple commenters requested additional time to provide comments; therefore, EPA is reopening the comment period for 30 days. The comment period now closes on December 4, 2017.
Office of Tribal Relations, USDA.
Notice of public meeting.
This notice announces a forthcoming meeting of The Council for Native American Farming and Ranching (CNAFR), a public advisory committee of the Office of Tribal Relations (OTR). Notice of the meetings are provided in accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended. This will be the first meeting held during fiscal year 2018 and will consist of, but not be limited to: Hearing public comments, subcommittee report outs, and discussion of potential recommendations. This meeting will be open to the public.
The teleconference meeting will be held on November 29, 2017. The meeting will be open to the public with time set aside for public comment on November 29 at approximately 1:30-2:30 p.m. The OTR will make the agenda available to the public via the OTR Web site (
The meeting will be conducted using teleconference technology. This meeting will not be convened in person. The agenda, with the call in information, will be made public via the OTR Web site (
Questions should be directed to the CNAFR Contact Person: Abby Cruz, Designated Federal Officer and Senior Policy Advisor for the Office of Tribal Relations, 1400 Independence Ave. SW., Whitten Bldg., 501-A, Washington, DC 20250; by Fax: (202) 720-1058; or by email:
In accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), as amended (5 U.S.C. App. 2), USDA established an advisory council for Native American farmers and ranchers. The CNAFR is a discretionary advisory committee established under the authority of the Secretary of Agriculture, in furtherance of the
The CNAFR will operate under the provisions of the FACA and report to the Secretary of Agriculture. The purpose of the CNAFR is (1) to advise the Secretary of Agriculture on issues related to the participation of Native American farmers and ranchers in USDA programs; (2) to transmit recommendations concerning any changes to USDA regulations or internal guidance or other measures that would eliminate barriers to program participation for Native American farmers and ranchers; (3) to examine methods of maximizing the number of new farming and ranching opportunities created by USDA programs through enhanced extension and financial literacy services; (4) to examine methods of encouraging intergovernmental cooperation to mitigate the effects of land tenure and probate issues on the delivery of USDA programs; (5) to evaluate other methods of creating new farming or ranching opportunities for Native American producers; and (6) to address other related issues as deemed appropriate.
The Secretary of Agriculture selected a diverse group of members representing a broad spectrum of persons interested in providing solutions to the challenges of the aforementioned purposes. Equal opportunity practices were considered in all appointments to the CNAFR in accordance with USDA policies. The Secretary selected the members in December 2016.
Interested persons may present views, orally or in writing, on issues relating to agenda topics before the CNAFR. Written submissions may be submitted to the CNAFR Contact Person on or before November 22, 2017. Oral presentations from the public will be heard approximately 1:30 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. on November 29, 2017. Individuals interested in making formal oral presentations should also notify the CNAFR Contact Person and submit a brief statement of the general nature of the issue they wish to present and the names, tribal affiliations, and addresses of proposed participants by November 22, 2017. All oral presentations will be given three (3) to five (5) minutes depending on the number of participants.
The OTR will also make the agenda available to the public via the OTR Web site (
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
Notice of availability and request for comments; extension of comment period.
We are extending the comment period for our draft environmental assessment relative to the control of yellow toadflax (
The comment period for the notice of availability and request for comments published on October 2, 2017 (82 FR 45796-45797), is extended. We will consider all comments that we receive on or before November 16, 2017.
You may submit comments by either of the following methods:
•
•
Supporting documents and any comments we receive on this docket may be viewed at
Dr. Colin D. Stewart, Assistant Director, Pests, Pathogens, and Biocontrol Permits, Permitting and Compliance Coordination, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231; (301) 851-2327, email:
On October 2, 2017, we published in the
Comments on the draft environmental assessment were required to be received on or before November 1, 2017. We are extending the comment period on Docket No. APHIS-2017-0071 for an additional 15 days. This action will allow interested persons additional time to prepare and submit comments.
Food and Nutrition Service, USDA.
Notice of approval of Information Collection Request (ICR).
The final rule and interim final rule titled Eligibility, Certification, and Employment and Training Provisions of the Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008 was published on January 6, 2017 (82 FR 2010). The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) cleared the associated information collection requirements on July 13, 2017. This document announces approval of the ICR.
The ICR associated with the final rule was published in the
Sasha Gersten-Paal, Branch Chief, Certification Policy Branch, Program Development Division, Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), at (703) 305-2507,
Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), USDA.
Notice.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice invites the general public and other public agencies to comment on this proposed information collection. This is a new collection for facilitating a communication network among CACFP organizations and USDA Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) Child Nutrition Programs, as well as between schools participating in the National School Breakfast Program and National School Lunch programs, both via the Team Nutrition initiative.
Written comments must be received on or before January 2, 2018.
Comments may be sent to: Kaylyn Padovani, Food and Nutrition Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 3101 Park Center Drive, Room 628, Alexandria, VA 22302. Comments may also be submitted via fax to the attention of Kaylyn Padovani at 703-305-2549 or via email to
All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for Office of Management and Budget approval. All comments will be a matter of public record.
Requests for additional information or copies of this information collection should be directed to Team Nutrition at 703-305-1624.
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information,
Team Nutrition uses the Socio-cognitive behavior theory to change behavior through three main strategies. The first is to provide training and technical assistance to child nutrition professionals to enable them to prepare and serve nutritious meals that appeal to children. Team Nutrition also increases opportunities for nutrition education through multiple communication channels to help children gain the knowledge, skills, and motivation to make healthy food and physical activity choices as part of a healthy lifestyle. Finally, Team Nutrition helps to build and bolster support for healthy school and child care environments that encourage nutritious food choices and physically active lifestyles.
Since 1995, Team Nutrition has collected information from schools via the Team Nutrition Database, to communicate releases and updates of Team Nutrition resources. In order to reach CACFP program operators and providers, FNS is expanding the database to collect the contact information of interested CACFP organizations (such as Sponsoring Agencies and Independent Centers). Those eligible entities that choose to input their information into the database, via the online enrollment forms either for Team Nutrition Schools or for Team Nutrition CACFP Organizations, will receive electronic correspondence, such as monthly newsletters and promotions that announce the availability of new and updated Team Nutrition materials that support nutrition education and provide technical assistance to foster an environment of health. This database allows the opportunity for the enrolled entities to affirm their commitment to childhood nutrition & wellness while gives the opportunity to collaborate with other peers.
The collection of the school contact information is currently approved under OMB #0584-0524 Generic Clearance to Conduct Formative Research, which expires on September 30, 2019. Since FNS wants to expand this data collection to include CACFP program operators and providers, FNS is creating a new information collection which will cover both activities. Once this new collection request has been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget, FNS will remove the burden associated with the Team Nutrition school contact information from OMB #0584-0524.
The Department of Commerce (DOC) will submit to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
A unique feature of the RLF Program is that, by law, EDA must exercise fiduciary responsibility over its RLF portfolio in perpetuity. EDA RLF regulations therefore require RLF recipients to submit Form ED-209, Revolving Loan Fund Financial Report, every six months for each RLF they operate (13 CFR 307.14(a)). In addition, RLF recipients must submit Form ED-209I, RLF Income and Expense Statement, every six months if either of the following conditions apply to their RLF: Administrative expenses for the reporting period exceeded $100,000, or RLF administrative expenses for the reporting period exceeded 50 percent of RLF income earned during the reporting period (13 CFR 307.14(c)). EDA requires that both of these reports be completed using an authorized and EDA-provided fillable PDF (Portable Document Format) Form.
This information collection request may be viewed at
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
On May 19, 2017, PGTEX USA, Inc. (PGTEX) submitted a notification of proposed production activity to the FTZ Board for its facility within FTZ 68—Site 3, in El Paso, Texas.
The notification was processed in accordance with the regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR part 400), including notice in the
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
The Department of Commerce (the Department) preliminarily determines that certain aluminum foil
Applicable November 2, 2017.
Tom Bellhouse or 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) 482-2057 and (202) 482-4475, respectively.
The Department published the notice of initiation of this LTFV investigation on March 30, 2017.
The product covered by this investigation is aluminum foil from the PRC. For a complete description of the scope of this investigation,
In accordance with the preamble to the Department's regulations,
The Department is conducting this investigation in accordance with section 731 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). We calculated export prices in accordance with section 772 of the Act. Because the PRC is a non-market economy within the meaning of section 771(18) of the Act, we calculated normal value (NV) in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act. For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions,
In the
The preliminary weighted-average antidumping margins are as follows:
In accordance
We will disclose to interested parties the calculations performed in this proceeding within five days of the date of announcement of this preliminary determination in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Case briefs or other written comments on the preliminary determination described above may be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance no later than seven days after the date on which the last verification report is issued in this proceeding.
Parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) A statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities.
Interested parties who wish to request a hearing must do so in writing within 30 days after the publication of this preliminary determination in the
Parties must file their case and rebuttal briefs, and any requests for a hearing, electronically using ACCESS.
Section 735(a)(2) of the Act provides that a final determination may be postponed until not later than 135 days after the date of the publication of the preliminary determination if, in the event of an affirmative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by exporters who account for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise, or in the event of a negative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by the petitioner. Section 351.210(e)(2) of the Department's regulations requires that requests by respondents for postponement of a final determination be accompanied by a request for extension of provisional measures from a four-month period to a period not more than six months in duration.
Respondents Dingsheng and Zhongji requested that, in the event of an affirmative preliminary determination in this investigation, the Department postpone its final determination,
In accordance with section 735(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(2)(ii), because: (1) Our preliminary determination is affirmative; (2) the requesting exporters account for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise; and (3) no compelling reasons for denial exist, we are postponing the final determination until no later than February 22, 2018, and are extending the provisional measures from a four-month period to a period not greater than six months.
In accordance with section 733(f) of the Act, we will notify the International
As part of this investigation, the Department initiated an inquiry into whether the PRC should continue to be treated as a nonmarket economy (NME) country under the antidumping and countervailing duty laws. The Department provided an opportunity for the public to comment and submit information with respect to the PRC on the six factors enumerated by section 771(18)(B) of the Act, which the Department must take into account in making a market/nonmarket economy determination. The Department has completed its inquiry and concludes that the PRC is a NME country because it does not operate sufficiently on market principles to permit the use of prices and costs in that country for purposes of the Department's antidumping analysis.
This determination is issued and published in accordance with sections 733(f) and 777(i)(I) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(c).
The merchandise covered by this investigation is aluminum foil having a thickness of 0.2 mm or less, in reels exceeding 25 pounds, regardless of width. Aluminum foil is made from an aluminum alloy that contains more than 92 percent aluminum. Aluminum foil may be made to ASTM specification ASTM B479, but can also be made to other specifications. Regardless of specification, however, all aluminum foil meeting the scope description is included in the scope.
Excluded from the scope of this investigation is aluminum foil that is backed with paper, paperboard, plastics, or similar backing materials on only one side of the aluminum foil, as well as etched capacitor foil and aluminum foil that is cut to shape.
Where the nominal and actual measurements vary, a product is within the scope if application of either the nominal or actual measurement would place it within the scope based on the definitions set forth above. The products under investigation are currently classifiable under Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings 7607.11.3000, 7607.11.6000, 7607.11.9030, 7607.11.9060, 7607.11.9090, and 760.19.6000. Further, merchandise that falls within the scope of this proceeding may also be entered into the United States under HTSUS subheadings 7606.11.3060, 7606.11.6000, 7606.12.3045, 7606.12.3055, 7606.12.3090, 7606.12.6000, 7606.91.3090, 7606.91.6080, 7606.92.3090, and 7606.92.6080. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this proceeding is dispositive.
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Commerce.
Notice. Agency Information Collection Activities, Proposals, Submissions and Approvals.
The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
Written comments must be submitted on or before January 2, 2018.
Direct all written comments to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6616, 14th and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at
Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to John Paul Jones II, Program Manager, Office of Special Programs, NIST, 100 Bureau Drive, Mailstop 8102, Gaithersburg, MD 20899; 301-975-2782;
NIST established the Organization of Scientific Area Committees for Forensic Science (OSAC) to enable a coordinated U.S. approach to standards for the forensic science disciplines. NIST seeks broad participation from forensic science practitioners, researchers, metrologists, statisticians, accreditation bodes, defense, and prosecution. NIST solicits self-nominations from these communities, using the OSAC Membership Application, to identify individuals interested and qualified to contribute.
The OSAC Membership Application may be completed and submitted only via web-based application.
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record.
Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, Department of Defense.
Notice of Federal Advisory Committee meeting.
The Department of Defense (DoD) is publishing this notice to announce that the following Federal Advisory Committee meeting of the Department of Defense Military Family Readiness Council will take place.
This meeting is open to the public and will be held on Monday, December 4, 2017 from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m., Pentagon Library and Conference Center, Room B6.
1155 Defense Pentagon PLC2 Pentagon Library and Conference Center, Room B6, Washington, DC 20301.
Dr. Randy Eltringham, (571) 372-5315 (Voice), (571) 372-0884 (Facsimile), or Ms. Melody McDonald (571) 372-0880 (Voice), OSD Pentagon OUSD P-R Mailbox Family Readiness Council,
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.
Exact order may vary.
U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Department of Energy (DOE).
Notice and request for comments.
EIA, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, intends to extend with no changes for three years with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Form EIA-851A
Comments regarding this proposed information collection must be received on or before January 2, 2018. If you anticipate difficulty in submitting comments within that period, contact the person listed in
Written comments may be sent to Tim Shear, U.S. Energy Information Administration, EI-23, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585 or by email to
Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to Tim Shear at 202-586-0403 or by email at
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information has practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
This information collection request contains:
(1) OMB No. 1905-0160;
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
Section 13(b) of the Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974, Pub. L. 93-275, codified as 15 U.S.C. 772(b) and the DOE Organization Act of 1977, Pub. L. 95-91, codified at 42 U.S.C. 7101
Take notice that the Commission received the following electric corporate filings:
Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt wholesale generator filings:
Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:
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:
The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) will prepare an environmental assessment (EA) that will discuss the environmental impacts of the Okeechobee Lateral Pipeline Project (Project) involving construction and operation of facilities by Florida Southeast Connection, LLC (FSC) in Okeechobee County, Florida. The Commission will use this EA in its decision-making process to determine whether the project is in the public convenience and necessity.
This notice announces the opening of the scoping process the Commission will use to gather input from the public and interested agencies on the project. You can make a difference by providing us with your specific comments or concerns about the project. Your comments should focus on the potential environmental effects, reasonable alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts. Your input will help the Commission staff determine what issues they need to evaluate in the EA. To ensure that your comments are timely and properly recorded, please send your comments so that the Commission receives them in Washington, DC on or before November 22, 2017.
This notice is being sent to the Commission's current environmental mailing list for this project. State and local government representatives should notify their constituents of this proposed project and encourage them to comment on their areas of concern.
If you are a landowner receiving this notice, a pipeline company representative may contact you about the acquisition of an easement to construct, operate, and maintain the proposed facilities. The company would seek to negotiate a mutually acceptable agreement. However, if the Commission approves the project, that approval conveys with it the right of eminent domain. Therefore, if easement negotiations fail to produce an agreement, the pipeline company could initiate condemnation proceedings where compensation would be determined in accordance with state.
FSC provided landowners with a fact sheet prepared by the FERC entitled “An Interstate Natural Gas Facility On My Land? What Do I Need To Know?” This fact sheet addresses a number of typically asked questions, including the use of eminent domain and how to participate in the Commission's proceedings. It is also available for viewing on the FERC Web site (
For your convenience, there are three methods you can use to submit your comments to the Commission. The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments and has expert staff available to assist you at (202) 502-8258 or
(1) You can file your comments electronically using the
(2) You can file your comments electronically by using the
(3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to the following address. Be sure to reference the project docket number CP17-463-000 with your submission: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.
FSC requests authorization to construct and operate approximately 5.2 miles of 20-inch-diameter natural gas transmission pipeline and associated facilities (inspection tool launcher and receiver and a meter station) in Okeechobee County, Florida. This pipeline would connect FSC's mainline system with the Florida Power & Light Company's Okeechobee Clean Energy Center (currently under construction) and would be capable of providing 400 million cubic feet per day of natural gas to this facility. FSC anticipates construction would require four to five months, beginning in mid-2018. The
Construction of the proposed facilities would disturb about 105 acres of land. Following construction, FSC would maintain about 30 acres of land for permanent operation of the project facilities. The remaining acreage would be restored and revert to former uses.
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the Commission to take into account the environmental impacts that could result from an action whenever it considers the issuance of a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. NEPA also requires us
In the EA we will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of the construction and operation of the proposed project under these general headings:
• Geology and soils;
• land use;
• water resources, fisheries, and wetlands;
• cultural resources;
• vegetation and wildlife;
• air quality and noise;
• endangered and threatened species;
• public safety; and
• cumulative impacts.
We will also evaluate reasonable alternatives to the proposed project or portions of the project, and make recommendations on how to lessen or avoid impacts on the various resource areas.
The EA will present our independent analysis of the issues. The EA will be available in the public record through eLibrary. Depending on the comments received during the scoping process, we may also publish and distribute the EA to the public for an allotted comment period. We will consider all comments on the EA before making our recommendations to the Commission. To ensure we have the opportunity to consider and address your comments, please carefully follow the instructions in the Public Participation section.
With this notice, we are asking agencies with jurisdiction by law and/or special expertise with respect to the environmental issues of this project to formally cooperate with us in the preparation of the EA.
In accordance with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's implementing regulations for section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, we are using this notice to initiate consultation with the applicable State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), and to solicit their views and those of other government agencies, interested Indian tribes, and the public on the project's potential effects on historic properties.
The environmental mailing list includes federal, state, and local government representatives and agencies; elected officials; environmental and public interest groups; Native American Tribes; other interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers. This list also includes all affected landowners (as defined in the Commission's regulations) who are potential right-of-way grantors, whose property may be used temporarily for project purposes, or who own homes within certain distances of aboveground facilities, and anyone who submits comments on the project. We will update the environmental mailing list as the analysis proceeds to ensure that we send the information related to this environmental review to all individuals, organizations, and government entities interested in and/or potentially affected by the proposed project.
If we publish and distribute the EA, copies of the EA will be sent to the environmental mailing list for public review and comment. If you would prefer to receive a paper copy of the document instead of the CD version or would like to remove your name from the mailing list, please return the attached Information Request (appendix 2).
In addition to involvement in the EA scoping process, you may want to become an “intervenor” which is an official party to the Commission's proceeding. Intervenors play a more formal role in the process and are able to file briefs, appear at hearings, and be heard by the courts if they choose to appeal the Commission's final ruling. An intervenor formally participates in the proceeding by filing a request to intervene. Instructions for becoming an intervenor are in the “Document-less Intervention Guide” under the “e-filing” link on the Commission's Web site. Motions to intervene are more fully described at
Additional information about the project is available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the FERC Web site at
In addition, the Commission offers a free service called eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings
Finally, public sessions or site visits will be posted on the Commission's calendar located at
Take notice that the Commission received the following electric corporate filings:
Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:
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:
Take notice that on October 19, 2017, pursuant to Rule 204 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.204, CVR Logistics, LLC filed a petition for temporary waiver of the tariff filing and reporting requirements applicable to interstate oil pipelines under Sections 6 and 20 of the Interstate Commerce Act and Parts 341 and 357 of the Commission's regulations. This request pertains to certain oil pipeline facilities and its associated appurtenances to be operated by Applicant within the States of Kansas and Oklahoma, as more fully explained in the petition.
Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Petitioner.
The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the eFiling link at
This filing is accessible on-line at
In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) regulations, 18 CFR part 380, the Office of Energy Projects has reviewed the application for a new license for the Salmon Creek and Annex Creek Hydroelectric Project, located on Salmon Creek and Annex Creek in the City and Borough of Juneau, Alaska and has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the project. The project occupies 648.45 acres of federal lands administered by the United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service.
The EA contains staff's analysis of the potential environmental effects of the project and concludes that relicensing the project, with appropriate environmental protective measures, would not constitute a major federal action that would significantly affect the quality of the human environment.
A copy of the EA is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
You may also register online at
Any comments should be filed within 30 days from the date of this notice.
The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file comments using the Commission's eFiling system at
For further information, contact Suzanne Novak at (202) 502-6665.
Take notice that on October 4, 2017, the North American Electric Reliability Corporation submitted an annual report on Find, Fix, Track and Report and Compliance Exception programs, in accordance with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Orders.
Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the eFiling link at
This filing is accessible on-line at
Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on November 13, 2017.
Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt wholesale generator filings:
Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:
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:
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission hereby gives notice that members of the Commission and/or Commission staff may attend the following meetings:
Further information regarding these meetings may be found at:
The discussions at the meetings, which are open to the public, may address matters at issue in the following Commission proceedings:
For further information, please contact Jonathan First, 202-502-8529, or
Take notice that on October 18, 2017, Enable Gas Transmission, LLC (Enable
Any questions regarding this application should be directed to Lisa Yoho, Senior Director, Regulatory and FERC Compliance for Enable Gas Transmission, LLC, P.O. Box 1336, Houston, Texas 77251, by telephone at (346) 701-2539, by fax at (346) 701-2905, or by Email at
Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 60 days after 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 and pursuant to section 157.205 of the regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.205), 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 filing a protest. If a protest is filed and not withdrawn within 30 days after the allowed time 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 commenters 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 commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenter will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order.
The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the eFiling link at
On October 27, 2017, the Commission issued an order in Docket No. EL18-8-000, pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C. 824e (2012), instituting an investigation into whether Great Bay Solar I, LLC's proposed revenue requirement for Reactive Supply and Voltage Control from Generation Sources Service may be unjust, unreasonable, unduly discriminatory or preferential, or otherwise unlawful.
The refund effective date in Docket No. EL18-8-000, established pursuant to section 206(b) of the FPA, will be the date of publication of this notice in the
Any interested person desiring to be heard in Docket No. EL18-8-000 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.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Notice of meeting.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announces an upcoming meeting for the Clean Air Act Advisory Committee (CAAAC). The EPA established the CAAAC on November 19, 1990, to provide independent advice and counsel to EPA on policy issues associated with implementation of the Clean Air Act of 1990. The Committee advises EPA on economic, environmental, technical, scientific and enforcement policy issues.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. App. 2 Section 10(a)(2), notice is hereby given that the CAAAC will hold its next face-to-face meeting on Tuesday, December 12th, 2017 from 8:30 a.m. until 4:30 p.m.
The meeting will take place at the Madison Hotel, 1177 15th St. NW., Washington, DC 20005.
Tamara Saltman, Designated Federal Official, Clean Air Act Advisory Committee (6103A), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 202-564-2781; email address:
The committee agenda and any documents prepared for the meeting will be publicly available on the CAAAC Web site at
For information on access or services for individuals with disabilities, please contact Lorraine Reddick at
Farm Credit Administration.
Notice, regular meeting.
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the Government in the Sunshine Act, of the regular meeting of the Farm Credit Administration Board (Board).
The regular meeting of the Board will be held at the offices of the Farm Credit Administration in McLean, Virginia, on November 9, 2017, from 9:00 a.m. until such time as the Board concludes its business.
Farm Credit Administration, 1501 Farm Credit Drive, McLean, Virginia 22102-5090. Submit attendance requests via email to
Dale L. Aultman, Secretary to the Farm Credit Administration Board, (703) 883-4009, TTY (703) 883-4056.
This meeting of the Board will be open to the public (limited space available). Please send an email to
The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841
The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications will also be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States.
Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than November 27, 2017.
1.
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
1.
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board) is adopting a proposal to extend for three years, without revision, the Notifications Related to Community Development and Public Welfare Investments of State Member Banks (FR H-6; OMB No. 7100-0278).
Federal Reserve Board Clearance Officer—Nuha Elmaghrabi—Office of the Chief Data Officer, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Washington, DC 20551 (202) 452-3829. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (TDD) users may contact (202) 263-4869, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Washington, DC 20551.
OMB Desk Officer—Shagufta Ahmed—Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503 or by fax to (202) 395-6974.
On June 15, 1984, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) delegated to the Board authority under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) to approve of and assign OMB control numbers to collection of information requests and requirements conducted or sponsored by the Board. Board-approved collections of information are incorporated into the official OMB inventory of currently approved collections of information. Copies of the Paperwork Reduction Act Submission, supporting statements and approved collection of information instrument(s) are placed into OMB's public docket files. The Federal Reserve may not conduct or sponsor, and the respondent is not required to respond to, an information collection that has been extended, revised, or implemented on or after October 1, 1995, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
Notice of revised Privacy Act system notices.
The FTC is making technical revisions to several of the notices that it is required to publish under the Privacy Act of 1974 to describe its systems of records. This action is intended to make these notices clearer, more accurate, and up-to-date.
This notice shall become final and effective on November 2, 2017.
G. Richard Gold and Alex Tang, Attorneys, Office of the General Counsel, FTC, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580, (202) 326-2424.
To inform the public, the FTC publishes in the
On June 12, 2008, the FTC republished and updated all of the FTC's SORNs, describing all of the agency's systems of records covered by the Privacy Act in a single document for ease of use and reference. 73 FR 33592. To ensure the SORNs remain accurate, FTC staff reviews each SORN on a periodic basis. As a result of this systematic review, the FTC made revisions to several of its SORNs on April 17, 2009, 74 FR 17863, August 27, 2010, 75 FR 52749, and February 23, 2015, 80 FR 9460. Based on subsequent review, the FTC is making the following technical revisions to a total of eight SORNs in four FTC SORN categories (I, II, III and V).
These SORNs relate to FTC employee records. The Human Resources Management Office (HRMO) is now the Human Capital Management Office (HCMO). We have revised references in these SORNs to reflect this change.
In light of the updated SORN template set forth in the newly revised OMB Circular A-108 (2016), the FTC is reprinting the entire text of each amended SORN for the public's benefit, to read as follows:
Matter Management System—FTC (FTC-I-5).
Unclassified.
Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580. For other locations where records may be maintained or accessed, see Appendix III (Locations of FTC Buildings and Regional Offices), available on the FTC's Web site at
Director, Records and Filings Office, Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580, email:
Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. 41
This system, currently known within the FTC as Matter Management System 2 (MMS2), is used to record and track the status or occurrence of planned or actual actions and events that may arise in investigations, rulemakings, or other Commission matters, and to generate status or history reports on these actions, events, and matters for use by Commission management and staff, in combination, as needed, with matter-related data from other systems (
This system includes a subsystem of records (formerly known as the Office of the Secretary Control and Reporting System or OSCAR) to record and keep track of the status of matters pending for a vote or other review or action before the full Commission (
Past and present Commission employees, and other participants or parties in Commission investigations, rulemaking, advisory, and law enforcement matters or proceedings. (Businesses, sole proprietorships, or corporations are not covered by this system.)
For records about past or present Commission employees: Name; employee identification number; organization name and code; employee work activities; and specific responsibilities and assignments on individual matters. For others: Records related to investigatory, rulemaking, advisory opinion and other matters or proceedings, including name and associated matter number; matter status; alleged or potential law violation; and goods or services associated with the proceeding. The records also include brief descriptions or summaries of planned or actual actions or events during an FTC investigation, rulemaking, court case, or other FTC matter or proceeding. The system also includes records of assignments, votes, circulations, or other activities or actions of the FTC's Commissioners on agency proceedings and matters.
Individual on whom the record is maintained and Commission staff associated with the matter.
Records in this system:
(1) May be made available or referred to federal, state, local or international government authorities for investigation, possible criminal prosecution, civil action, regulatory order or other law enforcement purpose; and
(2) May be disclosed on the FTC's public record under the FTC's Rules of Practice. See FTC-I-6, Public Records-FTC.
For other ways that the Privacy Act permits the FTC to use or disclose system records outside the agency, see Appendix I (Authorized Disclosures and Routine Uses Applicable to All FTC Privacy Act Systems of Records), available on the FTC's Web site at
System records are primarily maintained and accessed electronically. The system can generate electronic or printed status or history reports.
Indexed by Commissioner, staff, or other individual name, employee identification number, matter number, respondent's or correspondent's name, company name, industry investigation title, and FTC matter number.
Records are retained and disposed of in accordance with Schedule 2 of FTC Records Retention Schedule N1-122-09-1, which was approved by the National Archives and Records Administration.
For records other than those made public, access is restricted to agency personnel or contractors whose responsibilities require access. Access to nonpublic electronic records is controlled by “user ID” and password combination and/or other appropriate electronic access or network controls (
See § 4.13 of the FTC's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 4.13. For additional guidance, see also Appendix II (How To Make A Privacy Act Request), available on the FTC's Web site at
See § 4.13 of the FTC's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 4.13. For additional guidance, see also Appendix II (How To Make A Privacy Act Request), available on the FTC's Web site at
See § 4.13 of the FTC's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 4.13. For additional guidance, see also Appendix II (How To Make A Privacy Act Request), available on the FTC's Web site at
Copies of records contained in this system that have been placed on the FTC public record are available upon request or from the FTC's Web site, where applicable. See FTC-I-6, Public Records—FTC. However, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2), records in this system, which reflect records that are contained in other systems of records that are designated as exempt, are exempt from the requirements of subsections (c)(3), (d), (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (H), (I), and (f) of 5 U.S.C. 552a. See § 4.13(m) of the FTC Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 4.13(m).
73 FR 33591-33634 (June 12, 2008).
Office of Inspector General Investigative Files-FTC (FTC-I-7).
Unclassified.
Office of Inspector General (OIG), Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580. For other locations where records may be maintained or accessed, see Appendix III (Locations of FTC Buildings and Regional Offices), available on the FTC's Web site at
Inspector General, Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580, email:
Inspector General Act Amendments of 1988, Pubic Law 100-504, amending the Inspector General Act of 1978, Pub. L. 95-452, 5 U.S.C. app.
To document the conduct and outcome of investigations; to report results of investigations to other components of the FTC or other agencies and authorities for their use in evaluating their programs and imposition of criminal, civil or administrative sanctions; to report the results of investigations to other agencies or other regulatory bodies for an action deemed appropriate and for retaining sufficient information to fulfill reporting requirements; and to maintain records related to the activities of the Office of the Inspector General.
Subjects of OIG investigations relating to the programs and operations of the Federal Trade Commission. Subject individuals include, but are not limited to, current and former employees; current and former agents or employees of contractors or subcontractors, as well as current and former contractors and subcontractors in their personal capacity, where applicable; and other individuals whose actions affect the FTC, its programs or operations.
Correspondence relating to the investigation; internal staff memoranda; copies of subpoenas issued during the investigation, affidavits, statements from witnesses, transcripts of testimony taken in the investigation and accompanying exhibits; documents, records or copies obtained during the investigation; interview notes, documents and records relating to the investigation; opening reports, information or data relating to alleged or suspected criminal, civil or administrative violations or similar wrongdoing by subject individuals and final reports of investigation.
Employees or other individuals on whom the record is maintained, non-target witnesses, FTC and non-FTC records, to the extent necessary to carry out OIG investigations authorized by 5 U.S.C. app.
Records in this system may be:
(1) Disclosed to agencies, offices, or establishments of the executive, legislative, or judicial branches of the federal or state government—
(a) Where such agency, office, or establishment has an interest in the individual for employment purposes, including a security clearance or determination as to access to classified information, and needs to evaluate the individual's qualifications, suitability, and loyalty to the United States Government, or
(b) Where such agency, office, or establishment conducts an investigation of the individual for the purposes of granting a security clearance, or for making a determination of qualifications, suitability, or loyalty to the United States Government, or access to classified information or restricted areas, or
(c) Where the records or information in those records are relevant and necessary to a decision with regard to the hiring or retention of an employee or disciplinary or other administrative action concerning an employee, or
(d) Where disclosure is requested in connection with the award of a contract or other determination relating to a government procurement, or the issuance of a license, grant, or other benefit by the requesting agency, to the extent that the record is relevant and necessary to the requesting agency's decision on the matter, including, but not limited to, disclosure to any Federal agency responsible for considering suspension or debarment actions where such record would be germane to a determination of the propriety or necessity of such action, or disclosure to the United States General Accountability Office, the General Services Administration Board of Contract Appeals, or any other federal contract board of appeals in cases relating to an agency procurement;
(2) Disclosed to the Office of Personnel Management, the Office of Government Ethics, the Merit Systems Protection Board, the Office of the Special Counsel, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, or the Federal Labor Relations Authority or its General Counsel, of records or portions thereof relevant and necessary to carrying out their authorized functions, such as, but not limited to, rendering advice requested by the OIG, investigations of alleged or prohibited personnel practices (including unfair labor or discriminatory practices), appeals before official agencies, offices, panels or boards, and authorized studies or review of civil service or merit systems or affirmative action programs;
(3) Disclosed to independent auditors or other private firms with which the Office of the Inspector General has contracted to carry out an independent audit or investigation, or to analyze, collate, aggregate or otherwise refine data collected in the system of records, subject to the requirement that such contractors shall maintain Privacy Act safeguards with respect to such records;
(4) Disclosed to a direct recipient of federal funds such as a contractor, where such record reflects serious inadequacies with a recipient's personnel and disclosure of the record is for purposes of permitting a recipient to take corrective action beneficial to the Government;
(5) Disclosed to any official charged with the responsibility to conduct qualitative assessment reviews of internal safeguards and management procedures employed in investigative operations. This disclosure category includes members of the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency and officials and administrative staff within their investigative chain of command, as well as authorized officials of the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation;
(6) Disclosed to members of the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency for the preparation of reports to the President and Congress on the activities of the Inspectors General; and
(7) Disclosed to complainants and/or victims to the extent necessary to provide such persons with information and explanations concerning the progress and/or results of the investigation or case arising from the matters of which they complained and/or which they were a victim.
For other ways that the Privacy Act permits the FTC to use or disclose system records outside the agency, see Appendix I (Authorized Disclosures and Routine Uses Applicable to All FTC Privacy Act Systems of Records), available on the FTC's Web site at
The FTC maintains system records in various electronic and non-electronic formats and media. The OIG Investigative Files consist of paper records maintained in file folders, cassette tapes and CD-ROMs containing
The records are retrieved by the name of the subject of the investigation or by a unique control number assigned to each investigation.
Records are retained indefinitely, pending approval of an applicable retention and disposal schedule by the National Archives and Records Administration.
Access is restricted to agency personnel or contractors whose responsibilities require access. Paper records are maintained in lockable rooms or file cabinets, which are kept locked during non-duty hours. Records in file folders are retained as long as needed and then destroyed by shredding or burning. Computer disks and CD-ROMs are cleared, retired or destroyed when no longer useful. Entries on electronic media are deleted or erased when no longer needed. To the extent records or portions thereof are incorporated into emails or other electronic communications, access to such electronic records is controlled by “user ID” and password combination and/or other electronic access or network controls (
See § 4.13 of the FTC's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 4.13. For additional guidance, see also Appendix II (How To Make A Privacy Act Request), available on the FTC's Web site at
See § 4.13 of the FTC's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 4.13. For additional guidance, see also Appendix II (How To Make A Privacy Act Request), available on the FTC's Web site at
See § 4.13 of the FTC's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 4.13. For additional guidance, see also Appendix II (How To Make A Privacy Act Request), available on the FTC's Web site at
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), records in this system are exempt from the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552(a), except subsections (b), (c)(1) and (2), (e)(4)(A) through (F), (e)(6), (7), (9), (10) and (11) and (i) and corresponding provisions of 16 CFR 4.13, to the extent that a record in the system of records was compiled for criminal law enforcement purposes.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2), the system is exempt from 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3), (d), (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (H) and (I) and (f) and the corresponding provisions of 16 CFR 4.13, to the extent the system of records consists of investigatory material compiled for law enforcement purposes, other than material within the scope of the exemption at 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2). See 16 CFR 4.13(m).
74 FR 17863-17866 (April 17, 2009)
73 FR 33591-33634 (June 12, 2008).
Workers' Compensation—FTC (FTC-II-3).
Unclassified.
Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580. For other locations where records may be maintained or accessed, see Appendix III (Locations of FTC Buildings and Regional Offices), available on the FTC's Web site at
Director, Human Capital Management Office (HCMO), Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580. See DOL/GOVT-1 for information about the system manager and address for that system, email:
Federal Employees Compensation Act (FECA), 5 U.S.C. 8101
To consider claims filed by employees and/or their survivors for compensation under FECA based on work-related injuries, and to maintain records concerning such claims. The FECA establishes the system for processing and adjudicating claims that the Commission employee and/or the Commission and other covered individuals file with DOL's Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, seeking monetary, medical and similar benefits for injuries or deaths sustained by the individual while in the performance of duty. The records maintained in this system are created as a result of and are necessary to this process. The records provide information and verification about the individual's employment-related injury and the resulting disabilities and/or impairments, if any, on which decisions awarding or denying benefits provided under the FECA must be based.
Individuals (
This system may contain the following kinds of records: Names; Social Security numbers; reports of injury by the employee and/or the Commission; claim forms filed by or on behalf of injured employees or their survivors seeking benefits under the FECA; forms authorizing medical care and treatment; other medical records and reports; bills and other payment records; compensation payment records; copies of formal orders for or against the payment of benefits; copies of transcripts of hearings conducted; and any other medical, employment, or personal information submitted or gathered in connection with the claim. The system may also contain information relating to dates of birth, marriage, divorce, and death; notes of telephone conversations conducted in connection with the claim; information relating to vocational and/or medical
This system includes only claims-related records maintained by the FTC. Claims are transmitted the United States Department of Labor (DOL) for processing and adjudication. Data maintained by DOL by the Government-wide system of records notice published by DOL for its system of records, see DOL/GOVT-1 (Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, Federal Employees' Compensation Act File) or any successor DOL system notice that may be published for that system.
Employee claiming work-related injury; beneficiaries; witnesses; FTC supervisors, managers, and responsible FTC HCMO staff; DOL; suppliers of health care products and services and their agents and representatives, including physicians, hospitals, and clinics; consumer credit reports, etc.
Records in this system may be:
(1) Disclosed in response to queries from Department of Labor, Office of Workers Compensation Programs, supervisors and employees about compensation claims; and
(2) Used or disclosed for any purpose or routine use set forth in the system of records notice published by DOL for this system of records, DOL/GOVT-1 (Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, Federal Employees' Compensation Act File), or any successor DOL system notice that may be published for this system.
For other ways that the Privacy Act permits the FTC to use or disclose system records outside the agency, see Appendix I (Authorized Disclosures and Routine Uses Applicable to All FTC Privacy Act Systems of Records), available on the FTC's Web site at
Maintained in file folders or temporary electronic files.
Indexed by individual's name.
Records are retained and disposed of under schedules and procedures approved or issued by the National Archives and Records Administration.
See DOL/GOVT-1 for the retention and disposal schedules that apply to claims files maintained by that agency. In general, all case files and automated data in that system pertaining to a claim are destroyed 15 years after the case file has become inactive. Case files that have been scanned to create electronic copies are destroyed after the copies are verified. Automated data are retained in their most current form only, however, and as information is updated, outdated information is deleted.
Access is restricted to agency personnel or contractors whose responsibilities require access. Paper records are maintained in lockable rooms or file cabinets. Access to electronic records is controlled by “user ID” and password combination and/or other appropriate electronic access or network controls (
See § 4.13 of the FTC's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 4.13. For additional guidance, see also Appendix II (How To Make A Privacy Act Request), available on the FTC's Web site at
See § 4.13 of the FTC's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 4.13. For additional guidance, see also Appendix II (How To Make A Privacy Act Request), available on the FTC's Web site at
See § 4.13 of the FTC's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 4.13. For additional guidance, see also Appendix II (How To Make A Privacy Act Request), available on the FTC's Web site at
As explained in DOL/GOVT-1, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2), investigative materials, if any, in this system of records compiled for law enforcement purposes are exempt from subsections (c)(3), (d), (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (H) and (I), and (f) of 5 U.S.C. 552a, provided, however, that if any individual is denied any right, privilege, or benefit that he or she would otherwise be entitled to by Federal law, or for which he or she would otherwise be eligible, as a result of the maintenance of these records, such material shall be provided to the individual, except to the extent that the disclosure of the material would reveal the identity of a source who furnished information to the Government under an express promise that the identity of the source would be held in confidence, or prior to January 1, 1975, under an implied promise that the identity of the source would be held in confidence.
80 FR 9460-9465 (February 23, 2015)
73 FR 33591-33634 (June 12, 2008).
Equal Employment Opportunity Statistical Reporting System—FTC (FTC-II-5).
Unclassified.
Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580. For other locations where records may be maintained or accessed, see Appendix III (Locations of FTC Buildings and Regional Offices), available on the FTC's Web site at
Director, Equal Employment Opportunity Office, Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580, email:
5 U.S.C. 1301, 3301, 7201, 7204; Executive Order 10577; 42 U.S.C. 2000e-16; Public Law 93-112.
To maintain EEO-related data about the FTC workforce; to protect and limit access to such workforce data by collecting and maintaining such data separately from certain other human resources records about employees; to provide the FTC's EEO Office with data necessary to create general statistical analyses and reports.
FTC employees.
Coded minority group designations and other data relevant to equal employment opportunity (EEO) at the FTC; other employee identification data (
Self-identification by employee (
Data from system records are disclosed only in aggregate, non-individually identifiable form in analyses and reports generated for use within the FTC and for reporting to Congress, the Office of Management and Budget, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and the Office of Personnel Management, as required by law. For other ways that the Privacy Act permits the FTC to use or disclose system records outside the agency, see Appendix I (Authorized Disclosures and Routine Uses Applicable to All FTC Privacy Act Systems of Records), available on the FTC's Web site at
Data from information collection forms completed by FTC employees are entered into and stored in a structured electronic database maintained on agency servers, with restricted access (see “Safeguards” below). Paper forms are compiled and kept in the FTC's EEO Office.
Indexed by name of individual, name of group, or by cross-reference to title and grade or other human resources data fields or codes.
Records are retained and destroyed in accordance with schedules and guidance issued or approved by the National Archives and Records Administration. See,
Access is restricted to FTC personnel or contractors whose job duties require such access. Initial receipt and handling of information collection forms, as well as entry of data into computerized databases, is limited to authorized FTC individuals. Information collection forms are forwarded to and stored in lockable cabinets and offices within the FTC's EEO Office. Completed forms and system data are stored and maintained separately from other human resources records to prevent access or use by unauthorized individuals. Access to electronic records is controlled by “user ID” and password combination, and may be obtained only by written authorization of the FTC's EEO Director. System database is further protected by other network controls (
See § 4.13 of the FTC's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 4.13. For additional guidance, see also Appendix II (How To Make A Privacy Act Request), available on the FTC's Web site at
See § 4.13 of the FTC's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 4.13. For additional guidance, see also Appendix II (How To Make A Privacy Act Request), available on the FTC's Web site at
See § 4.13 of the FTC's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 4.13. For additional guidance, see also Appendix II (How To Make A Privacy Act Request), available on the FTC's Web site at
None.
73 FR 33591-33634 (June 12, 2008).
Employee Health Care Records—FTC (FTC-II-10).
Unclassified.
Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580. For other locations where records may be maintained or accessed, see Appendix III (Locations of FTC Buildings and Regional Offices), available on the FTC's Web site at
Director, Human Capital Management Office, Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580, email:
Director, DCP/HRS/PSC, Room 4A-15, Parklawn Building, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, Maryland 20857-0001.
5 U.S.C. chapters 11, 63, 81, 83, and 84; 42 U.S.C. 216.
To maintain records concerning medical treatment administered to employees while on the job; to maintain continuity of care and evaluation; to furnish documentary evidence of the course of the patient's medical evaluation and treatment; to document communications between the responsible practitioner and any other health professionals contributing to the individual's health care and treatment; to verify the individual's eligibility for certain services; for quality assurance (
See OPM/GOVT-10 for a description of the purposes for which the agency may compile and maintain other employee medical records, if any, that are described in and covered by that OPM system notice.
Current and former FTC employees or others who receive services through on-site health units at FTC facilities.
Names, medical reports, opinions, evaluations, diagnoses and treatment information; and other records of the type described in the Privacy Act system of records notice published by the Health and Human Services' Program Support Center (HHS/PSC) for System No. 09-40-0005 (Public Health Service (PHS) Beneficiary-Contract Medical/Health Care Records), or any successor system notice for that system. The FTC currently has an interagency contract with HHS/PSC, which, in turn, uses private contractors to provide nursing, vaccination, and other miscellaneous on-site health care services to FTC employees.
This system (FTC-II-10) excludes other medical records, if any, that may be compiled or maintained by the FTC or a contractor on the FTC's behalf about FTC employees resulting from: (1) A request for reasonable accommodation under sections 501 and 505 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (Pub. L. 93-112); (2) a condition of the individual's employment (
Individual about whom the records are maintained, treating nurses or other medical staff, witness statements, supervisors/managers and other agency officials, and others.
Records in this system may be:
(1) Used to disclose information to the Department of Labor, Department of Veterans Affairs, Social Security Administration, Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board, or a national, state, or local Social Security-type agency, when necessary to adjudicate a claim (filed by or on behalf of the individual) under a retirement, insurance, or health benefit program;
(2) Used to disclose information to a Federal, state, or local agency to the extent necessary to comply with laws governing reporting of communicable diseases;
(3) Used to disclose information to the Merit Systems Protection Board, the Office of Special Counsel, the Federal Labor Relations Authority and its General Counsel, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, arbitrators, and hearing examiners to the extent necessary to carry out their authorized duties;
(4) Used to disclose information to health insurance carriers contracting with the Office of Personnel Management to provide a health benefits plan under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program information necessary to verify eligibility for payment of a claim for health benefits, and to disclose information to the Office of Federal Employees Group Life Insurance or Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board that is relevant and necessary to adjudicate claims;
(5) Used to disclose information, when an individual to whom a record pertains is mentally incompetent or under other legal disability, to any person who is responsible for the care of the individual, to the extent necessary, and to disclose to the agency-appointed representative of an employee all notices, determinations, decisions, or other written communications issued to the employee, in connection with an examination ordered by the agency under agency-filed disability retirement procedures;
(6) Used to disclose to a requesting agency, organization, or individual the home address and other information concerning those individuals who it is reasonably believed might have contracted an illness or been exposed to or suffered from a health hazard while employed in the Federal work force; and
(7) May be disclosed, to the extent they reflect information regarding the commission of crimes or the reporting of occurrences of communicable diseases, tumors, child abuse, births, deaths, alcohol or drug abuse, etc., as required by health providers and facilities by State law or regulation of the department of health or other agency of the State or its subdivision in which the facility is located. Disclosures will be made to organizations as specified by the State law or regulation, such as births and deaths to the vital statistics agency and crimes to law enforcement agencies.
For other ways that the Privacy Act permits the FTC to use or disclose system records outside the agency, see Appendix I (Authorized Disclosures and Routine Uses Applicable to All FTC Privacy Act Systems of Records), available on the FTC's Web site at
Stored in file folders. Some information may be stored temporarily in electronic format (
Indexed by individual's name.
Records are retained according to schedules and procedures issued or approved by the National Archives and Records Administration.
Access is restricted to agency personnel or contractors whose responsibilities require access. Paper records are maintained in lockable rooms or file cabinets. Access to electronic records is controlled by “user ID” and password combination and/or other appropriate electronic access or network controls (
See § 4.13 of the FTC's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 4.13. For additional guidance, see also Appendix II (How To Make A Privacy Act Request), available on the FTC's Web site at
See § 4.13 of the FTC's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 4.13. For additional guidance, see also Appendix II (How To Make A Privacy Act Request), available on the FTC's Web site at
See § 4.13 of the FTC's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 4.13. For additional guidance, see also Appendix II (How To Make A Privacy Act Request), available on the FTC's Web site at
None.
80 FR 9460-9465 (February 23, 2015).
74 FR 17863-17866 (April 17, 2009).
73 FR 33591-33634 (June 12, 2008).
Travel Management System—FTC (FTC-III-2).
Not applicable.
Financial Management Office, Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20580. This system of records is principally operated and maintained off-site for the FTC by the Department of the Interior, although this system is also intended to include any miscellaneous official FTC travel data that may be maintained on-site by individual FTC offices and retrieved by name or other personally assigned identifier about individuals on official FTC travel. For other locations where records may be maintained or accessed, see Appendix III (Locations of FTC Buildings and Regional Offices), available on the FTC's Web site at
Chief Financial Officer, Financial Management Office, Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20580, email:
31 U.S.C. 3511, 3512 and 3523; 5 U.S.C. Chapter 57; and implementing Federal Travel Regulations (41 CFR parts 301-304).
To plan, authorize, arrange, process and manage official FTC travel; to maintain records on individuals who are current FTC employees on travel and individuals being provided travel by the Government; to obtain travel authorizations; to prepare and submit local travel vouchers; to generate travel expense reports; and to enable travel agents who are under contract to the Federal government to issue and account for travel provided to individuals.
FTC employees or other individuals (
Names, Social Security numbers, home and/or business phone numbers, home and/or business addresses, vendor ID numbers, email addresses, emergency contact information (names, addresses, and phone numbers), and credit card information (personal and/or government-issued). For traveling FTC employees or other individuals (
Other types of records covered by this system are set out in the General Services Administration (GSA) Privacy Act system of records notice applicable to this system, GSA/GOVT-4, or any successor system notice for this system.
Traveling employees or other individuals (
(1) For any routine use noted in the GSA Privacy Act system of records notice applicable to this system, GSA/GOVT-4, or any successor system notice for this system.
For other ways that the Privacy Act permits the FTC to use or disclose system records outside the agency, see Appendix I (Authorized Disclosures and Routine Uses Applicable to All FTC Privacy Act Systems of Records), available on the FTC's Web site at
Data are entered into system database by traveling individuals and/or administrative staff through system Web site and stored electronically; temporary paper printouts. Miscellaneous travel data maintained by individual FTC offices are stored in electronic files on secured agency servers.
Indexed by individual name and travel order number.
See National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) General Records Schedule (GRS) 9 for Travel and Transportation Records, and GRS 20 for Electronic Records. Electronic data are available online as detailed records for at least 36 months, and are available as retrievable archived records for at least 6 years and 3 months, pursuant to NARA guidelines regarding record disposition, as provided in 36 CFR 1228 and 1234. Records that meet the criteria for disposition may be purged from the system database. Other materials, including inputs and hard copy printouts derived from electronic records created on an ad hoc basis for reference purposes or to meet day-to-day business needs, are destroyed when the agency determines that they are no longer needed for administrative, legal, audit, or other operational purposes according to the GRS.
Access is restricted to agency personnel or contractors whose responsibilities require access. Paper records are maintained in lockable rooms or file cabinets. Access to electronic records is controlled by “user ID” and password combination and/or other appropriate electronic access or network controls (
See § 4.13 of the FTC's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 4.13. For additional guidance, see also Appendix II (How To Make A Privacy Act Request), available on the FTC's Web site at
See § 4.13 of the FTC's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 4.13. For additional guidance, see also Appendix II (How To Make A Privacy Act Request), available on the FTC's Web site at
See § 4.13 of the FTC's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 4.13. For additional guidance, see also Appendix II (How To Make A Privacy Act Request), available on the FTC's Web site at
None.
75 FR 52749-52751 (August 27, 2010); 73 FR 33591-33634 (June 12, 2008).
Employee Transportation Program Records—FTC (FTC-III-5).
Unclassified.
Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580. For other locations where records may be maintained or accessed, see Appendix III (Locations of FTC Buildings and Regional Offices), available on the FTC's Web site at
Director, Administrative Services Office, Office of the Executive Director, Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580, email:
5 U.S.C. 7905 note; Public Law 103-172; Executive Order 13150.
Transit subsidy records are collected and maintained to implement Federal law encouraging Federal employees to use public transportation for commuting to and from work. Such records are used to authorize subsidies for qualified FTC employees to help cover such commuting costs; to ensure the accurate and timely disbursement of subsidies to such employees; and to audit and otherwise detect or prevent fraud or abuse, if any, of such subsidies. Other employee transportation program records may be collected and maintained to administer those programs, including for building security purposes (
Past and present FTC employees who have applied for public transportation subsidies to commute for work, or who may apply to participate in other employee transportation-related programs (
Data that the FTC may compile, generate, and maintain in connection with reviewing and approving transit subsidy applications filed by eligible FTC employees with the online system operated by Department of Transportation (DOT), which administers and distributes Federal transit subsidies.
This FTC system notice applies to application data about FTC employees that the FTC may access from DOT's system, or that the FTC may itself generate, in reviewing and approving transit subsidies requested by its employees, or to audit and verify transit disbursements made to such employees, to the extent the FTC maintains and retrieves this data from its own system of records by employee name or other identifier assigned to such individuals. This system notice does not cover the transit application data compiled and maintained by DOT, which is covered by DOT's system notice. See DOT/ALL 8 (Employee Transportation Facilitation), or any successor system notice for that system, for the categories of records maintained in DOT's system.
Past and current FTC employees who have applied to participate in the subsidy program; FTC offices; Department of Transportation.
Records in this system:
(1) May be disclosed to the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) for purposes of processing and distributing subsidies to FTC employees and verifying employee compliance with program rules, and may be used and disclosed by DOT under the routine uses set forth in the applicable DOT system notice, DOT/ALL 8 (Employee Transportation Facilitation), or any successor system notice for that system; and
(2) May be disclosed to other investigatory or law enforcement authorities, where necessary, to investigate, prosecute, discipline, or pursue other appropriate action against suspected program fraud or abuse, if any.
For other ways that the Privacy Act permits the FTC to use or disclose system records outside the agency, see Appendix I (Authorized Disclosures and Routine Uses Applicable to All FTC Privacy Act Systems of Records), available on the FTC's Web site at
Records are maintained in electronic or paper format.
Records are maintained and retrieved alphabetically by employee's last name.
Retained for three years and then destroyed, in accordance with the National Archives and Records Administration's General Record Schedule 9, Item 7.
Access is restricted to FTC personnel or contractors whose responsibilities require access. Records are maintained in passphrase protected computer systems or locked file cabinets, accessible only to the program manager or other FTC staff whose job duties require access. FTC buildings are guarded and monitored by security personnel, cameras, ID checks, and other physical security measures. Obsolete records are destroyed by disposal in burn bags, by shredding, or by similarly secure means.
See § 4.13 of the FTC's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 4.13. For additional guidance, see also Appendix II (How To Make A Privacy Act Request), available on the FTC's Web site at
See § 4.13 of the FTC's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 4.13. For additional guidance, see also Appendix II (How To Make A Privacy Act Request), available on the FTC's Web site at
See § 4.13 of the FTC's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 4.13. For additional guidance, see also Appendix II (How To Make A Privacy Act Request), available on the FTC's Web site at
None.
73 FR 33591-33634 (June 12, 2008).
Privacy Act Requests and Appeals—FTC (FTC-V-2).
Unclassified.
Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580. For other locations where records may be maintained or accessed, see Appendix III (Locations of FTC Buildings and Regional Offices), available on the FTC's Web site at
Freedom of Information Act/Privacy Act Supervisor, Office of the General Counsel, Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580, email:
Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. 41
To process and review requests and appeals for access to, correction of, or an accounting of disclosure of records under the Privacy Act; to determine the status of requested records or the request for correction or disclosure; to respond to such requests and appeals; and to maintain records documenting the consideration and disposition of these requests for reporting, analysis, and recordkeeping purposes.
Individuals filing requests for access to, correction of, or an accounting of disclosures of personal information contained in system of records maintained by the Commission, pursuant to the Privacy Act; FTC staff assigned to help process, consider, and respond to such requests, including any appeals.
Requests and other communications and documents generated or compiled by the FTC to process, review, and respond to the Privacy Act request, including any appeals.
Individual about whom record is maintained and agency staff assigned to help process, review or respond to the request, including any appeal.
For other ways that the Privacy Act permits the FTC to use or disclose system records outside the agency, see Appendix I (Authorized Disclosures and Routine Uses Applicable to All FTC Privacy Act Systems of Records), available on the FTC's Web site at
System records are stored and maintained electronically using a commercial software run on the agency's internal network servers. Temporary paper files are destroyed once the request is complete.
Indexed by name of requesting party. Records can also be searched by address, phone number, fax number, and email of the requesting party, subject matter of the request, requestor organization, FOIA number, and staff member assigned to request.
Records are retained and disposed of in accordance with General Records Schedule 4.2, issued by the National Archives and Records Administration.
Access to nonpublic system records is restricted to FTC personnel or contractors whose responsibilities require access. Nonpublic paper records are temporary, maintained in lockable file cabinets or offices, and destroyed once the request is complete. Access to electronic records is controlled by “user ID” and passphrase combination and other electronic access or network controls (
See § 4.13 of the FTC's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 4.13. For additional guidance, see also Appendix II (How To Make A Privacy Act Request), available on the FTC's Web site at
See § 4.13 of the FTC's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 4.13. For additional guidance, see also Appendix II (How To Make A Privacy Act Request), available on the FTC's Web site at
See § 4.13 of the FTC's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 4.13. For additional guidance, see also Appendix II (How To Make A Privacy Act Request), available on the FTC's Web site at
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2), records in this system, which reflect records that are contained in other systems of records that are designated as exempt, are exempt from the requirements of subsections (c)(3), (d), (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (H), (I), and (f) of 5 U.S.C. 552a. See § 4.13(m) of the FTC Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 4.13(m).
73 FR 33591-33634 (June 12, 2008).
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Notice; renewal of advisory committee.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the renewal of the Patient Engagement Advisory Committee by the Commissioner of Food and Drugs (the Commissioner). The Commissioner has determined that it is in the public interest to renew the Patient Engagement Advisory Committee for an additional 2 years beyond the charter expiration date. The new charter will be in effect until October 6, 2019.
Authority for the Patient Engagement Advisory Committee will expire on October 6, 2017, unless the Commissioner formally determines that renewal is in the public interest.
Letise Williams, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 5441, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-8398,
Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.65 and approval by the Department of Health and Human Services pursuant to 45 CFR part 11 and by the General Services Administration, FDA is announcing the renewal of the Patient Engagement Advisory Committee. The committee is a discretionary Federal advisory committee established to provide advice to the Commissioner. The Patient Engagement Advisory Committee advises the Commissioner or designee in discharging responsibilities as they relate to helping to ensure safe and effective devices for human use and, as required, any other product for which FDA has regulatory responsibility. The Committee provides advice to the Commissioner on complex issues relating to medical devices, the regulation of devices, and their use by patients. Agency guidance and policies, clinical trial or registry design, patient preference study design, benefit-risk determinations, device labeling, unmet clinical needs, available alternatives, patient reported outcomes, and device-related quality of life or health status issues are among the topics that may be considered by the Committee. The Committee provides relevant skills and perspectives in order to improve communication of benefits, risks and clinical outcomes, and increase integration of patient perspectives into the regulatory process for medical devices. It performs its duties by identifying new approaches, promoting innovation, recognizing unforeseen risks or barriers, and identifying unintended consequences that could result from FDA policy.
The Committee shall consist of a core of nine voting members including the Chair. Members and the Chair are selected by the Commissioner or designee from among authorities who are knowledgeable in areas such as clinical research, primary care patient experience, health care needs of patient groups in the United States, or are experienced in the work of patient and health professional organizations, methodologies for eliciting patient preferences, and strategies for communicating benefits, risks, and clinical outcomes to patients and research subjects. Members will be invited to serve for overlapping terms of up to 4 years. Almost all non-Federal members of this committee serve as Special Government Employees. The core of voting members may include one technically qualified member, selected by the Commissioner or designee, who is identified with consumer interests and is recommended by either a consortium of consumer-oriented organizations or other interested persons. The Commissioner or designee shall also have the authority to select from a group of individuals nominated by industry to serve temporarily as nonvoting members who are identified with industry interests. The number of temporary members selected for a particular meeting will depend on the meeting topic.
The Commissioner or designee shall also have the authority to select members of other scientific and technical FDA advisory committees (normally not to exceed 10 members) to serve temporarily as voting members and to designate consultants to serve temporarily as voting members when: (1) Expertise is required that is not available among current voting standing members of the Committee (when additional voting members are added to the Committee to provide needed expertise, a quorum will be based on the combined total of regular and added members) or (2) to comprise a quorum when, because of unforeseen circumstances, a quorum is or will be lacking. Because of the size of the Committee and the variety in the types of issues that it will consider, FDA may, in connection with a particular committee meeting, specify a quorum that is less than a majority of the current voting members. The Agency's regulations (21 CFR 14.22(d)) authorize a committee charter to specify quorum requirements.
Further information regarding the most recent charter and other information can be found at
This document is issued under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app.). For general information related to FDA advisory committees, please check
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Notice.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is requesting that any industry organizations interested in participating in the selection of a nonvoting industry representative to serve on the Pediatric Advisory Committee for the Office of the Commissioner notify FDA in writing. FDA is also requesting nominations for a nonvoting industry representative(s) to serve on the Pediatric Advisory Committee. A nominee may either be self-nominated or nominated by an organization to serve as a nonvoting industry representative. Nominations will be accepted for current vacancies effective with this notice.
Any industry organization interested in participating in the selection of an appropriate nonvoting member to represent industry interests must send a letter stating that interest to FDA by December 4, 2017 (see sections I and II of this document for further details). Concurrently, nomination materials for prospective candidates should be sent to FDA by December 4, 2017. Nominations received on or before December 4, 2017 will be given first consideration for membership on the Pediatric Advisory Committee. Nominations received after December 4, 2017 will be considered for nomination to the committee as later vacancies occur.
All statements of interest from industry organizations interested in participating in the selection process of nonvoting industry representative nomination should be sent to Marieann Brill (see
Regarding all nomination questions for nonvoting industry representative the primary contact is: Marieann Brill, Office of the Commissioner, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, Rm. 5154, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 240-402-3838, email:
FDA is requesting nominations for nonvoting industry representative(s) on the Pediatric Advisory Committee:
The Committee reviews and evaluates and makes recommendations to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs (the Commissioner) regarding (1) pediatric research conducted under sections 351, 409I, and 499 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 262, 284m, and 290b) and sections 501, 502, 505, 505A, 505B, 510(k), 515, and 520(m) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 351, 352, 355, 355a, 355c, 360(k), 360e, and 360j(m)); (2) identification of research priorities related to pediatric therapeutics (including drugs and biological products) and medical devices for pediatric populations and the need for additional diagnostics and treatments of specific pediatric diseases or conditions; (3) the ethics, design, and analysis of clinical trials related to pediatric therapeutics (including drugs and biological products) and medical devices; (4) pediatric labeling disputes as specified in Public Law 107-109, Public Law 110-85, and Public Law 112-144; (5) pediatric labeling changes as specified in Public Law 107-109, Public Law 110-85, and Public Law 112-144; (6) adverse event reports for drugs studied under Public Law 107-109, Public Law 110-85, and Public Law 112-144; (7) any safety issues that may occur as specified Public Law 107-109, Public Law 110-85, and Public Law 112-144; (8) any other pediatric issue or pediatric labeling dispute involving FDA-regulated products; (9) pediatric ethical issues including research involving children as subjects as specified in 21 CFR 50.54; and (10) any other matter involving pediatrics for which FDA has regulatory responsibility.
The Committee also advises and makes recommendations to the Secretary of Health and Human Services (Secretary) (HHS) directly or to the Secretary through the Commissioner on research involving children as subjects that is conducted or supported by HHS as specified in 45 CFR 46.407.
Any industry organization interested in participating in the selection of an appropriate nonvoting member to represent industry interests should send a letter stating that interest to the FDA contact (see
Any interested person may nominate one or more qualified individuals for membership on the advisory committee. Self-nominations are also accepted. Nominations must include a current, complete résumé or curriculum vitae for each nominee and a signed copy of the Acknowledgement and Consent form available at the FDA Advisory Nomination Portal (see
FDA seeks to include the views of women and men, members of all racial and ethnic groups, and individuals with and without disabilities on its advisory committees and, therefore, encourages nominations of appropriately qualified candidates from these groups.
This notice is issued under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2) and 21 CFR part 14, relating to advisory committees.
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Notice of public meeting; request for comments.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, the Agency, or we) is announcing the following public meeting entitled “Assessment of FDA Hiring and Retention”. The purpose of the public meeting is to share high-level findings from a recently completed diagnostic assessment of FDA's hiring process conducted by a qualified, independent contractor with expertise in assessing human resources operations and transformation. The purpose also is to outline a set of near-term actions FDA will or can take to improve the hiring process, provide an update on FDA's progress toward Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) and Biosimilar User Fee Act (BsUFA) user fee hiring and retention commitments, and solicit input on actions FDA is taking and any further recommendations or priorities FDA should pursue with regard to the hiring process.
The public meeting will be held on November 30, 2017, from 9 a.m. to 12 noon. Submit either electronic or written comments on this public workshop by January 15, 2018. See the
The public meeting will be held at the FDA's White Oak Campus, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31 Conference Center, the Great Room (Rm. 1503), Section A, Silver Spring, MD 20993. Entrance for the public meeting participants (non-FDA employees) is through Building 1 where routine security check procedures will be performed. For parking and security information, please refer to
A summary report of evaluation findings related to the hiring process, conducted by an independent third party contractor, will be published in the docket by November 15, 2017, and will be titled “Initial Assessment of FDA Hiring and Retention.”
You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late, untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments must be submitted on or before January 15, 2018. The
Submit electronic comments in the following way:
•
• If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).
Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
•
• For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”
• Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on
Daniel Brounstein, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 1, Rm. 1312, Silver Spring,
FDA is responsible for protecting and promoting the public health by helping to ensure the safety, efficacy, and security of human and veterinary drugs, biological products, and medical devices; and by helping to ensure the safety of the nation's food supply, cosmetics, and products that emit radiation. FDA also has responsibility for regulating the manufacturing, marketing, and distribution of tobacco products to protect the public health and to reduce tobacco use by minors.
Included in this is a mandate to advance the public health mission by helping to speed innovations that make medical products more effective, safer, and more affordable, and helping the public access accurate science-based information for FDA-regulated products. Just as the science and technology underlying new medical products is advancing, the science of development and evaluation of medical products and clinical care is also dramatically improving. To enable FDA to continue to effectively evaluate these innovative developments, a specialized workforce is required to support the Agency's regulatory science and operations initiatives.
Over the past 5 years, the Agency has struggled with challenges related to its hiring processes, including challenges in managing the hiring process and bringing the right skills to the Agency. FDA has demonstrated that diagnosing the current state and drastically reimagining the hiring process is a top priority and is committed to implementing new, bold, consistent, and high quality hiring processes to tackle these challenges. The criticality of these priorities is consistent with the PDUFA VI and BsUFA II user-fee commitments. These commitments include the use of a qualified, independent contractor with expertise in assessing human resources operations and transformation to perform an initial baseline assessment no later than December 31, 2017, and a public meeting no later than December 31, 2017, to present and discuss report findings.
The agenda will be posted prior to the meeting at:
If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please contact
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Notice.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the
Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection of information by January 2, 2018.
You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late, untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments must be submitted on or before January 2, 2018. The
Submit electronic comments in the following way:
•
• If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).
Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
•
• For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”
•
Domini Bean, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-12M, 11601 Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852, 301-796-5733,
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. “Collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the
With respect to the following collection of information, FDA invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology.
This information collection supports FDA regulations found in 21 CFR part 315. These regulations require manufacturers of diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals to submit information that demonstrates the safety and effectiveness of a new diagnostic radiopharmaceutical or of a new indication for use of an approved diagnostic radiopharmaceutical. The regulations also describe the kinds of indications for diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals and some of the criteria that the Agency uses to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of a diagnostic radiopharmaceutical under section 505 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355) (the FD&C Act) and section 351 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 262) (the PHS Act). Information about the safety or effectiveness of a diagnostic radiopharmaceutical enables FDA to properly evaluate the safety and effectiveness profiles of a new diagnostic radiopharmaceutical or a new indication for use of an approved diagnostic radiopharmaceutical.
The regulations clarify existing FDA requirements for approval and evaluation of drug and biological products already in place under the authorities of the FD&C Act and the PHS Act. The information, which is usually submitted as part of a new drug application or biologics license application or as a supplement to an approved application, typically includes, but is not limited to, nonclinical and clinical data on the pharmacology, toxicology, adverse events, radiation safety assessments, and chemistry, manufacturing, and controls. The content and format of an application for approval of a new drug
Based on past submissions (human drug applications and/or new indication supplements for diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals), we estimate two submissions will be received annually. We estimate the time needed to prepare a complete application for a diagnostic radiopharmaceutical to be approximately 10,000 hours, roughly one-fifth of which, or 2,000 hours, is estimated to be spent preparing the portions of the application that would be affected by these regulations. The regulations do not impose any additional reporting burden for safety and effectiveness information on diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals beyond the estimated burden of 2,000 hours because safety and effectiveness information is already required by § 314.50 (collection of information approved under OMB control number 0910-0001). In fact, clarification in these regulations of FDA's criteria for evaluation of diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals is intended to streamline overall information collection burdens, particularly for diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals that may have well-established, low-risk safety profiles, by enabling manufacturers to tailor information submissions and avoid unnecessary clinical studies.
FDA estimates the burden of this information collection as follows:
Table 1 contains estimates of the annual reporting burden for the preparation of the safety and effectiveness sections of an application that are imposed by the applicable regulations. This estimate does not include time needed to conduct studies and clinical trials or other research from which the reported information is obtained.
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
National Institutes of Health, HHS.
Notice.
The inventions listed below are owned by an agency of the U.S. Government and are available for licensing in the U.S.
Licensing information and copies of the patent applications listed below may be obtained by emailing the indicated licensing contact Michael Shmilovich,
This notice is in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404 to achieve commercialization of results of federally-funded research and development. Foreign patent applications are filed on selected inventions to extend market coverage for companies and may also be available for licensing. A description of the technology follows.
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the NHLBI Special Emphasis Panel 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.
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal Housing Commissioner, HUD.
Notice.
This notice establishes operating cost adjustment factors (OCAFs) for project-based rental assistance contracts issued under Section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 and renewed under the Multifamily Assisted Housing Reform and Affordability Act of 1997 (MAHRA) with an anniversary date on or after February 11, 2018. OCAFs are annual factors used primarily to adjust the rents for contracts renewed under section 515 or section 524 of MAHRA. OCAFs are distinct from, and do not apply to the same properties as Annual Adjustment Factors (AAFs). AAFs are used to adjust contract rents for units assisted in certain Section 8 housing assistance payment programs during the initial (
Carisa L. Janis, Program Analyst, Office of Asset Management and Portfolio Oversight, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20410; telephone number 202-402-2487 (this is not a toll-free number). Hearing- or speech-impaired individuals may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339.
Section 514(e)(2) and section 524(c)(1) of MAHRA (42 U.S.C. 1437f note) require HUD to establish guidelines for the development of OCAFs for rent
MAHRA gives HUD broad discretion in setting OCAFs, referring, for example, in sections 524(a)(4)(C)(i), 524(b)(1)(A), 524(b)(3)(A) and 524(c)(1) simply to “an operating cost adjustment factor established by the Secretary.” The sole limitation to this grant of authority is a specific requirement in each of the foregoing provisions that application of an OCAF “shall not result in a negative adjustment.” Contract rents are adjusted by applying the OCAF to that portion of the rent attributable to operating expenses exclusive of debt service.
The OCAFs provided in this notice are applicable to eligible projects having a contract anniversary date of February 11, 2018 or after and were calculated using the same method as those published in HUD's 2017 OCAF notice originally published on October 5, 2016 (81 FR 69073) and amended and republished on December 27, 2016 (81 FR 95162). Specifically, OCAFs are calculated as the sum of weighted average cost changes for wages, employee benefits, property taxes, insurance, supplies and equipment, fuel oil, electricity, natural gas, and water/sewer/trash using publicly available indices. The weights used in the OCAF calculations for each of the nine cost component groupings are set using current percentages attributable to each of the nine expense categories. These weights are calculated in the same manner as in the December 27, 2016, notice. Average expense proportions were calculated using three years of audited Annual Financial Statements from projects covered by OCAFs. The expenditure percentages for these nine categories have been found to be very stable over time, but using three years of data increases their stability. The nine cost component weights were calculated at the state level, which is the lowest level of geographical aggregation with enough projects to permit statistical analysis. These data were not available for the Western Pacific Islands, so data for Hawaii were used as the best available indicator of OCAFs for these areas.
The best current price data sources for the nine cost categories were used in calculating annual change factors. State-level data for fuel oil, electricity, and natural gas from Department of Energy surveys are relatively current and continue to be used. Data on changes in employee benefits, insurance, property taxes, and water/sewer/trash costs are only available at the national level. The data sources for the nine cost indicators selected used were as follows:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The sum of the nine cost component percentage weights equals 100 percent of operating costs for purposes of OCAF calculations. To calculate the OCAFs, state-level cost component weights developed from AFS data are multiplied by the selected inflation factors. For instance, if wages in Virginia comprised 50 percent of total operating cost expenses and increased by 4 percent from 2017 to 2018 the wage increase component of the Virginia OCAF for 2018 would be 2.0 percent (50% * 4%). This 2.0 percent would then be added to the increases for the other eight expense categories to calculate the 2018 OCAF for Virginia. For states where the OCAF is less than 0 percent, the OCAF is floored at 0 percent. The OCAFs for 2018 are included as an Appendix to this Notice.
Sections 514 and 515 of MAHRA, as amended, created the Mark-to-Market program to reduce the cost of federal housing assistance, to enhance HUD's administration of such assistance, and to ensure the continued affordability of units in certain multifamily housing projects. Section 524 of MAHRA authorizes renewal of Section 8 project-based assistance contracts for projects without restructuring plans under the Mark-to-Market program, including projects that are not eligible for a restructuring plan and those for which the owner does not request such a plan. Renewals must be at rents not exceeding comparable market rents except for certain projects. As an example, for Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation projects, other than single room occupancy projects (SROs) under the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11301
This notice sets forth rate determinations and related external administrative requirements and procedures that do not constitute a development decision affecting the physical condition of specific project areas or building sites. Accordingly, under 24 CFR 50.19(c)(6), this notice is categorically excluded from environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321).
This notice does not impact the information collection requirements already submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection displays a currently valid OMB control number.
The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number for this program is 14.195.
Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.
Notice of information collection; request for comment.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) is proposing to renew an information collection.
Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before January 2, 2018.
Send your comments on the information collection request (ICR) by mail to Ms. Evangeline Campbell, Chief, Division of Human Services, Office of Indian Services, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1849 C Street NW., MS-4513-MIB, Washington, DC 20240; facsimile: (202) 208-5113; email:
To request additional information about this ICR, contact Ms. Evangeline Campbell, (202) 513-7621.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we provide the general public and other Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand our information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format.
We are soliciting comments on the proposed ICR that is described below. We are especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is the collection necessary to the proper functions of the BIA; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the BIA enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the BIA minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology.
Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of public record. We will include or summarize each comment in our request to OMB to approve this ICR. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
This form must completed by tribes that operate child protection programs.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
The authority for this action is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.
Notice of information collection; request for comment.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) is proposing to renew an information collection.
Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before January 2, 2018.
Send your comments on the information collection request (ICR) by mail to Ms. Charlene Toledo, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Office of Trust Services, Division of Probate Services, 2600 N Central Ave., STE MS 102, Phoenix, AZ 85004; or email to
To request additional information about this ICR, contact Ms. Charlene Toledo by telephone at (505) 563-3371.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we provide the general public and other Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand our information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format.
We are soliciting comments on the proposed ICR that is described below. We are especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is the collection necessary to the proper functions of the BIA; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the BIA enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the BIA minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology.
Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of public record. We will include or summarize each comment in our request to OMB to approve this ICR. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
The authority for this action is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
U.S. International Trade Commission.
Notice.
Notice is hereby given that the presiding administrative law judge (“ALJ”) has issued a Final Initial Determination on Violation of Section 337 which includes a 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 should the Commission find a violation. The ALJ recommended, should the Commission find a violation of section 337, that the Commission issue a limited exclusion order prohibiting the entry of certain audio processing hardware, software, and products containing the same manufactured abroad by or on behalf of Respondent Apple Inc. of Cupertino, California, that infringe certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,363,345. The ALJ also recommend that a cease and desist order be issued. The ALJ recommend that any remedy be delayed for a period of three months to one year and that any limited exclusion order include exceptions for warranty, refurbishment, and government use, as well as a certification provision. This notice is soliciting public interest comments from the public only. Parties are to file public interest submissions pursuant to Commission rules.
Amanda Fisherow, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2737. Copies of non-confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation are or will be available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server at
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:
The Commission is interested in further development of the record on the public interest in its investigations. Accordingly, parties are to file public interest submissions 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 October 26, 2017. Comments should address whether issuance of remedial 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) indicate the extent to which like or directly competitive articles are produced in the United States or are otherwise available in the United States, with respect to the articles potentially subject to the recommended orders;
(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 orders within a commercially reasonable time; and
(v) explain how the recommended orders would impact consumers in the United States.
Written submissions must be filed no later than by close of business on November 30, 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 Commission Rule 210.4(f), 19 CFR part 210.4(f). Submissions should refer to the investigation number (“Inv. No. 1026”) in a prominent place on the cover page and/or the first page. (
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.
This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act
By order of the Commission.
On October 26, 2017, the Department of Justice lodged a proposed Consent Decree with the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Western Division, in the lawsuit entitled
The United States filed this lawsuit under Sections 106(a) and 107 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. 9606(a) and 9607, against the Cooper Living Trust and Cooper Properties, LP (Settling Defendants), for recovery of response costs incurred by the United States and to address environmental contamination at the Cooper Drum Company Superfund Site located in Los Angeles County, California (“the Site”).
The Settling Defendants both owned a portion of the Site at the time of disposal of hazardous substances by the Cooper Drum Company, which operated a drum reconditioning business at the Site. The reconditioning process resulted in contamination of the soil and groundwater beneath the Site.
Under the Consent Decree the Settling Defendants agree to complete the sale of property adjacent to the Site (the Property) and pay the United States the greater of 90 percent of the net sales proceeds or $2.5 million. In return, the United States agrees not to sue the Defendants under Sections 106 and 107 of CERCLA.
The publication of this notice opens a period for public comment on the Consent Decree. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division, and should refer to
During the public comment period, the Consent Decree may be examined and downloaded at this Justice Department Web site:
Please enclose a check or money order for $9.50 (25 cents per page reproduction cost × 38 pages) payable to the United States Treasury.
Notice of availability; request for comments.
The Department of Labor (DOL) is submitting the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy (OASP) sponsored information collection request (ICR) proposal titled, “Evaluation of Strategies Used in the TechHire and Strengthening Working Families Initiative Grant Programs,” to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval for use in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995. Public comments on the ICR are invited.
The OMB will consider all written comments that agency receives on or before December 4, 2017.
A copy of this ICR with applicable supporting documentation; including a description of the likely respondents, proposed frequency of response, and estimated total burden may be obtained free of charge from the
Submit comments about this request by mail to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for DOL-ASP, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503; by Fax: 202-395-5806 (this is not a toll-free number); or by email:
Michel Smyth by telephone at 202-693-4129 (this is not a toll-free number) or by email at
44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D).
This ICR seeks PRA authority for the Evaluation of Strategies Used in the TechHire and Strengthening Working Families Initiative Grant Programs information collection that will support an evaluation of both the implementation and impact of the programs. The purpose of the evaluation is to identify whether the grants help low-wage workers obtain employment in and advance in H-1B industries and occupations and, if so, which strategies are most helpful. Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2016 section 107 authorizes this information collection.
This proposed information collection is subject to the PRA. A Federal agency generally cannot conduct or sponsor a collection of information, and the public is generally not required to respond to an information collection, unless it is approved by the OMB under the PRA and displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. In addition, notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall generally be subject to penalty for failing to comply with a
Interested parties are encouraged to send comments to the OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the address shown in the
• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; 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,
Notice of availability; request for comments.
On October 31, 2017, the Department of Labor (DOL) will submit the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) sponsored information collection request (ICR) titled, “Ionizing Radiation Standard,” to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval for continued use, without change, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). Public comments on the ICR are invited.
The OMB will consider all written comments that agency receives on or before December 4, 2017.
A copy of this ICR with applicable supporting documentation; including a description of the likely respondents, proposed frequency of response, and estimated total burden may be obtained free of charge from the
Submit comments about this request by mail to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for DOL-OSHA, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503; by Fax: 202-395-5806 (this is not a toll-free number); or by email:
Contact Michel Smyth by telephone at 202-693-4129, TTY 202-693-8064 (these are not toll-free numbers) or by email at
This ICR seeks to extend PRA authority for the Ionizing Radiation Standard information collection requirements codified in regulations 29 CFR 1910.1096. Several provisions of the Standard specify information collection requirements; these include monitoring worker exposure to ionizing radiation, instructing workers on the hazards associated with ionizing radiation exposure and precautions to minimize exposure, posting caution signs at radiation areas, reporting worker overexposures to the OSHA, maintaining exposure records, and providing exposure records to current and former workers. The purpose of the Standard and its information collection requirements is to document that employers are providing their workers with protection from hazardous ionizing radiation exposure. Occupational Safety and Health Act sections 6 and 8 authorize this information collection.
This information collection is subject to the PRA. A Federal agency generally cannot conduct or sponsor a collection of information, and the public is generally not required to respond to an information collection, unless it is approved by the OMB under the PRA and displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. In addition, notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall generally be subject to penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information that does not display a valid Control Number.
OMB authorization for an ICR cannot be for more than three (3) years without renewal, and the DOL seeks to extend PRA authorization for this information collection for three (3) more years, without any change to existing requirements. The DOL notes that existing information collection requirements submitted to the OMB receive a month-to-month extension while they undergo review. For additional substantive information about this ICR, see the related notice published in the
Interested parties are encouraged to send comments to the OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the address shown in the
• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the
• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; 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,
44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D).
Notice of availability; request for comments.
On October 31, 2017, the Department of Labor (DOL) will submit the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) sponsored information collection request (ICR) titled, “Fire Protection in Shipyard Employment Standard,” to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval for continued use, without change, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). Public comments on the ICR are invited.
The OMB will consider all written comments that agency receives on or before December 4, 2017.
A copy of this ICR with applicable supporting documentation; including a description of the likely respondents, proposed frequency of response, and estimated total burden may be obtained free of charge from the
Submit comments about this request by mail to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for DOL-OSHA, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503; by Fax: 202-395-5806 (this is not a toll-free number); or by email:
Michel Smyth by telephone at 202-693-4129, TTY 202-693-8064 (these are not toll-free numbers) or by email at
This ICR seeks to extend PRA authority for the Fire Protection in Shipyard Employment Standard information collection requirements codified in regulations 29 CFR part 1915, subpart P. The Standard makes it mandatory for an Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSH Act) covered employer engaged in shipyard employment to develop a written fire safety plan and written statement or policy that contains information about fire watches and fire response duties and responsibilities. The Standard also requires the employer to obtain medical examinations for certain workers and to develop training programs and to train employees exposed to fire hazards. Additionally, the Standard requires an employer to create and maintain records to certify that employees have been made aware of the details of the fire safety plan and that employees have been trained as required by the Standard. OSH Act sections 2(b)(9), 6(b)(7), and 8(c) authorize this information collection.
This information collection is subject to the PRA. A Federal agency generally cannot conduct or sponsor a collection of information, and the public is generally not required to respond to an information collection, unless it is approved by the OMB under the PRA and displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. In addition, notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall generally be subject to penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information that does not display a valid Control Number.
OMB authorization for an ICR cannot be for more than three (3) years without renewal, and the DOL seeks to extend PRA authorization for this information collection for three (3) more years, without any change to existing requirements. The DOL notes that existing information collection requirements submitted to the OMB receive a month-to-month extension while they undergo review. For additional substantive information about this ICR, see the related notice published in the
Interested parties are encouraged to send comments to the OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the address shown in the
• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; 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,
44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D).
Notice of availability; request for comments.
On October 31, 2017, the Department of Labor (DOL) will submit the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) sponsored information collection request (ICR) titled, “Fire Brigades Standard,” to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval for continued use, without change, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). Public comments on the ICR are invited.
The OMB will consider all written comments that agency receives on or before December 4, 2017.
A copy of this ICR with applicable supporting documentation; including a description of the likely respondents, proposed frequency of response, and estimated total burden may be obtained free of charge from the
Submit comments about this request by mail to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for DOL-OSHA, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503; by Fax: 202-395-5806 (this is not a toll-free number); or by email:
Michel Smyth by telephone at 202-693-4129, TTY 202-693-8064 (these are not toll-free numbers) or by email at
This ICR seeks to extend PRA authority for the Fire Brigades Standard information collection requirements codified in regulations 29 CFR 1910.156, which requires each covered employer establishing a fire brigade to write an organizational statement, to ascertain the fitness of workers with specific medical conditions to participate in fire related operations, and to provide appropriate training and information to fire brigade members. Occupational Safety and Health Act sections 2 and 8 authorize this information collection.
This information collection is subject to the PRA. A Federal agency generally cannot conduct or sponsor a collection of information, and the public is generally not required to respond to an information collection, unless it is approved by the OMB under the PRA and displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. In addition, notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall generally be subject to penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information that does not display a valid Control Number.
OMB authorization for an ICR cannot be for more than three (3) years without renewal, and the DOL seeks to extend PRA authorization for this information collection for three (3) more years, without any change to existing requirements. The DOL notes that existing information collection requirements submitted to the OMB receive a month-to-month extension while they undergo review. For additional substantive information about this ICR, see the related notice published in the
Interested parties are encouraged to send comments to the OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the address shown in the
• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; 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,
44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D).
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).
Notice of availability of proposed records schedules; request for comments.
The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) publishes notice at least once monthly of certain Federal agency requests for records disposition authority (records schedules). Once approved by NARA, records schedules provide mandatory instructions on what happens to records when agencies no longer need them for current Government business. The records schedules authorize agencies to preserve records of continuing value in the National Archives of the United States and to destroy, after a specified period, records lacking administrative, legal, research, or other value. NARA publishes notice in the
NARA must receive requests for copies in writing by December 4, 2017. Once NARA finishes appraising the records, we will send you a copy of the schedule you requested. We usually prepare appraisal memoranda that contain additional information concerning the records covered by a proposed schedule. You may also request these. If you do, we will also provide them once we have completed the appraisal. You have 30 days after we send to you these requested documents in which to submit comments.
You may request a copy of any records schedule identified in this notice by contacting Records Appraisal and Agency Assistance (ACRA) using one of the following means:
You must cite the control number, which appears in parentheses after the name of the agency that submitted the schedule, and a mailing address. If you would like an appraisal report, please include that in your request.
Margaret Hawkins, Director, by mail at Records Appraisal and Agency Assistance (ACRA); National Archives and Records Administration; 8601 Adelphi Road, College Park, MD 20740-6001, by phone at 301-837-1799, or by email at
NARA publishes notice in the
Each year, Federal agencies create billions of records on paper, film, magnetic tape, and other media. To control this accumulation, agency records managers prepare schedules proposing records retention periods and submit these schedules for NARA's approval. These schedules provide for timely transfer into the National Archives of historically valuable records and authorize the agency to dispose of all other records after the agency no longer needs them to conduct its business. Some schedules are comprehensive and cover all the records of an agency or one of its major subdivisions. Most schedules, however, cover records of only one office or program or a few series of records. Many of these update previously approved schedules, and some include records proposed as permanent.
The schedules listed in this notice are media neutral unless otherwise specified. An item in a schedule is media neutral when an agency may apply the disposition instructions to records regardless of the medium in which it creates or maintains the records. Items included in schedules submitted to NARA on or after December 17, 2007, are media neutral unless the item is expressly limited to a specific medium. (See 36 CFR 1225.12(e).)
Agencies may not destroy Federal records without Archivist of the United States' approval. The Archivist approves destruction only after thoroughly considering the records' administrative use by the agency of origin, the rights of the Government and of private people directly affected by the Government's activities, and whether or not the records have historical or other value.
In addition to identifying the Federal agencies and any subdivisions requesting disposition authority, this notice lists the organizational unit(s) accumulating the records (or notes that the schedule has agency-wide applicability when schedules cover records that may be accumulated throughout an agency); provides the control number assigned to each schedule, the total number of schedule items, and the number of temporary items (the records proposed for destruction); and includes a brief description of the temporary records. The records schedule itself contains a full description of the records at the file unit level as well as their disposition. If NARA staff has prepared an appraisal memorandum for the schedule, it also includes information about the records. You may request additional information about the disposition process at the addresses above.
1. Department of Justice, Agency-wide (DAA-0060-2016-0003, 1 item, 1 temporary item). Email records of non-senior agency employees not covered by NARA-approved records control schedules for permanent agency email records.
2. Department of Justice, Agency-wide (DAA-0060-2017-0005, 1 item, 1 temporary item). Records documenting Native American tribal access to the Department of Justice's Criminal Justice Information Network.
3. Department of Justice, Agency-wide (DAA-0060-2017-0014, 1 item, 1 temporary item). Case files regarding benefit claims provided under the Energy Employee Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000.
4. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (DAA-0416-2016-0002, 1 item, 1 temporary item). Master files of an electronic information system providing access to motor vehicle crash data analyses and tracking information for data requests.
5. National Archives and Records Administration, Government-wide (DAA-GRS-2018-0001, 1 item, 1 temporary item). Addition to the General Records Schedules for records documenting overtime work by phased-retirement employee
6. Peace Corps, Office of Global Health and HIV (DAA-0490-2017-0007, 2 items, 1 temporary item). Records of the Global Health Services Partnerships office including general administrative records such as recruitment and marketing files. Proposed for permanent retention are high level program records, such as policy files, memorandums, and reports.
7. Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of the Secretary (DAA-0266-2016-0002, 9 items, 6 temporary items). Informational documents, briefing materials, administrative proceeding files and periodic reports, certified mail receipts, studies and investigations, and notifications from Self-Regulatory Organizations (SROs). Proposed for permanent retention are official Commission orders and the official minutes and audio recordings of Commission meetings.
The National Science Board's Committee on Oversight (CO), pursuant to NSF regulations (45 CFR part 614), the National Science Foundation Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1862n-5), and the Government in the Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b), hereby gives notice of the scheduling of a teleconference for the transaction of National Science Board business, as follows:
Friday, November 3, 2017 at 9:00 a.m. EDT.
Open.
Committee Chair's remarks, and discussion of the functions of the Merit Review report and consideration of possible research topics.
Point of contact for this meeting is: Ann Bushmiller (
Please refer to the National Science Board Web site
Notice.
The National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Education, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are currently requesting recommendations for membership on the Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education Advisory Panel (Committee). Recommendations should consist of the name of the submitting individual, the organization or the affiliation providing the member nomination, the name of the recommended individual, the recommended individual's curriculum vita, an expression of the individual's interest in serving, and the following recommended individual's contact information: Address, telephone number, FAX number, and email address. Self-recommendations are accepted. If you would like to make a membership recommendation, please send your recommendation to Nafeesa Owens at
The mailing address for the National Science Foundation is 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, Virginia 22314. The web link to committee information may be found on the NSF Web site: NSF Advisory Committees.
The STEM Education Advisory Panel (Committee) was established on October 18, 2017, under the authority of the American Innovation and Competitiveness Act (Pub. L. 114-329; Section 303(b)) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (“FACA”) of 1972 (5 U.S.C, Appendix 2, as amended).
The role of the Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education Advisory Panel (Committee) is to provide advice and recommendations to the Committee on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education (CoSTEM), assess CoSTEM's progress in carrying out responsibilities related to the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act, and help identify need or opportunity to update the Federal STEM Education 5-Year Strategic Plan.
NSF encourages individuals to submit their recommendations by November 30, 2017, in order to be considered for initial selection. Thereafter, NSF intends to publish a notice requesting recommendations on an annual basis. NSF will keep recommendations active for 12 months from the date of receipt. Although NSF welcomes all recommendations, the Agency will not be able to acknowledge or respond positively to each person who contacts NSF or has been recommended.
A primary consideration when formulating committee membership is recognized knowledge, expertise, or demonstrated ability. Other factors that may be considered are balance among diverse institutions, regions, and groups underrepresented in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.
Membership will consist of no less than 11 individuals. Members shall primarily be individuals from academic institutions, nonprofit organizations, and industry, including in-school, out-of-school, and informal education practitioners; and shall be individuals who are qualified to provide advice and information on STEM education research, development, training, implementation, interventions, professional development or workforce needs or concerns. Members may serve on the panel (Committee) for up to a three-year term. Advisory meetings will be held twice a year.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1)
The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.35E to enhance the information available before an auction and revise its procedures for Trading Halt
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.
The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.35E (Auctions) to enhance the information available before an auction and revise its procedures for Trading Halt Auctions, Rule 7.10E to exclude Trading Halt Auctions from being reviewed as a clearly erroneous execution, Rule 7.31E (Orders and Modifiers) to add a new Imbalance Only Order, and Rule 7.11E (Limit Up—Limit Down Plan and Trading Pauses in Individual Securities Due to Extraordinary Market Volatility) to conform the rule to approved changes to the Regulation NMS Plan to Address Extraordinary Market Volatility (“Plan”).
The Operating Committee for the Plan with input from the Advisory Committee to the Plan and staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”), identified a number of enhancements to the reopening process following a Trading Pause that have been addressed in a combination of an amendment to the Plan and amendments to the rules of the Primary Listing Exchanges.
With respect to the Plan, the Participants amended the Plan to provide that a Trading Pause will continue until the Primary Listing Exchange reopens trading using its established reopening procedures and reports a Reopening Price.
In connection with LULD Amendment 12, the Participants agreed on a standardized approach for how the Primary Listing Exchanges should conduct certain aspects of an automated reopening following a Trading Pause. Specifically, because trading centers will not be permitted to resume trading in an NMS Stock until there is a Reopening Price, the Participants believe it is appropriate for the Primary Listing Exchanges to adopt uniform standards for determining whether and when to conduct such automated reopenings, including what price collar thresholds would be applicable to such automated reopenings and how to provide for extensions of when a reopening auction would be conducted. The goal of such changes is to ensure that all Market Order interest could be satisfied in an automated reopening auction.
More specifically, the Participants have agreed that if there is an imbalance of market orders, or if the Reopening Price would be outside of specified price collar thresholds, the Trading Pause would be extended an additional five minutes in order to provide additional time to attract offsetting liquidity. If at the end of such extension, Market Orders still cannot be satisfied within price collar thresholds or if the reopening auction would be priced outside of the applicable price collar thresholds, the Primary Listing Exchange would extend the Trading Pause an additional five minutes. With each such extension, the Participants have agreed that it would be appropriate to widen the price collar threshold on the side of the market on which there is buying or selling pressure.
With respect to price collar thresholds, the Participants have agreed that the reference price for calculating price collar thresholds would be the price of the limit state that preceded the Trading Pause,
• if there is selling pressure, the lower collar for the auction would be the Lower Price Band minus five percent and the upper collar would be the Upper Price Band;
• if there is buying pressure, the upper collar for the auction would be the Upper Price Band plus five percent and the lower collar would be the Lower Price Band.
For each extension, the collars would be widened an additional five percent, but only on the side of the imbalance.
Finally, the Participants have agreed that the proposed new procedures for reopening trading following a Trading Pause reduces the potential that an order or orders entered by one or more ETP Holders caused such execution to be clearly erroneous. Specifically, the Participants believe that the proposed standardized procedures for reopening trading following a Trading Pause incorporates a methodology that allows for widened collars, which may result in a reopening price away from prior trading prices, but which reopening price would be a result of a measured and transparent process that eliminates the potential that such trade would be considered erroneous.
As a Primary Listing Exchange, the Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.35E to implement the proposed uniform trading practices with respect to
The proposed rule changes are based on the rules of its affiliated exchange, NYSE Arca, Inc. (“NYSE Arca”), without any substantive differences.
To effect the proposed enhancements that will be implemented by all Primary Listing Exchanges, the Exchange proposes to add new sub-paragraphs (5)-(10) to Rule 7.35E(e), which governs Trading Halt Auctions, re-number current Rule 7.35E(e)(5) as new Rule 7.35E(e)(11), and amend Rule 7.35E(e)(2). The Exchange proposes to implement these changes for all Trading Halt Auctions. The proposed standardized trading practices agreed upon by the Operating Committee are intended for Trading Halt Auctions following a trading pause under Rule 7.11E. However, the Exchange believes that these proposed procedures would be beneficial following all halts, including regulatory halts and halts due to extraordinary market volatility. The proposed rule changes are based on NYSE Arca Rule 7.35-E(e) without any substantive differences.
Rule 7.35E(e)(2) currently provides that after trading in a security has been halted or paused, the Exchange will disseminate the estimated time at which trading in that security will re-open (“Re-Opening Time”). The Exchange proposes to add to this rule that the initial Re-Opening Time for a Trading Halt Auction following a trading pause under Rule 7.11E (“Trading Pause”) or trading halt due to extraordinary market volatility under Rule 7.12E (“MWCB Halt”) will be at the scheduled end of the Trading Pause or MWCB Halt. This proposed rule text clarifies that for Trading Pauses and MWCB Halts, the length of the initial pause or halt period is as specified in those rules. As specified in the Plan, the scheduled end of the Trading Pause is five minutes after a Trading Pause has been declared. As specified in Rule 7.12E(b), the scheduled end of a Level 1 or Level 2 Market Decline is 15 minutes. If there is a Level 3 Market Decline, the Exchange will not re-open.
Proposed Rule 7.35E(e)(5) would provide that a Trading Halt Auction would not be conducted if the Indicative Match Price, before being adjusted based on Auction Collars, is below (above) the Lower (Upper) Auction Collar or if there is a sell (buy) Market Imbalance, either of which would be defined as an “Impermissible Price.”
• Proposed Rule 7.35E(e)(6)(A) would provide that, if there is an Impermissible Price at the initial Re-Opening Time, the pause or halt would be extended an additional five minutes and a new Re-Opening Time would be disseminated, which would be referred to as the “First Extension.” The proposed rule would further provide that the Exchange would not conduct a Trading Halt Auction before the Re-Opening Time for the First Extension. As such, if the Exchange disseminates a First Extension, consistent with the Plan in effect before LULD Amendment 12, which provides that if the Primary Listing Exchange does not reopen, trading centers may not resume trading until ten minutes after the beginning of the Trading Pause, the Trading Pause would continue for ten minutes and trading would not resume before that ten-minute marker.
• Proposed Rule 7.35E(e)(6)(B) would provide that if there is an Impermissible Price at the end of the First Extension, the pause or halt would be extended an additional five minutes and a new Re-Opening Time would be disseminated (“Subsequent Extension”). As further proposed, the Exchange would conduct a Trading Halt Auction before the Re-Opening Time for a Subsequent Extension if the Indicative Match Price, before being adjusted based on Auction Collars, would be within the applicable Auction Collars and there is no Market Imbalance. This proposed change would implement the Participant's proposal that for Subsequent Extensions, if equilibrium of prices is reached, the Exchange would conduct the Trading Halt Auction immediately and would not extend the Trading Pause any further.
• Proposed Rule 7.35E(e)(6)(C) would provide that the trading pause or halt would continue to be extended if there is an Impermissible Price at the Re-Opening Time for a Subsequent Extension. This proposed rule text makes clear that a halt or pause would continue to be extended until a Trading Halt Auction can be conducted, as provided for in proposed Rule 7.35E(e)(5).
The Exchange proposes that the price collar threshold for Auction Collars for securities with an Auction Reference Price above $3.00 would be the Auction Reference Price multiplied by five percent. The price collar threshold for securities with an Auction Reference Price $3.00 and below would be $0.15. This value would be defined as the “Price Collar Threshold.” For securities priced above $3.00, once calculated, the Price Collar Threshold would be applicable for each Subsequent Extension, described below. For securities with an Auction Reference
The Exchange believes that the proposed Price Collar Thresholds are designed to align the Auction Collars with the existing percentage parameters as specified in the Plan. The Exchange proposes to use the single 5% threshold for all securities priced above $3.00 and $0.15 for all securities priced $3.00 or less, and not apply a separate percentage parameter based on the tiers specified in the Plan, because the Exchange believes it would be simpler and more transparent. Moreover, the Exchange believes that because the proposed rule changes would provide for the widening of collars, and would prevent trades at an Impermissible Price, the specific size of the Price Collar Threshold becomes less meaningful. For example, if the Market Imbalance is so large that the proposed five percent price collar threshold is too narrow to permit a Trading Halt Auction, the proposed extensions and widening of Auction Collars, as described below, would provide for a measured manner by which the collars would be widened either to permit a trade at a permissible price or to attract additional offsetting interest. If, at a later date, the Plan is amended and the applicable tiers and percentage parameters are adjusted, the Exchange will reevaluate the Price Collar Thresholds for Trading Halt Auctions and if they should be changed, will file a separate proposed rule change.
Because the Price Collar Thresholds for Auction Collars applicable to a Trading Halt Auction would be specified in proposed Rule 7.35E(e)(7), the Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.35E(a)(10)(A) to specify that the Auction Collar price thresholds specified in that rule would be applicable to the Core Trading and Closing Auctions only. The Exchange further proposes to delete the following text: “*The price collar thresholds specified in this paragraph applicable to Trading Halt Auctions are in effect until proposed rule change based on SR-NYSEArca-2016-130 for the Exchange is effective and operative.” The Exchange believes that proposed Rule 7.35E(e)(7) obviates the current price collar thresholds specified for Trading Halt Auctions, which were adopted on an interim basis pending the outcome of the review that resulted in LULD Amendment 12 and standardized trading practices among the Primary Listing Exchanges for how to resume trading following a Trading Pause.
The Exchange proposes to make a related change to Rule 7.35E(a)(8)(A) to amend the chart that specifies Auction Reference Prices for the Trading Halt Auction. As proposed, the Exchange would add the clause “except as provided for in Rule 7.35E(e)(7)(A)” to specify that the Auction Reference Price would be determined under that subparagraph of the rule instead of the Auction Reference Price specified in Rule 7.35E(a)(8)(A). For a Trading Halt Auction following a MWCB Halt or regulatory halt, the Auction Reference Price would continue to be as specified in Rule 7.35E(a)(8)(A).
• Proposed Rule 7.35E(e)(7)(B)(i) would specify how Auction Collars would be determined for a Trading Halt Auction following a Trading Pause. As proposed, if the Auction Reference Price is the Lower (Upper) Price Band, the lower (upper) Auction Collar would be the Auction Reference Price decreased (increased) by the Price Collar Threshold, rounded down to the nearest MPV,
• Proposed Rule 7.35E(e)(7)(B)(ii) would specify how Auction Collars would be determined for a Trading Halt Auction following a MWCB Halt or regulatory halt. In this case, because there would not be a security-specific pricing direction reason for the halt, the Exchange proposes that the Price Collar Threshold would be applied on both sides of the Auction Reference Price. Accordingly, for stocks priced above $3.00, the upper (lower) boundary of the Auction Collar would be the Auction Reference Price (as defined in Rule 7.35E(a)(8)(A)), plus (minus) the Auction Reference Price multiplied by 5%. For stocks priced $3.00 and under, the upper (lower) boundary of the Auction Collar would be the Auction Reference Price (as defined in Rule 7.35E(a)(8)(A)), plus (minus) $0.15. For Trading Halt Auctions following a MWCB Halt or regulatory halt, if the Price Collar Threshold calculation results in a price that is not in the applicable MPV for the security, the
• Proposed Rule 7.35E(e)(7)(C)(i) would further provide that if the Impermissible Price is on the side of the Lower (Upper) Auction Collar, the last-calculated Lower (Upper) Auction Collar would be decreased (increased) by a Price Collar Threshold and the Upper (Lower) Auction Collar would stay the same.
• To address the concept of mean reversion, proposed Rule 7.35E(e)(7)(C)(ii) would provide that if the side of the Impermissible Price changes from the Lower (Upper) Auction Collar to the Upper (Lower) Auction Collar, the last-calculated Upper (Lower) Auction Collar would be widened for that Extension and the last-calculated Lower (Upper) Auction Collar will remain the same. Therefore, if, during an Extension, the directional trading pressure switches from sell to buy, the upper Auction Collar would be widened, and the last-Lower Auction Collar would remain the same.
Proposed Rules 7.35E(e)(8) and (9) would specify the Exchange's proposed handling of orders for a Trading Halt Auction, which are discussed in greater detail below.
Proposed Rule 7.35E(e)(10) would specify what the Exchange would do if a Re-Opening Time for a Trading Pause would be in the last ten minutes of trading before the end of Core Trading Hours. The Participants have amended the Plan to provide that if an NMS Stock is in a Trading Pause during the last ten minutes of trading before the end of Regular Trading Hours, the Primary Listing Exchange would not reopen trading and would attempt to execute a closing transaction using its established closing procedures.
In such circumstances, as specified in proposed Rule 7.35E(e)(10)(A), MOO Orders, LOO Orders, and IO Orders (described below) entered during the pause would not participate in the Closing Auction and would be cancelled. The Exchange proposes to add this rule text to provide transparency to ETP Holders of how orders that are designated to participate in a Trading Halt Auction only would be processed if the Exchange transitions to a Closing Auction without conducting that Trading Halt Auction. The Exchange believes this proposed rule text would provide notice for ETP Holders to enter closing-only interest,
In addition, as specified in proposed Rule 7.35E(e)(10)(B), the Auction Collars for the Closing Auction for such security would be the most recently widened Auction Collars for the Trading Halt Auction that did not occur. Currently, the Auction Collars for Closing Auctions are the greater of $0.50 or 10% away from the Auction Reference Price. The Exchange believes that if the Exchange goes directly from an unresolved Trading Pause, MWCB Halt, or regulatory halt in an NMS Stock to a Closing Auction, the price collar thresholds applicable to the Closing Auction would result in Auction Collars that do not correlate to the trading condition for that NMS Stock.
The Exchange proposes to make a related amendment to Rule 7.35E(a)(10)(A) to add the clause “except as provided for in Rule 7.35E(e)(10)(B)”. This proposed rule text makes clear that the price collar thresholds for a Closing Auction are defined in Rule 7.35E(a)(10)(A), except as provided for in proposed Rule 7.35E(e)(10)(B).
The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.10E(a) to provide that ETP Holders may not request a review of a Trading Halt Auction under Rule 7.10E(b), which specifies the procedures for an ETP Holder to request a review of an execution, as clearly erroneous. The Exchange believes that this proposed rule text would implement the proposed standardized trading practice that reopening auctions would not be eligible for review by ETP Holders as a clearly erroneous execution.
Finally, the Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.11E to delete obsolete rule text and conform the remaining rule text to LULD Amendment 12, as described above. First, the Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.11E(b) to delete the second and third sentences of this paragraph as inconsistent with LULD Amendment 12, described above.
Proposed Rule 7.31E(c)(5)(A) would provide that an IO Order would be accepted only during a halt or pause, including any extensions. This proposed rule text is consistent with the Exchange's current rules that MOO or LOO Orders designated to participate in a Trading Halt Auction will be accepted only during the trading halt that precedes such Trading Halt Auction.
Proposed Rule 7.31E(c)(5)(B) would provide that an IO Order would participate in a Trading Halt Auction only if: (i) There is an imbalance in the security on the opposite side of the market from the IO Order after taking into account all other orders eligible to trade at the Indicative Match Price; and (ii) the limit price of the IO Order to buy (sell) would be at or above (below) the Indicative Match Price. Proposed Rule 7.31E(c)(5)(C) would provide that the working price of an IO Order to buy (sell) would be adjusted to be equal to the Indicative Match Price, provided that the working price of the IO Order would not be higher (lower) than its limit price. Finally, proposed Rule 7.31E(c)(5)(D) would provide that an IO Order that participates in a Trading Halt Auction would be ranked in time priority among IO Orders after all other orders eligible to participate in the auction have been allocated. The proposed IO Order is based on the IO Order offered by NYSE Arca.
For example, assume for a Trading Halt Auction that the lower boundary of an Auction Collar is $10.00. Assume further that after allocating all other orders eligible to participate in the Trading Halt Auction, there is a sell Total Imbalance of 10,000 shares and absent Auction Collars, the Indicative Match Price would be below $10.00. As provided for in Rule 7.35E(a)(10)(B), once the Auction Collars are applied, the Indicative Match Price for that Trading Halt Auction would be $10.01 (
Proposed Rule 7.35E(e)(8) would describe how the Trading Halt Auction Imbalance Freeze would function. As proposed, the Trading Halt Auction Imbalance Freeze would begin five seconds before the Re-Opening Time, including Re-Opening Times for each Extension. The Exchange proposes to use the same period of time for the Trading Halt Auction Imbalance Freeze, five seconds, as provided for in Rule 7.35E(c)(3) for the Core Open Auction. Specifically, the Exchange believes that the proposed five-second time period strikes the appropriate balance for providing sufficient time for market participants to enter and cancel orders before the Trading Halt Auction while at the same time having a short period for any imbalance to stabilize before the auction is conducted. The rule would further provide that if a pause or halt is extended, the Trading Halt Auction Imbalance Freeze for the prior period would end, new orders and order instructions received during the prior period's Trading Halt Auction Imbalance Freeze would be processed, and the Exchange would accept new order entry and cancellation as provided for in Rule 7.18E(c) until the next Trading Halt Auction Imbalance Freeze. In other words, if at the Re-Opening Time, the Exchange extends the Trading Pause for five minutes, the restrictions on order entry and cancellation from the prior freeze would no longer be in effect, and any order instructions that were not processed will be processed.
The proposed rule would further provide how order entry and cancellation during the Trading Halt Auction Imbalance Freeze would be processed:
• As proposed in Rule 7.35E(e)(8)(A), MOO Orders and LOO Orders that are on the same side as the Imbalance, would flip the Imbalance, or would create a new Imbalance would be rejected. This proposed rule text is based on how MOC Orders and LOC Orders are processed during the Closing Auction Imbalance Freeze, as described in Rule 7.35E(d)(2)(A).
• As proposed in Rule 7.35E(e)(8)(B), Market Orders (other than MOO Orders) and Limit Orders would be accepted but would not be included in the calculation of the Indicative Match Price or the Trading Halt Auction Imbalance Information.
• Proposed Rule 7.35E(e)(8)(C) would provide that requests to cancel and requests to cancel and replace Market
• Finally, proposed Rule 7.35E(e)(8)(D) would provide that all other order instructions would be accepted. This proposed rule text is based on Rules 7.35E(c)(3)(D) and (d)(2)(C), without any differences.
• Proposed Rule 7.35E(a)(11) would define the term “Book Clearing Price” to mean the price at which all interest eligible to participate in an auction could be traded if not subject to an Auction Collar. The rule would further provide that the Book Clearing Price would be zero if a sell (buy) imbalance cannot be filled by any buy (sell) orders. For example, if there are only sell orders and no buy orders, the Book Clearing Price would be zero.
• Proposed Rule 7.35E(a)(12) would define the term “Far Clearing Price” to mean the price at which Auction-Only Orders could be traded within the Auction Collar. Auction-Only Orders are defined in Rule 7.31E(c).
• Proposed Rule 7.35E(a)(13) would define the term “Auction Indicator” to mean an indicator of whether an auction could be conducted, based on the applicable Auction Collar and Imbalance. This information would be relevant for the Trading Halt Auction and provide transparency regarding whether a Trading Pause, MWCB Halt, or regulatory halt would be eligible to be conducted. If an Auction Indicator is “no,” market participants would be on notice that submitting offsetting interest may reduce the possibility of the Exchange extending a Trading Halt Auction.
• Proposed Rule 7.35E(a)(14) would define the term “Imbalance Freeze Indicator” to mean an indicator of whether a security is currently in an Auction Imbalance Freeze. This indicator would put market participants on notice of whether there are order entry and cancellation restrictions in place at any given time before an auction.
Finally, the Exchange proposes to replace the word “truncated” with the words “rounded down”
The Exchange proposes to implement the proposed rule change at the same time that LULD Amendment 12 is implemented, which, subject to technology changes and the effectiveness of the extension for the implementation date for the LULD Amendment 12 changes, is anticipated to be in the fourth quarter of 2017.
The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”),
The Exchange believes the proposed changes would 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, because they are designed, together with LULD Amendment 12, to address the issues experienced on August 24, 2015 by reducing the number of repeat Trading Pauses in a single NMS Stock. LULD Amendment 12 is an essential component to Participants' goal of more standardized processes across Primary Listing Exchanges in reopening trading following a Trading Pause, and facilitates the production of an equilibrium Reopening Price by centralizing the reopening process through the Primary Listing Exchange, which would also improve the accuracy of the reopening Price Bands. LULD
This proposed rule change further supports this initiative by proposing uniform trading practices for reopening trading following a Trading Pause. The Exchange believes that the proposed standardized approach for how the Primary Listing Exchanges would conduct certain aspects of an automated reopening following a Trading Pause would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system because it would provide certainty for market participants regarding how a security would reopen following a Trading Pause, regardless of the listing exchange. The Exchange further believes that the proposed changes would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and protect investors and the public interest because the goal of the proposed changes is to ensure that all Market Order interest could be satisfied in an automated reopening auction while at the same time reducing the potential for multiple Trading Pauses in a single security due to a large order imbalance.
The Exchange further believes that the standardized proposal to extend a Trading Pause an additional five minutes would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system because it would provide additional time to attract offsetting liquidity. If at the end of such extension, Market Orders still cannot be satisfied within price collar thresholds or if the reopening auction would be priced outside of the applicable price collar thresholds, the Primary Listing Exchange would extend the Trading Pause an additional five minutes, which the Exchange believes would further protect investors and the public interest by reducing the potential for significant price disparity in post-auction trading, which could otherwise trigger another Trading Pause. With each such extension, the Exchange believes that widening the price collar threshold on the side of the market on which there is buying or selling pressure would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system because it would provide additional time to attract offsetting interest while at the same time addressing that an imbalance may not be resolved within the prior Auction Collars.
With respect to price collar thresholds, the Exchange believes that using the price of the limit state that preceded the Trading Pause,
The Exchange believes that applying the proposed changes to its Trading Halt Auctions not only following a Trading Pause, but also following a MWCB Halt or regulatory halt, would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system because it would promote consistency in how the Exchange conducts its Trading Halt Auctions, thus reducing complexity in the marketplace.
The Exchange believes that precluding ETP Holders from requesting a review of a Trading Halt Auction as a clearly erroneous execution would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system because the proposed new procedures for reopening trading following a Trading Pause would reduce the possibility that an order(s) from an ETP Holder(s) caused a Trading Halt Auction to be clearly erroneous. Specifically, the Exchange believes that the proposed standardized procedures for reopening trading following a Trading Pause incorporates a methodology that allows for widened collars, which may result in a reopening price away from prior trading prices, but which reopening price would be a result of a measured and transparent process that eliminates the potential that such trade would be considered erroneous.
The Exchange believes that the proposed amendments to Rule 7.11E would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system because the proposed changes would remove obsolete rule text and amend the remaining rule text to conform to LULD Amendment 12, as described above.
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change to add an IO Order for Trading Halt Auctions would further remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system because such order type is designed to attract offsetting interest that would participate in the Trading Halt Auction. The Exchange believes that offering such order type would provide an option for market participants that are willing to participate in an auction to offset an imbalance, but do not want such orders to participate in continuous trading. The proposed order type is based on the CO Order offered by NYSE Arca and are designed with the same purpose—to reduce the imbalance to assist in achieving pricing equilibrium.
The Exchange further believes that the proposed rule change to add a Trading Halt Auction Imbalance Freeze would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system because it would provide market participants with a brief period to assess the imbalance going into a Trading Halt Auction. During such time, order entry and cancellation would be revised in a manner designed to reduce the last-published imbalance. The proposed mechanism for the Trading Halt Auction Imbalance Freeze is not novel, as it is based in part on the existing Core Open Auction Imbalance Freeze,
The Exchange believes that the proposed manner of how it would process Limit Orders that do not participate in a Trading Halt Auction, but have a limit price within the applicable Auction Collars, in that such orders would roll into continuous trading, would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system. Such Limit Orders likely would not impact the pricing of post-auction trading and trigger another Trading Pause because the limit price of such orders would be within the same price range that trading would otherwise be permitted.
The Exchange believes that the proposed amendments to enhance the Auction Imbalance Information to add the Auction Reference Price, the Auction Collar, the Book Clearing Price, the Far Clearing Price, the Imbalance Freeze Indicator, and the Auction Indicator would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
The Exchange believes that the proposed amendments to Rule 7.31E(a)(10)(A) to replace “truncated” with “rounded down” would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system because the proposed rule change is designed to promote clarity, consistency, and transparency in Exchange rules.
Finally, the Exchange believes that the proposed changes are consistent with the Act because they are based on the rules of NYSE Arca without any substantive differences.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is not designed to address any competitive issues, but rather, to achieve the Participants' goal of more standardized processes across Primary Listing Exchanges in reopening trading following a Trading Pause, and facilitates the production of an equilibrium Reopening Price by centralizing the reopening process through the Primary Listing Exchange, which would also improve the accuracy of the reopening Price Bands. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change reduces the burden on competition for market participants because it promotes a transparent and consistent process for reopening trading following a Trading Pause regardless of where a security may be listed. The Exchange further believes that the proposed rule change would not impose any burden on competition because they are designed to increase transparency regarding the Exchange's Trading Halt Auction process while at the same time increasing the ability for offsetting interest to participate in an auction, which would assist in achieving pricing equilibrium for such an auction.
No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change.
The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act
A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under Section 19(b)(2)(B)
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:
• Use the Commission's Internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Exchange proposes to memorialize an optional Kill Switch protection.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at
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.
The Exchange proposes to memorialize its Kill Switch risk protection which is applicable to all Members at ISE Rule 711(d). The Kill Switch allows Members to cancel open orders and prevent new order submission. This feature provides Members with a powerful risk management tool for immediate control of their order activity.
The Kill Switch is an optional tool that enables Members to initiate a message(s)
The Member must send a message to the Exchange to request the cancellation of all orders for the Member. The Member is unable to enter additional orders until re-entry has been enabled pursuant to subsection (d)(2) of Rule 711.
Proposed subsection (d)(2) stipulates that after orders are cancelled by the Member utilizing the Kill Switch, the Member is unable to enter additional orders until the Member has made a request to the Exchange and Exchange staff has set a re-entry indicator to enable re-entry.
The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act
The individual firm benefits of enhanced risk protections flow downstream to counter-parties both at the Exchange and at other options exchanges, thereby increasing systemic protections as well. This risk feature allows Members to enter orders without fear of inadvertent exposure to excessive risk, which in turn benefits investors through increased liquidity for the execution of their orders, thereby protecting investors and the public interest. By memorializing the features in this rule change, Members are aware of the impact of utilizing this risk tool.
This optional risk tool as noted above is offered to all Members. The Exchange further represents that its proposal operates consistently with the firm quote obligations of a broker-dealer pursuant to Rule 602 of Regulation NMS and that the functionality is not mandatory. Specifically, any interest that is executable against a Member's orders that are received
With respect to providing information regarding the cancellation of orders as a result of the Kill Switch to the Clearing Member, each Member that transacts through a Clearing Member on the Exchange accepts financial responsibility for all Exchange transactions made by the Member on
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposal does not impose an undue burden on intra-market competition because all Members may avail themselves of the Kill Switch. The Kill Switch functionality is optional. The proposed rule change protects Members in the event the Member is suffering from a systems issue or from the occurrence of unusual or unexpected market activity that would require them to withdraw from the market in order to protect investors. Utilizing this Kill Switch will permit the Member to protect itself from inadvertent exposure to excessive risk. Reducing such risk will enable Members to enter orders without fear of inadvertent exposure to excessive risk, which in turn will benefit investors through increased liquidity for the execution of their orders. Such increased liquidity benefits investors because they receive better prices and because it lowers volatility in the options market. For these reasons, the Exchange does not believe this proposal imposes an undue burden on inter-market competition because other exchanges offer the same functionality, which is being memorialized herein.
No written comments were either solicited or received.
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
A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does not become operative before 30 days from the date of the filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),
The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because the proposal is similar to the rules of other options exchanges and the Exchange's proposal does not raise any new or novel issues. Therefore, the Commission hereby waives the 30-day operative delay and designates the proposed rule change to be operative upon filing with the Commission.
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.
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:
• Use the Commission's Internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
The following is a notice of applications for deregistration under section 8(f) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 for the month of October 2017. A copy of each application may be obtained via the Commission's Web site by searching for the file number, or for an applicant using the Company name box, at
The Commission: Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
Brad Gude, Senior Counsel, at (202) 551-5590 or Chief Counsel's Office at (202) 551-6821; SEC, Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-8010.
For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Exchange proposes to memorialize an optional Kill Switch protection.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at
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.
The Exchange proposes to memorialize its Kill Switch risk protection which is applicable to all Members at GEMX Rule 711(d). The Kill Switch allows Members to cancel open orders and prevent new order submission. This feature provides Members with a powerful risk management tool for immediate control of their order activity.
The Kill Switch is an optional tool that enables Members to initiate a message(s)
The Member must send a message to the Exchange to request the cancellation of all orders for the Member. The Member is unable to enter additional orders until re-entry has been enabled pursuant to subsection (d)(2) of Rule 711.
Proposed subsection (d)(2) stipulates that after orders are cancelled by the Member utilizing the Kill Switch, the Member is unable to enter additional orders until the Member has made a request to the Exchange and Exchange staff has set a re-entry indicator to enable re-entry.
The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act
The individual firm benefits of enhanced risk protections flow downstream to counter-parties both at the Exchange and at other options exchanges, thereby increasing systemic protections as well. This risk feature allows Members to enter orders without fear of inadvertent exposure to excessive risk, which in turn benefits investors through increased liquidity for the execution of their orders, thereby protecting investors and the public interest. By memorializing the features in this rule change, Members are aware of the impact of utilizing this risk tool.
This optional risk tool as noted above is offered to all Members. The Exchange further represents that its proposal operates consistently with the firm quote obligations of a broker-dealer pursuant to Rule 602 of Regulation NMS and that the functionality is not mandatory. Specifically, any interest that is executable against a Member's orders that are received
With respect to providing information regarding the cancellation of orders as a result of the Kill Switch to the Clearing Member, each Member that transacts through a Clearing Member on the Exchange accepts financial responsibility for all Exchange transactions made by the Member on whose behalf the Clearing Member agrees to clear.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposal does not impose an undue burden on intra-market competition because all Members may avail themselves of the Kill Switch. The Kill Switch functionality is optional. The proposed rule change protects Members in the event the Member is suffering from a systems issue or from the occurrence of unusual or unexpected market activity that would require them to withdraw from the market in order to protect investors. Utilizing this Kill Switch will permit the Member to protect itself from inadvertent exposure to excessive risk. Reducing such risk will enable Members to enter orders without fear of inadvertent exposure to excessive risk, which in turn will benefit investors through increased liquidity for the execution of their orders. Such increased liquidity benefits investors because they receive better prices and because it lowers volatility in the options market. For these reasons, the Exchange does not believe this proposal imposes an undue burden on inter-market competition because other exchanges offer the same functionality, which is being memorialized herein.
No written comments were either solicited or received.
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
A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does not become operative before 30 days from the date of the filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),
The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because the proposal is similar to the rules of other options exchanges and the Exchange's proposal does not raise any new or novel issues. Therefore, the Commission hereby waives the 30-day operative delay and designates the proposed rule change to be operative upon filing with the Commission.
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.
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:
• Use the Commission's Internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
On August 30, 2017, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”)
The Exchange proposes to list and trade the Shares of the Fund under Nasdaq Rule 5745, which governs the listing and trading of Exchange-Traded Managed Fund Shares, as defined in Nasdaq Rule 5745(c)(1). The Fund is a series of the Eaton Vance NextShares Trust II (“Trust”). The Exchange represents that the Trust is registered with the Commission as an open-end investment company and that it has filed a registration statement on Form N-1A (“Registration Statement”) with the Commission with respect to the Fund.
Foreside Fund Services, LLC will be the principal underwriter and distributor of the Fund's Shares. State Street Bank and Trust Company will act as the accounting agent, custodian, and transfer agent to the Fund. ICE Data Services will be the intraday indicative value calculator to the Fund.
The Exchange has made the following representations and statements in describing the Fund.
The investment objective of the Fund is total return. The Fund will invest at least 80% of its net assets (plus any borrowings for investment purposes) in credit-related investments (the “80% Policy”). For purposes of the 80% Policy, “credit-related investments” are fixed-income, variable rate, and floating-rate securities, as well as derivatives that provide exposure to such investments. Credit-related investments are corporate debt, senior loans, structured credit investments, emerging market debt, real estate debt,
Consistent with the disclosure requirements that apply to traditional open-end investment companies, a complete list of the Fund's current portfolio positions will be made available at least once each calendar quarter, with a reporting lag of not more than 60 days. The Fund may provide more frequent disclosures of portfolio positions at its discretion.
As defined in Nasdaq Rule 5745(c)(3), the “Composition File” is the specified portfolio of securities and/or cash that the Fund will accept as a deposit in issuing a creation unit of Shares, and the specified portfolio of securities and/or cash that the Fund will deliver in a redemption of a creation unit of Shares. The Composition File will be disseminated through the National Securities Clearing Corporation once each business day before the open of trading in Shares on that day and also will be made available to the public each day on a free Web site.
An estimated value of an individual Share, defined in Nasdaq Rule 5745(c)(2) as the “Intraday Indicative Value” (“IIV”), will be calculated and disseminated at intervals of not more than 15 minutes throughout the Regular Market Session
Because Shares will be listed and traded on the Exchange, Shares will be available for purchase and sale on an intraday basis. Shares will be purchased and sold in the secondary market at prices directly linked to the Fund's next-determined NAV using a trading protocol called “NAV-Based Trading.” All bids, offers, and execution prices of Shares will be expressed as a premium/discount (which may be zero) to the Fund's next-determined NAV (
According to the Exchange, member firms will utilize certain existing order types and interfaces to transmit Share bids and offers to Nasdaq, which will process Share trades like trades in shares of other listed securities.
To avoid potential investor confusion, Nasdaq represents that it will work with member firms and providers of market data services to seek to ensure that representations of intraday bids, offers, and execution prices of Shares that are made available to the investing public follow the “NAV−$0.01/NAV+$0.01” (or similar) display format. Specifically, the Exchange will use the NASDAQ Basic and NASDAQ Last Sale data feeds to disseminate intraday price and quote data for Shares in real time in the “NAV−$0.01/NAV+$0.01” (or similar) display format. Member firms may use the NASDAQ Basic and NASDAQ Last Sale data feeds to source intraday Share prices for presentation to the investing public in the “NAV−$0.01/NAV+$0.01” (or similar) display format.
Alternatively, member firms may source intraday Share prices in proxy price format from the Consolidated Tape and other Nasdaq data feeds
After careful review, the Commission finds that the Exchange's proposal to list and trade the Shares is consistent with the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.
The Shares will be subject to Nasdaq Rule 5745, which sets forth the initial and continued listing criteria applicable to Exchange-Traded Managed Fund Shares. A minimum of 50,000 Shares and no less than two creation units of the Fund will be outstanding at the commencement of trading on the Exchange.
Nasdaq deems the Shares to be equity securities, thus rendering trading in the Shares subject to Nasdaq's existing rules governing the trading of equity securities. Every order to trade Shares of the Fund is subject to the proxy price protection threshold of plus/minus $1.00, which determines the lower and upper thresholds for the life of the order and provides that the order will be cancelled at any point if it exceeds $101.00 or falls below $99.00.
Nasdaq also represents that trading in the Shares will be subject to the existing trading surveillances, administered by both Nasdaq and FINRA on behalf of the Exchange, which are designed to detect violations of Exchange rules and applicable federal securities laws.
Prior to the commencement of trading in the Fund, the Exchange will inform its members in an Information Circular of the special characteristics and risks associated with trading the Shares. Specifically, the Information Circular will discuss the following: (a) The procedures for purchases and redemptions of Shares in creation units (and that Shares are not individually redeemable); (b) Nasdaq Rule 2111A, which imposes suitability obligations on Nasdaq members with respect to recommending transactions in the Shares to customers; (c) how information regarding the IIV and Composition File is disseminated; (d) the requirement that members deliver a prospectus to investors purchasing Shares prior to or concurrently with the confirmation of a transaction; and (e) information regarding NAV-Based Trading protocols.
The Information Circular also will identify the specific Nasdaq data feeds from which intraday Share prices in proxy price format may be obtained. As noted above, all orders to buy or sell Shares that are not executed on the day the order is submitted will be automatically cancelled as of the close of trading on that day, and the Information Circular will discuss the effect of this characteristic on existing order types. In addition, Nasdaq intends to provide its members with a detailed explanation of NAV-Based Trading through a Trading Alert issued prior to the commencement of trading in Shares on the Exchange.
Nasdaq states that each of the Adviser and the Sub-Adviser is not a registered broker-dealer; however, each is affiliated with a broker-dealer. Nasdaq further states that each of the Adviser and the Sub-Adviser has implemented and will maintain a fire wall with respect to its affiliated broker-dealer regarding access to information concerning the composition of, and/or changes to, the Fund's portfolio.
The Commission finds that the proposal to list and trade the Shares on the Exchange is consistent with Section 11A(a)(1)(C)(iii) of the Act,
The Commission notes that once a Fund's daily NAV has been calculated and disseminated, Nasdaq will price each Share trade entered into during the day at the Fund's NAV plus/minus the trade's executed premium/discount. Using the final trade price, each executed Share trade will then be disseminated to member firms and market data services via a File Transfer Protocol (“FTP”) file
The Exchange will obtain a representation from the issuer of the Shares that the NAV per Share will be calculated daily (on each day that the New York Stock Exchange is open for trading) and provided to Nasdaq via the MFQS by the Fund accounting agent. As soon as the NAV is entered into the MFQS, Nasdaq will disseminate the NAV to market participants and market data vendors via the MFDS so that all firms will receive the NAV per share at the same time.
The Exchange further represents that it may consider all relevant factors in exercising its discretion to halt or suspend trading in the Shares. The Exchange will halt trading in the Shares under the conditions specified in Nasdaq Rule 4120 and in Nasdaq Rule 5745(d)(2)(C). Additionally, the Exchange may cease trading the Shares if other unusual conditions or circumstances exist that, in the opinion of the Exchange, make further dealings on the Exchange detrimental to the maintenance of a fair and orderly market. To manage the risk of a non-regulatory Share trading halt, Nasdaq has in place back-up processes and procedures to ensure orderly trading. Prior to the commencement of market trading in the Shares, the Fund will be required to establish and maintain a
The Exchange represents that all statements and representations made in the filing regarding: (a) The description of the portfolio or reference assets, (b) limitations on portfolio holdings or reference assets, (c) dissemination and availability of the reference asset or IIV, or (d) the applicability of Exchange listing rules shall constitute continued listing requirements for listing the Shares on the Exchange. The issuer has represented to the Exchange that it will advise the Exchange of any failure by the Fund to comply with the continued listing requirements, and, pursuant to its obligations under Section 19(g)(1) of the Act, the Exchange will monitor for compliance with the continued listing requirements.
This approval order is based on all of the Exchange's representations, including those set forth above and in Amendment No. 1.
For the foregoing reasons, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with Section 6(b)(5)
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to the provisions of section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”)
The Exchange is filing a proposal to amend Exchange Rule 518(a)(9) to: (i) Update the definition of a derived order on the Exchange, (ii) clarify the circumstances under which a derived order is generated by the Exchange's System, and the price at which a derived order may be generated, and (iii) expand the situations under which a derived order is removed from the Exchange's Simple Order Book.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at
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.
The Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 518(a)(9) to: (i) Update the definition of a derived order on the Exchange, (ii) clarify the circumstances under which a derived order is generated by the Exchange's System,
A “derived order” is an Exchange-generated limit order on the Simple Order Book that represents either the bid or offer of one component of a complex order resting on the Strategy
The Exchange is proposing to amend the definition of a “derived order” in two ways. First, the Exchange is proposing to revise the current requirement in Rule 518(a)(9) that a derived order can only be generated from one component of a complex order resting on the Strategy Book that is comprised of orders to buy or sell an equal quantity (currently with a one-to-one ratio) of two option components. Under the proposal, a derived order may now be comprised of orders to buy or sell two option components, where the size of one component has a base ratio of “one” relative to the other component (1:1, 1:2, or 1:3). Thus, the basis for the generation of derived orders on the Exchange will not be restricted to complex orders of equal size with a one-to-one ratio; instead, a derived order may be generated by using a complex order resting on the Strategy Book with two components, provided that one component of the complex order has a base ratio of one relative to the other component. For example, a complex order whose components have a size ratio of 1:3 could be used to generate a derived order, whereas a complex order whose components have a size ratio of 2:3 could not.
The Exchange is also proposing to amend Rule 518(a)(9) by adding a final sentence stating that derived orders are subject to the managed interest process described in Rule 515(c)(1)(ii).
The System will create a derived order to buy Option A at a price of $2.10. The new MBBO would be $2.10 × $2.20. However, the $2.10 bid price would lock the ABBO
Should interest arrive on MIAX Options to sell at $2.10 or lower, it will trade at $2.10 against the derived order, as Rule 515(c)(1)(ii)(A) provides that if the Exchange receives a new order or quote on the opposite side of the market from the managed order that can be executed, the System will immediately execute the remaining contracts from the initiating order to the extent possible at the order's current Book price ($2.10), provided that the execution price does not violate the current NBBO. The other side of the complex order will execute against the $1.00 bid price for Option B, effectively legging the complex order for a net price of $1.10.
The Exchange believes that generating and managing a derived order (rather
The Exchange is also proposing to amend Rule 518(a)(9)(i) to provide more detail regarding the circumstances under which a derived order is generated by the Exchange's System, and the price at which a derived order must be generated. Currently, a derived order may be automatically generated for one or more legs of a complex order at a price: (A) That matches or improves upon the best displayed bid or offer in the affected series on the Simple Order Book; and (B) at which the net price of the complex order on the Strategy Book can be achieved when the other component of the complex order is executed against the best displayed bid or offer on the Simple Order Book. Additionally, a derived order will not be displayed at a price that locks or crosses the best bid or offer of another exchange. In such a circumstance, the System will display the derived order on the Simple Order Book at a price that is one MPV away from the current opposite side best bid or offer of such other exchange, and rank the derived order on the Simple Order Book according to its actual price.
The Exchange is proposing to amend Rule 518(a)(9)(i) to add more detail to the rule stating that a derived order may be automatically generated if the complex order is eligible for “Legging” pursuant to Rule 518(c)(2)(iii), and meets the requirements set forth therein.
The Exchange is proposing to amend Rule 518(a)(9)(i)(B) to make a technical modification to the current rule text. Currently, the rule provides that a derived order may automatically be generated for one or more legs of a complex order at a price, “at which the net price of the complex order on the Strategy Book can be achieved when the other component(s) of the complex order is (are) executed against the best displayed bid or offer on the Simple Order Book.” The Exchange proposes to make the word “components” singular by removing the “(s)” and removing the word “(are)” following the phrase “complex order” so that the new sentence has the proper subject-verb agreement. The Exchange believes this change describes System functionality with more accuracy and precision.
The Exchange is proposing to amend Rule 518(a)(9)(i)(B) to state that a derived order may be automatically generated for one or more legs of a complex order at a price at which the net price of the complex order “at the best price” on the Strategy Book can be achieved when the other component of the complex order is executed against the best displayed bid or offer on the Simple Order Book. This requirement is intended to ensure that a complex order executed by way of generating and Legging a derived order for execution against an order on the Simple Order Book is not executed at a net price that is inferior to the best net price displayed on the Strategy Book. A derived order could not, therefore, result in a trade-through of a complex order resting on the Strategy Book at the Exchange's best displayed net price.
The Exchange is also proposing to amend Rule 518(a)(9)(vi), which describes the various circumstances under which a derived order that has been generated is removed from the Simple Order Book. Specifically, the Exchange is proposing to amend Rule 518(a)(9)(vi)(B), which currently provides that a derived order is automatically removed from the Simple Order Book if the execution of the derived order would no longer achieve the net price of the complex order on the Strategy Book when the other component of the complex order is executed against the best bid or offer on the Simple Order Book. The Exchange is proposing to replace the word “would” with the word “may” in this sub-paragraph in order to broaden the rule to reflect that the System will remove a derived order from the Simple Order Book any time the price of the best bid or offer on the Simple Order Book changes such that the net price of the complex order to be executed may not be achieved. A price change of the best bid or offer could be either: (i) Improving (raising the bid or lowering the offer) or, (ii) worsening (lowering the bid or raising the offer). In scenario (i), the derived order could remain on the Simple Order Book as it could still achieve the net price of the complex order. However, in scenario (ii), the derived order may not achieve the net price of the complex order depending upon how much the price had moved. For the sake of processing efficiency and speed, rather than perform the calculation to determine if the derived order could still achieve the net price for the complex order in scenario (ii), the System simply cancels any derived order in scenario (i) or (ii). The Exchange believes that removal of the derived order from the Simple Order Book when there is a possibility that the complex order may not be executed at its net price is prudent and is an appropriate safeguard against such an execution.
The Exchange is also proposing to amend Rules 518(a)(9)(vi)(C) and (D), which currently describe the automatic removal of a derived order from the Simple Order Book when the complex order is executed in full, or is cancelled. The Exchange is proposing to consolidate sub-paragraphs (C) and (D) into one sub-paragraph (C), to delete the phrase “in full,” and to broaden the rule by stating that a derived order is automatically removed from the Simple Order Book if the complex order is executed, cancelled, or modified in any way.
The Exchange is also proposing to amend Rule 518(a)(9)(vi)(D) by deleting the current text (see above) and adopting new Rule 518(a)(9)(vi)(D) to state that a derived order is automatically removed from the Simple Order Book if the strategy
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change relating to derived orders will facilitate more interaction between the Strategy Book and the Simple Order Book, resulting in increased execution opportunities and better execution prices for complex orders and for orders resting on the Simple Order Book.
The Exchange will announce the implementation date of the proposed rule change by Regulatory Circular to be published no later than 60 days following the operative date of the proposed rule. The implementation date will be no later than 60 days following the issuance of the Regulatory Circular.
The Exchange believes that its proposed rule change is consistent with section 6(b) of the Act
The Exchange's proposal to amend Rule 518(a)(9) to remove the limitation on the generation of derived orders to use only complex orders of equal size with a one-to-one ratio, and instead to permit a derived order to be generated by using a complex order resting on the Strategy Book with a ratio of greater than one-to-one, provided that one component of the complex order that is used to generate the derived order has a base ratio of one relative to the other component, is designed to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a free and open market and a national market system. Specifically, the Exchange believes that this proposal will increase the number of derived orders that may be generated on the Exchange, thus enhancing liquidity and increasing the number of opportunities for the execution of complex orders on the Exchange.
The Exchange's proposal to state in Rule 518(a)(9) that derived orders are subject to the managed interest process described in Rule 515(c)(1)(ii) is designed protect investors and the public interest by ensuring that a derived order (which is firm for its price and size) does not lock or cross an away market price at the NBBO. If a derived order were to lock or cross an away market price at the NBBO, the Exchange would not be able to route the derived
The proposed amendment to Exchange Rule 518(a)(9)(i), adding the requirement that a derived order may be automatically generated if the complex order is eligible for Legging pursuant to Rule 518(c)(2)(iii), is designed to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a free and open market by establishing clearly in the Exchange's Rules that the System will generate derived orders only for complex orders whose components (including the component represented by a derived order) can be executed as individual legs against orders on the Simple Order Book. In order for a component to be executed against an order on the Simple Order Book, the complex order must be executed by way of its individual legs; there is thus no need for, or purpose in, generating a derived order for a complex order that is not eligible for Legging.
The Exchange's proposal to amend Rule 518(a)(9)(i)(B) to clarify the conditions required for the creation of derived orders would promote just and equitable principles of trade and remove impediments to a free and open market by providing greater transparency concerning the operation of Exchange functionality.
The Exchange's proposal to amend Rule 518(a)(9)(i)(B), to require that a derived order be generated at a price at which the net price of the complex order at the best price on the Strategy Book can be achieved, is designed to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest by ensuring that a complex order executed by way of Legging against orders on the Simple Order Book could not result in a trade-through of a complex order at the Exchange's best displayed net price.
The proposed amendment to Exchange Rule 518(a)(9)(vi)(B) is designed to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest by ensuring that a derived order is removed from the Simple Order Book any time the price of the best bid or offer on the Simple Order Book changes such that the net price of a complex order at the top of the Strategy Book may not be achieved by executing the derived order and another order at the changed price, thus protecting investors by ensuring a safeguard against such an execution.
The proposed amendments to Rules 518(a)(9)(vi)(C) and (D), describing the automatic removal of derived orders from the Simple Order Book, are designed to protect investors and the public interest by ensuring that derived orders do not result in executions that trade through the top of the Exchange's Simple Order Book and Strategy Book, and that executions on the Simple Order Book and on the Strategy Book do not result in prices that trade through away markets.
Amended Rule 518(a)(9)(vi)(E), stating that the System will continually evaluate any remaining complex order(s) on the Strategy Book to determine whether a new derived order should be generated, ensures that a new derived order can and will be generated by the System under the proper conditions even after a previously generated derived order has been removed from the Simple Order Book. This provision is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade and also to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a free and open market and a national market system by providing more opportunities to execute complex orders through Legging using derived orders as market conditions change.
The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule change removes impediments to and perfects the mechanisms of a free and open market and a national market system by attracting more order flow and by increasing the frequency with which MIAX Options participants are able to trade complex orders.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change enhances intermarket competition by providing market participants with additional opportunities to execute complex orders through the generation of a greater number of derived orders using an expanded permissible size ratio. The Exchange believes that the additional opportunities to trade complex orders will result in the submission of more complex orders for execution on the Exchange, thus enhancing the Exchange's competitive position by increasing liquidity and order flow on the Exchange. Moreover, the proposed rule change is consistent with the rules of other exchanges, as cited above.
The Exchange also believes that its proposal enhances intra-market competition, as all Exchange participants in the same category are able to participate on an equal basis with respect to the trading of complex orders.
For all the reasons stated, 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, and believes the proposed change will in fact enhance competition.
Written comments were neither solicited nor received.
Because the proposed rule change does not (i) significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved.
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.
• Use the Commission's Internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Exchange proposes to [sic] a [sic] proposal [sic] to establish a Nonstandard Expirations Pilot Program on a pilot basis, for an initial period of twelve months from the date of approval of this proposed rule change.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at
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.
The purpose of this rule filing is to permit the listing and trading, on a pilot basis, of p.m.-settled options on broad-based indexes with nonstandard expiration dates for an initial period of twelve months (the “Nonstandard Expirations Pilot Program” or “Pilot Program”) from the date of approval of this proposed rule change.
The Exchange proposes to add new subsection (b)(vii)(1), Weekly Expirations, to Rule 1101A, Terms of Options Contracts. Under the proposed new rule the Exchange would be permitted to open for trading Weekly Expirations on any broad-based index eligible for standard options trading to expire on any Monday, Wednesday, or Friday (other than the third Friday-of-the-month or days that coincide with an EOM expiration). Weekly Expirations would be subject to all provisions of Rule 1101A and would be treated the same as options on the same underlying index that expire on the third Friday of the expiration month. Unlike the standard monthly options, however, Weekly Expirations would be p.m.-settled. New series in Weekly
The maximum number of expirations that could be listed for each Weekly Expiration (
Under the proposal, the Exchange could open for trading EOMs on any broad-based index eligible for standard options trading to expire on last trading day of the month. EOMs would be subject to all provisions of Rule 1101A and treated the same as options on the same underlying index that expire on the third Friday of the expiration month. However, the EOMs would be P.M.-settled and new series in EOMs could be added up to and including on the expiration date for an expiring EOM.
The maximum number of expirations that could be listed for EOMs in a given class would be the same as the maximum number of expirations permitted for standard options on the same broad-based index. EOM expirations would not need to be for consecutive end of month expirations. However, the expiration date of a non-consecutive expiration may not be beyond what would be considered the last expiration date if the maximum number of expirations were listed consecutively. EOMs that are first listed in a given class could expire up to four weeks from the actual listing date. Other expirations would not be counted as part of the maximum numbers of EOM expirations for a broad-based index class.
Weekly Expirations and EOMs would be subject to the same rules that currently govern the trading of standard monthly broad-based index options, including sales practice rules, margin requirements, and floor trading procedures. Contract terms for Weekly Expirations and EOMs would be the same as those for standard monthly broad-based index options. Since Weekly Expirations and EOMs will be a new type of series, and not a new class, the Exchange proposes that Weekly Expirations and EOMs shall be aggregated for any applicable reporting and other requirements.
The Exchange has analyzed its capacity and represents that it believes the Exchange and the Options Price Reporting Authority (“OPRA”) have the necessary systems capacity to handle any additional traffic associated with the listing of the maximum number nonstandard expirations permitted under the Pilot.
As stated above, this proposal is to establish a Nonstandard Expirations Pilot Program for broad-based index options on a pilot basis, for an initial period of twelve months from the date of approval of this proposed rule change. If the Exchange were to propose an extension of the Pilot or should the Exchange propose to make the Pilot permanent, the Exchange would submit a filing proposing such amendments to the Pilot.
Further, any positions established under the Pilot would not be impacted by the expiration of the Pilot. For example, if the Exchange lists a Weekly Expiration or EOM that expires after the Pilot expires (and is not extended) then those positions would continue to exist.
However, any further trading in those series would be restricted to transactions where at least one side of the trade is a closing transaction.
As part of the Pilot, the Exchange will submit a Pilot report to the Commission at least two months prior to the expiration date of the Pilot (the “annual report”). The annual report will contain an analysis of volume, open interest and trading patterns. In addition, for series that exceed certain minimum open interest parameters, the annual report will provide analysis of index price volatility and, if needed, share trading activity. The annual report will be provided to the Commission on a confidential basis.
For all Weekly Expirations and EOM series, the annual report will contain the following volume and open interest data for each broad-based index overlying Weekly Expiration and EOM options:
(1) Monthly volume aggregated for all Weekly Expiration and EOM series,
(2) Volume in Weekly Expiration and EOM series aggregated by expiration date,
(3) Month-end open interest aggregated for all Weekly Expiration and EOM series,
(4) Month-end open interest for EOM series aggregated by expiration date and open interest for Weekly Expiration series aggregated by expiration date,
(5) Ratio of monthly aggregate volume in Weekly Expiration and EOM series to total monthly class volume, and
(6) Ratio of month-end open interest in EOM series to total month-end class open interest and ratio of open interest in each Weekly Expiration series to total class open interest.
In addition, the annual report will contain the information noted above for standard Expiration Friday, AM-settled series, if applicable, for the period covered in the pilot report as well as for the six-month period prior to the initiation of the pilot.
Upon request by the SEC, the Exchange will provide a data file containing: (1) Weekly Expiration and EOM option volume data aggregated by series, and (2) Weekly Expiration open interest for each expiring series and EOM month-end open interest for expiring series.
In the annual report, the Exchange also proposes to identify Weekly Expiration and EOM trading patterns by undertaking a time series analysis of open interest in Weekly Expiration and EOM series aggregated by expiration date compared to open interest in near-term standard Expiration Friday A.M.-settled series in order to determine whether users are shifting positions from standard series to Weekly Expiration and EOM series. Declining open interest in standard series accompanied by rising open interest in Weekly Expiration and EOM series would suggest that users are shifting positions.
For each Weekly Expiration and EOM expiration that has open interest that exceeds certain minimum thresholds, the annual report will contain the following analysis related to index price changes and, if needed, underlying share trading volume at the close on expiration dates:
(1) a comparison of index price changes at the close of trading on a given expiration date with comparable price changes from a control sample. The data will include a calculation of percentage price changes for various time intervals and compare that information to the respective control sample. Raw percentage price change data as well as percentage price change data normalized for prevailing market volatility, as measured by an appropriate index agreed by the Commission and the Exchange, will be provided; and
(2) if needed, a calculation of share volume for a sample set of the component securities representing an upper limit on share trading that could be attributable to expiring in-the-money Weekly Expiration and EOM expirations. The data, if needed, will include a comparison of the calculated share volume for securities in the sample set to the average daily trading volumes of those securities over a sample period.
The minimum open interest parameters, control sample, time intervals, method for selecting the component securities, and sample periods will be determined by the Exchange and the Commission.
The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,
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. Specifically, the Exchange does not believe the proposal will impose any burden on intramarket competition as all market participants will be treated in the same manner with respect to Weekly Expirations and EOMs. Additionally, the Exchange does not believe the proposal will impose any burden on intermarket competition as market participants are welcome to become members and trade at Phlx if they determine that this proposed rule change has made Phlx more attractive or favorable. Finally, all options exchanges are free to compete by listing and trading their own broad-based index options with weekly or end of month expirations.
No written comments were either solicited or received.
Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No.1, is consistent with the Act. In particular, the Commission solicits comment on the following:
• Will the pilot data contemplated in this notice allow the Commission to determine whether the weekly and monthly PM-settled options proposed in this filing have adverse effects on market volatility and the operation of fair and orderly markets in the underlying cash market?
• Will the pilot data contemplated in this notice allow the Commission to determine whether the weekly and monthly PM-settled options proposed in this filing have adverse effects on liquidity, volume, open interest, trading patterns, and volatility in other option contracts with standard expirations?
• Will the pilot data contemplated in this notice allow the Commission to determine whether the weekly and monthly PM-settled options proposed in this filing have adverse effects on index price volatility?
• Will the weekly and monthly PM-settled options proposed in this filing affect the market for options contracts with nonstandard expirations offered by CBOE? If so, how? In addition, how would this proposal affect the data and information related to nonstandard expirations that are provided by CBOE?
• What concerns do market participants have related to the proposed Nonstandard Expirations Pilot Program? If any, please be specific in describing your concerns. If any, will the pilot data contemplated in this notice allow the Commission to examine whether the concerns are valid?
Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's Internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Exchange proposes to memorialize an optional Kill Switch protection.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at
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.
The Exchange proposes to memorialize its Kill Switch risk protection which is applicable to all Members at MRX Rule 711(d). The Kill Switch allows Members to cancel open orders and prevent new order submission. This feature provides Members with a powerful risk management tool for immediate control of their order activity.
The Kill Switch is an optional tool that enables Members to initiate a message(s)
The Member must send a message to the Exchange to request the cancellation of all orders for the Member. The Member is unable to enter additional orders until re-entry has been enabled pursuant to subsection (d)(2) of Rule 711.
Proposed subsection (d)(2) stipulates that after orders are cancelled by the Member utilizing the Kill Switch, the Member is unable to enter additional orders until the Member has made a request to the Exchange and Exchange staff has set a re-entry indicator to enable re-entry.
The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act
The individual firm benefits of enhanced risk protections flow downstream to counter-parties both at the Exchange and at other options exchanges, thereby increasing systemic protections as well. This risk feature allows Members to enter orders without fear of inadvertent exposure to excessive risk, which in turn benefits investors through increased liquidity for the execution of their orders, thereby protecting investors and the public interest. By memorializing the features in this rule change, Members are aware of the impact of utilizing this risk tool.
This optional risk tool as noted above is offered to all Members. The Exchange further represents that its proposal operates consistently with the firm quote obligations of a broker-dealer pursuant to Rule 602 of Regulation NMS and that the functionality is not mandatory. Specifically, any interest that is executable against a Member's orders that are received
With respect to providing information regarding the cancellation of orders as a result of the Kill Switch to the Clearing Member, each Member that transacts through a Clearing Member on the Exchange accepts financial responsibility for all Exchange transactions made by the Member on whose behalf the Clearing Member agrees to clear.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposal does not impose an undue burden on intra-market competition because all Members may avail themselves of the Kill Switch. The Kill Switch functionality is optional. The proposed rule change protects Members in the event the Member is suffering from a systems issue or from the occurrence of unusual or unexpected market activity that would require them to withdraw from the market in order to protect investors. Utilizing this Kill Switch will permit the Member to protect itself from inadvertent exposure to excessive risk. Reducing such risk will enable Members to enter orders without fear of inadvertent exposure to excessive risk, which in turn will benefit investors through increased liquidity for the execution of their orders. Such increased liquidity benefits investors because they receive better prices and because it lowers volatility in the options market. For these reasons, the Exchange does not believe this proposal imposes an undue burden on inter-market competition because other exchanges offer the same functionality, which is being memorialized herein.
No written comments were either solicited or received.
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
A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does not become operative before 30 days from the date of the filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),
The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because the proposal is similar to the rules of other options exchanges and the Exchange's proposal does not raise any new or novel issues. Therefore, the Commission hereby waives the 30-day operative delay and designates the proposed rule change to be operative upon filing with the Commission.
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.
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:
• Use the Commission's Internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Exchange proposes to remove references to Nasdaq Options Services.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at
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.
The purpose of this filing is to remove references to “Nasdaq Options Services” or “NOS” and in certain cases replace those references with a reference to “Nasdaq Execution Services” or “NES.” The Exchange previously filed a proposed rule change which replaced Nasdaq Options Services with Nasdaq Execution Services.
No other changes are being proposed in this filing. The Exchange represents that these changes are concerned solely with the administration of the Exchange and do not affect the meaning, administration, or enforcement of any rules of the Exchange or the rights, obligations, or privileges of Exchange members or their associated persons in any way. Accordingly, this filing is being submitted under Rule 19b-4(f)(3).
The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The removal of references to “Nasdaq Options Services” or “NOS” and, where applicable, replacement with “Nasdaq Execution Services” or “NES” will avoid confusion.
No written comments were either solicited or received.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if
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:
• Use the Commission's Internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Based upon a review of the Administrative Record assembled pursuant to Section 219(a)(4)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended (8 U.S.C. 1189(a)(4)(C)) (“INA”), and in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of the Treasury, I conclude that the circumstances that were the basis for the designation of the aforementioned organization as a Foreign Terrorist Organization have not changed in such a manner as to warrant revocation of the designation and that the national security of the United States does not warrant a revocation of the designation.
Therefore, I hereby determine that the designation of the aforementioned organization as a Foreign Terrorist Organization, pursuant to Section 219 of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1189), shall be maintained.
This determination shall be published in the
Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: I hereby determine that a certain object to be included in the exhibition “Coming Away: Winslow Homer and England,” imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, is of cultural significance. The object is imported pursuant to a loan agreement with the foreign owner or custodian. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the exhibit object at the Milwaukee Art Museum, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, from on or about March 2, 2018, until on or about May 20, 2018, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest.
Elliot Chiu in the Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-632-6471; email:
The foregoing determinations were made pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), E.O. 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681,
Based upon a review of the administrative record assembled in this matter, and in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of the Treasury, I have concluded that there is a sufficient factual basis to find that Abdallah Azzam Brigades (and other aliases) is also known as Marwan Hadid Brigades, also known as Marwan Hadid Brigade.
Therefore, pursuant to Section 1(b) of Executive Order 13224, I hereby amend the designation of Abdallah Azzam Brigades as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist to include the following
This determination shall be published in the
Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: I hereby determine that a certain object to be included in the exhibition “Portraits of the World: Switzerland,” imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, is of cultural significance. The object is imported pursuant to a loan agreement with the foreign owner or custodian. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the exhibit object at the National Portrait Gallery, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, District of Columbia, from on or about December 15, 2017, until on or about November 12, 2018, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest.
Elliot Chiu in the Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-632-6471; email:
The foregoing determinations were made pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), E.O. 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681,
Based upon a review of the Administrative Record assembled pursuant to Section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended (8 U.S.C. 1189) (“INA”), and in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of the Treasury, I have concluded that there is a sufficient factual basis to find that the following are aliases of Abdallah Azzam Brigades (and other aliases): Marwan Hadid Brigades, also known as Marwan Hadid Brigade.
Therefore, pursuant to Section 219(b) of the INA, as amended (8 U.S.C. 1189(b)), I hereby amend the designation of Abdallah Azzam Brigades as a foreign terrorist organization to include the following new aliases: Marwan Hadid Brigades, also known as Marwan Hadid Brigade.
This determination shall be published in the
Surface Transportation Board.
Notice tentatively approving and authorizing finance transaction.
On October 3, 2017, Sureride Charter Inc. d/b/a Sundiego Charter Co. d/b/a SunExpress Charter Co. (SCI), an interstate passenger motor carrier, filed an application to acquire McClintock Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a Goldfield Stage & Company (the Acquisition Carrier), an interstate passenger motor carrier. The Board is tentatively approving and authorizing the transaction, and, if no opposing comments are timely filed, this notice will be the final Board action. Persons wishing to oppose the application must follow the rules.
Comments must be filed by December 18, 2017. The applicant may file a reply by January 2, 2018. If no opposing comments are filed by December 18, 2017, this notice shall be effective December 19, 2017.
Send an original and 10 copies of any comments referring to Docket No. MCF 21077 to: Surface Transportation Board, 395 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20423-0001. In addition, send one copy of comments to SCI's representative: Andrew K. Light, Scopelitis, Garvin, Light, Hanson, & Feary, P.C., 10 W. Market Street, Suite 1400, Indianapolis, IN 46204.
Sarah Fancher (202) 245-0355. Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) for the hearing impaired: 1-800-877-8339.
SCI states that it is a California corporation and an interstate passenger motor carrier. It states that it is wholly owned by All Aboard America! Holdings, Inc. (AAAHI), which is wholly owned by AAAHI Acquisition Corporation, which is wholly owned by AAAHI Intermediate Holdings LLC, which is wholly owned by AAAHI Topco Corporation, which is in turn wholly owned by AAAHI Holdings LLC. According to SCI, the majority owner of AAAHI Holdings LLC is Tensile Capital Partners Master Fund LP, 89.6% of which is owned by Tensile Capital Partners LP. SCI further states that none of the entities that have a direct or indirect ownership interest in SCI (Ownership Entities) possess motor carrier authority or have USDOT Numbers or Safety Ratings.
SCI states that, in addition to SCI, AAAHI wholly owns the following passenger motor carriers (the Affiliated Carriers): Hotard Coaches, Inc. (Hotard); Industrial Bus Lines, Inc. d/b/a All Aboard America (Industrial); Ace Express Coaches, LLC (Ace Express); All Aboard Transit Services, LLC (AATS); and All Aboard America! School Transportation, LLC (AAAST). According to SCI, the Affiliated Carriers exercise substantial independence in running their diverse operations, and none of the Ownership Entities hold any controlling interest in any regulated bus transportation provider other than the Affiliated Carriers.
SCI provides a description of each of the Affiliated Carriers, as summarized below:
• Hotard is a Louisiana corporation that provides local and regional charter services within Louisiana and Mississippi, and to and from various points in the continental United States. It holds common carrier operating authority from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) as a motor carrier of passengers (MC-143881). Hotard operates a fleet of 273 vehicles, of which 80 are full-sized motor coaches and the remainder are school buses. The school buses are mainly used for employee shuttle services under contract with large employers, operating interstate between Texas and Louisiana and intrastate within Louisiana.
• Industrial is a New Mexico corporation that provides local and regional charter services in Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas. Industrial holds common carrier operating authority from FMCSA as a motor carrier of passengers (MC-133171). Its fleet consists of 81 full-sized motor coaches and 13 minibuses.
• Ace Express is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business in Golden, Colo. Ace Express operates charter, contract, and casino services. It holds common carrier operating authority from FMCSA as a motor carrier of passengers (MC-908184). Ace Express provides charter services with its fleet of 60 motor coaches and 17 minibuses. Other services are provided on a contract basis for corporate and municipal clients.
• AATS is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business in Commerce City, Colo. AATS operates 82 paratransit vehicles that are provided by Denver Rapid Transit District, with whom it has a contract to provide paratransit services. AATS provides the drivers, maintenance of vehicles, and supervision of employees involved in the paratransit service. AATS does not conduct interstate passenger operations and thus does not hold passenger carrier operating authority from FMCSA. AATS states that it does not possess Colorado intrastate passenger carrier authority, as its operations are exempt from the need for such authority under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 40-10.1-105(e) (2011).
• AAAST is a Texas limited liability company that provides transportation for school children under contract with a number of school districts in Texas. The school districts typically provide the school buses and AAAST provides the drivers, maintenance of vehicles, and supervisions of employees. AAAST currently operates 67 buses for five school districts. AAAST does not conduct interstate passenger operations and thus does not hold passenger carrier operating authority from FMCSA. AAAST operates pursuant to intrastate authority issued by the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles under Certificate No. 007050629C.
SCI states that the Acquisition Carrier is a California corporation that holds common carrier operating authority from FMCSA as a motor carrier of passengers (MC-191442). The Acquisition Carrier provides local and regional charter service in California using 23 full-size coaches, five mini-coaches, two vans, and three cars. SCI states that the Acquisition Carrier is wholly owned by individuals Kevin and Dalyce McClintock (Sellers). According to SCI, the Sellers do not currently hold interests in any regulated bus transportation provider other than the Acquisition Carrier.
SCI explains that under the proposed transaction, SCI would assume 100% control of the Acquisition Carrier.
Under 49 U.S.C. 14303(b), the Board must approve and authorize a transaction that it finds consistent with the public interest, taking into consideration at least: (1) The effect of the proposed transaction on the adequacy of transportation to the public; (2) the total fixed charges that result; and (3) the interest of affected carrier employees. SCI has submitted the information required by 49 CFR 1182.2, including information to demonstrate that the proposed transaction is consistent with the public interest under 49 U.S.C. 14303(b) and a statement that the gross operating revenues of SCI, the Acquisition Carrier, and the Affiliated Carriers (which as described above are under common control with SCI) exceeded $2 million in both interstate and intrastate services for the preceding 12-month period ending June 30, 2017.
SCI asserts that the transaction would not have a material, detrimental impact on the adequacy of transportation services available for the public. SCI further explains that it anticipates that services to the public would be improved because the Acquisition Carrier would continue to operate, but going forward, it would operate as part of the AAAHI corporate family. Under this new ownership, SCI states that the AAAHI corporate family intends to use its business and financial management skills, as well as its capital, to increase the efficiencies and enhance the viability of the Acquisition Carrier, thereby ensuring the continued availability of adequate passenger transportation service for the public. SCI also states that services currently provided by the Acquisition Carrier would continue to be provided under the same name currently used to provide such services.
According to SCI, fixed charges of the Acquisition Carrier are not expected to change materially. SCI states that its fixed charges, in the form of interest expense, will increase as a result of the borrowing of funds used to complete the contemplated transaction. SCI states, however, that such an increase is not expected to impact the provision of transportation services.
Regarding the interests of employees, SCI asserts that its current intent is “to continue the existing operations of the Acquisition Carrier,” but that it “is evaluating its employment needs with a view to employing qualified personnel that are currently employed by the Acquisition Carrier to operate the relevant services.” (App. 8.)
Finally, SCI asserts that the impact of the proposed transaction on the regulated motor carrier industry would be minimal and that neither competition nor the public interest would be adversely affected, as the proposed transaction involves merely the addition of a single interstate passenger motor carrier to a previously approved portfolio of carriers.
On the basis of the application, the Board finds that the proposed acquisition is consistent with the public interest and should be tentatively approved and authorized. If any opposing comments are timely filed, these findings will be deemed vacated, and, unless a final decision can be made on the record as developed, a procedural schedule will be adopted to
This action is categorically excluded from environmental review under 49 CFR 1105.6(c).
Board decisions and notices are available on our Web site at “
1. The proposed transaction is approved and authorized, subject to the filing of opposing comments.
2. If opposing comments are timely filed, the findings made in this notice will be deemed as having been vacated.
3. Notice of this decision will be published in the
4. This notice will be effective December 19, 2017, unless opposing comments are filed by December 18, 2017.
5. A copy of this notice will be served on: (1) The U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590; (2) the U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division, 10th Street & Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20530; and (3) the U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of the General Counsel, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.