Federal Register Vol. 82, No.215,

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 215 (November 8, 2017)

Page Range51753-51971
FR Document

82_FR_215
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
82 FR 51773 - Federal Acquisition Regulation; Removal of Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Rule RepublicationPDF
82 FR 51971 - Continuation of the National Emergency With Respect to the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass DestructionPDF
82 FR 51969 - Continuation of the National Emergency With Respect to IranPDF
82 FR 51967 - Continuation of the National Emergency With Respect to BurundiPDF
82 FR 51965 - Honoring the Victims of the Sutherland Springs, Texas, ShootingPDF
82 FR 51833 - Sunshine Act Meeting NoticePDF
82 FR 51805 - Sunshine Act Meeting NoticePDF
82 FR 51877 - Sunshine Act MeetingPDF
82 FR 51801 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request-User Access Request Form FNS-674PDF
82 FR 51802 - Notice of Availability of Draft Scientific Assessment for Public CommentPDF
82 FR 51778 - Revisions to Framework Adjustment 56 to the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Management PlanPDF
82 FR 51786 - National Performance Management Measures; Assessing Performance of the National Highway System, Freight Movement on the Interstate System, and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement ProgramPDF
82 FR 51788 - Oil and Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standards for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources: Stay of Certain RequirementsPDF
82 FR 51884 - Product Change-Priority Mail Negotiated Service AgreementPDF
82 FR 51885 - Product Change-Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, & First-Class Package Service Negotiated Service AgreementPDF
82 FR 51794 - Oil and Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standards for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources: Three Month Stay of Certain RequirementsPDF
82 FR 51753 - Public Availability of Government Accountability Office RecordsPDF
82 FR 51829 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Implementation of the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone; State Implementation Plan Requirements, EPA ICR No. 2347.03, OMB Control No. 2060-0695PDF
82 FR 51834 - Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding CompaniesPDF
82 FR 51852 - Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) Becoming the Sole CBP-Authorized Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) System for Generating, Transmitting and Updating Daily and Monthly StatementsPDF
82 FR 51849 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Draft Guidance for Industry and Review Staff on Target Product Profile-A Strategic Development Process ToolPDF
82 FR 51879 - Nuclear Power Plant Instrumentation for EarthquakesPDF
82 FR 51907 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments; Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Air Taxi and Commercial Operator Airport Activity SurveyPDF
82 FR 51906 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments; Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Aviation InsurancePDF
82 FR 51853 - Section 8 Housing Assistance Payments Program-Annual Adjustment Factors, Fiscal Year 2018PDF
82 FR 51940 - 2017-2018 Refuge-Specific Hunting and Sport Fishing RegulationsPDF
82 FR 51857 - International Wildlife Conservation Council Establishment; Request for NominationsPDF
82 FR 51822 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 51870 - ``Made in America'' Outdoor Recreation Advisory Committee Establishment; Request for NominationsPDF
82 FR 51872 - Certain LED Lighting Devices, LED Power Supplies, and Components Thereof Institution of InvestigationPDF
82 FR 51878 - Notice of Availability and Notice of Public Meeting for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Green Bank Observatory, Green Bank, West VirginiaPDF
82 FR 51778 - Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Summer Flounder Fishery; Quota TransferPDF
82 FR 51770 - Ecclesiastical Endorsing OrganizationsPDF
82 FR 51860 - Tribal Consultation on Indian Trust Asset Reform Act (ITARA) Sec. 304, Transition Plan for the Office of the Special Trustee for American IndiansPDF
82 FR 51841 - Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and RecommendationsPDF
82 FR 51835 - Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and RecommendationsPDF
82 FR 51837 - Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and RecommendationsPDF
82 FR 51838 - Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act ReviewPDF
82 FR 51839 - Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act ReviewPDF
82 FR 51842 - Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act ReviewPDF
82 FR 51777 - Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; 2017 Commercial Accountability Measure and Closure for South Atlantic Gray Triggerfish; July Through December SeasonPDF
82 FR 51908 - Proposed Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 51936 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Revision of an Approved Information Collection; Comment Request; Company-Run Annual Stress Test Reporting Template and Documentation for Covered Institutions With Total Consolidated Assets of $50 Billion or More Under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection ActPDF
82 FR 51844 - Recurrent Herpes Labialis: Developing Drugs for Treatment and Prevention; Guidance for Industry; AvailabilityPDF
82 FR 51873 - Established Aggregate Production Quotas for Schedule I and II Controlled Substances and Assessment of Annual Needs for the List I Chemicals Ephedrine, Pseudoephedrine, and Phenylpropanolamine for 2018PDF
82 FR 51843 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 51902 - IHR Holdings, LLC-Acquisition Exemption-Santa Teresa Capital, LLC at Santa Teresa, Dona Ana County, N.M.PDF
82 FR 51883 - Submission for Review: Verification of Who Is Getting Payments, RI 38-107 and RI 38-147PDF
82 FR 51884 - Submission for Review: Request for Change to Unreduced Annuity, RI 20-120PDF
82 FR 51883 - Submission for Review: Financial Resources Questionnaire (RI 34-1, RI 34-17, and RI 34-18) and Notice of Amount Due Because of Annuity Overpayment (RI 34-3, RI 34-19, and RI 34-20)PDF
82 FR 51757 - Privacy Act RegulationsPDF
82 FR 51754 - Regulation D; Docket No. OP-1582; Reserve Requirements of Depository InstitutionsPDF
82 FR 51846 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Guidance for Industry on Expedited Programs for Serious Conditions-Drugs and BiologicsPDF
82 FR 51766 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Lake Washington, Seattle, WAPDF
82 FR 51765 - Special Local Regulations; Key West World Championship, Atlantic Ocean, Key West, FLPDF
82 FR 51767 - Safety Zone; Mamala Bay, Oahu, HIPDF
82 FR 51831 - Notice of Termination of the Receivership of 10510, First National Bank of Crestview, Crestview, FloridaPDF
82 FR 51832 - Notice of Termination of the Receivership of 10471, Frontier Bank, LaGrange, GeorgiaPDF
82 FR 51833 - Notice of Termination of the Receivership of 10422, Patriot Bank Minnesota, Forest Lake, MinnesotaPDF
82 FR 51831 - Notice to All Interested Parties of Intent To Terminate the Receivership of 10359, Community Central Bank, Mount Clemens, MichiganPDF
82 FR 51832 - Notice of Termination of the Receivership of 10355, New Horizons Bank, East Ellijay, GeorgiaPDF
82 FR 51831 - Notice of Termination of the Receivership of 10335, The First State Bank, Camargo, OklahomaPDF
82 FR 51832 - Notice of Termination of the Receivership of 10327, Oglethorpe Bank, Brunswick, GeorgiaPDF
82 FR 51832 - Notice to All Interested Parties of Intent To Terminate the Receivership of 10247, First National Bank, Rosedale, MississippiPDF
82 FR 51833 - Notice of Termination of the Receivership of 10124, Jennings State Bank, Spring Grove, MinnesotaPDF
82 FR 51833 - Notice to All Interested Parties of Intent To Terminate the Receivership of 10065, Cooperative Bank, Wilmington, North CarolinaPDF
82 FR 51827 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
82 FR 51825 - White River Electric Association, Inc.; Notice of Preliminary Determination of a Qualifying Conduit Hydropower Facility and Soliciting Comments and Motions To IntervenePDF
82 FR 51829 - Flambeau Hydro, LLC; Notice Soliciting Scoping CommentsPDF
82 FR 51828 - Northwest Pipeline LLC; Notice of Amendment to Application for Certificate of Public Convenience and NecessityPDF
82 FR 51824 - Notice of Application Ready for Environmental Analysis and Soliciting Comments, Recommendations, Terms and Conditions, and Prescriptions; KEI (Maine) Power Management (III) LLCPDF
82 FR 51825 - Notice of Request for Temporary Waiver; Marathon Pipe Line LLCPDF
82 FR 51826 - Marathon Pipe Line LLC; Notice of Petition for Declaratory OrderPDF
82 FR 51826 - Southern Partners, INC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 AuthorizationPDF
82 FR 51823 - Combined Notice of Filings #2PDF
82 FR 51906 - Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition ReceivedPDF
82 FR 51851 - National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
82 FR 51851 - National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute: Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
82 FR 51851 - National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Notice of MeetingPDF
82 FR 51852 - Center for Scientific Review: Amended Notice of MeetingPDF
82 FR 51850 - Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
82 FR 51850 - Center for Scientific Review: Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
82 FR 51870 - Recent Trends in U.S. Services Trade, 2018 Annual ReportPDF
82 FR 51892 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Depository Trust Company; National Securities Clearing Corporation; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation; Order Approving Proposed Rule Changes To Adopt the Clearing Agency Securities Valuation FrameworkPDF
82 FR 51887 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ PHLX LLC; Order Approving Proposed Rule Changes To Amend Rules 1024, Conduct of Accounts for Options Trading, and 1025, Supervision of AccountsPDF
82 FR 51890 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend NYSE Arca Rules 7.31-E and 7.35-EPDF
82 FR 51894 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Exchange's Fees at Rule 7058PDF
82 FR 51899 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Price Improvement XL AuctionPDF
82 FR 51897 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Miami International Securities Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its Fee SchedulePDF
82 FR 51885 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to an Incentive to the Market Access and Routing Subsidy ProgramPDF
82 FR 51877 - Notice of Lodging of Proposed Consent Decree Under the Clean Air ActPDF
82 FR 51856 - Endangered Species; Marine Mammal Receipt of Applications for PermitPDF
82 FR 51822 - Marine Mammals; File No. 21158PDF
82 FR 51804 - Notice of Public Meeting of the Wisconsin Advisory Committee for a Meeting To Discuss Civil Rights Concerns in the StatePDF
82 FR 51803 - Notice of Request for Extension of a Currently Approved Information CollectionPDF
82 FR 51802 - Notice of Request for Extension of a Currently Approved Information CollectionPDF
82 FR 51834 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 51805 - Proposed Content for the Prototype 2020 Census Redistricting Data FilePDF
82 FR 51821 - Fisheries of the Gulf of Mexico; Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review (SEDAR); Public MeetingPDF
82 FR 51903 - Commission MeetingPDF
82 FR 51880 - AREVA, Inc.; Consideration of Approval of Transfer of License; CorrectionPDF
82 FR 51758 - Imposition of Special Measure Against Bank of Dandong as a Financial Institution of Primary Money Laundering ConcernPDF
82 FR 51847 - Intent To Review an Analysis Data Reviewer's Guide; Notice of Availability, Request for CommentsPDF
82 FR 51804 - Notice of Public Meeting of the Texas Advisory CommitteePDF
82 FR 51863 - Notice of Inventory Completion: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Tuzigoot National Monument, Clarkdale, AZPDF
82 FR 51866 - Notice of Inventory Completion: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Tuzigoot National Monument, Clarkdale, AZ; CorrectionPDF
82 FR 51867 - Notice of Inventory Completion: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Washington, DCPDF
82 FR 51862 - Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items: Museum of Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TXPDF
82 FR 51861 - Notice of Inventory Completion: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Alaska Region, Anchorage, AKPDF
82 FR 51864 - Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items: New York State Museum, Albany, NYPDF
82 FR 51868 - Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items: New York State Museum, Albany, NYPDF
82 FR 51865 - Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items: New York State Museum, Albany, NYPDF
82 FR 51869 - Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items: New York State Museum, Albany, NYPDF
82 FR 51756 - Establishment Class E Airspace; Cisco, TXPDF
82 FR 51787 - Repeal of Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating UnitsPDF
82 FR 51814 - Certain Softwood Lumber Products From Canada: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, and Final Negative Determination of Critical CircumstancesPDF
82 FR 51806 - Certain Softwood Lumber Products From Canada: Final Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Affirmative Final Determination of Critical CircumstancesPDF
82 FR 51813 - Large Residential Washers From the Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2016-2017PDF
82 FR 51810 - Large Residential Washers From Mexico: Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2016-2017PDF
82 FR 51858 - Notice of Availability; Florida Trustee Implementation Group Deepwater HorizonPDF
82 FR 51812 - Certain Lined Paper Products From India and the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Expedited Second Sunset Reviews of Antidumping Duty OrdersPDF
82 FR 51819 - Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod From Mexico: Preliminary Results and Preliminary Determination of No Shipments; 2015-2016PDF
82 FR 51903 - Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration Pilot Program-Announcement of Establishment of Program and Request for ApplicationsPDF
82 FR 51782 - Airworthiness Directives; Textron Aviation Inc. AirplanesPDF

Issue

82 215 Wednesday, November 8, 2017 Contents Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Food and Nutrition Service

See

National Institute of Food and Agriculture

See

Rural Business-Cooperative Service

See

Rural Housing Service

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 51822-51823 2017-24326 Census Bureau Census Bureau NOTICES Requests for Comments: Proposed Content for Prototype 2020 Census Redistricting Data File, 51805-51806 2017-24242 Centers Disease Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 51835-51843 2017-24313 2017-24314 2017-24315 2017-24316 2017-24317 2017-24318 Centers Medicare Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 51843-51844 2017-24305 Civil Rights Civil Rights Commission NOTICES Meetings: Texas Advisory Committee, 51804 2017-24236 Wisconsin Advisory Committee, 51804-51805 2017-24247 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 51805 2017-24391 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Drawbridge Operations: Lake Washington, Seattle, WA, 51766-51767 2017-24292 Safety Zones: Mamala Bay, Oahu, HI, 51767-51770 2017-24290 Special Local Regulations: Key West World Championship, Atlantic Ocean, Key West, FL, 51765-51766 2017-24291 Commerce Commerce Department See

Census Bureau

See

International Trade Administration

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Comptroller Comptroller of the Currency NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 51908-51936 2017-24310 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Company-Run Annual Stress Test Reporting Template and Documentation for Covered Institutions with Total Consolidated Assets of $50 Billion or More. etc., 51936-51937 2017-24309 Defense Department Defense Department RULES Federal Acquisition Regulations: Removal of Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Rule, 51773-51777 R1--2017--23590 Drug Drug Enforcement Administration NOTICES Schedules of Controlled Substances: Production Quotas for Ephedrine, Pseudoephedrine, and Phenylpropanolamine, 51873-51877 2017-24306 Energy Department Energy Department See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency PROPOSED RULES Oil and Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standards for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources: Stay of Certain Requirements, 51788-51794 2017-24344 Emission Standards for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources: Three Month Stay of Certain Requirements, 51794-51800 2017-24341 Repeal of Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units, 51787-51788 2017-24216 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Implementation of 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone; State Implementation Plan Requirements, 51829-51831 2017-24339 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration RULES Establishment Class E Airspace: Cisco, TX, 51756-51757 2017-24222 PROPOSED RULES Airworthiness Directives: Textron Aviation Inc. Airplanes, 51782-51786 2017-24065 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Air Taxi and Commercial Operator Airport Activity Survey, 51907-51908 2017-24332 Aviation Insurance, 51906-51907 2017-24331 Petitions for Exemptions; Summaries, 51906 2017-24268 Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration Pilot Program: Establishment of Program and Request for Applications, 51903-51906 2017-24126 Federal Deposit Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 51908-51936 2017-24310 Terminations of Receivership: Community Central Bank, Mount Clemens, MI, 51831-51832 2017-24285 Cooperative Bank, Wilmington, NC, 51833 2017-24279 First National Bank of Crestview, Crestview, FL, 51831 2017-24288 First National Bank, Rosedale, MS, 51832 2017-24281 First State Bank, Camargo, OK, 51831 2017-24283 Frontier Bank, LaGrange, GA, 51832 2017-24287 Jennings State Bank, Spring Grove, MN, 51833 2017-24280 New Horizons Bank, East Ellijay, GA, 51832-51833 2017-24284 Oglethorpe Bank, Brunswick, GA, 51832 2017-24282 Patriot Bank Minnesota, Forest Lake, MN, 51833 2017-24286 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Applications: Flambeau Hydro, LLC, 51829 2017-24275 KEI (Maine) Power Management (III), LLC, 51824-51825 2017-24273 Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity: Northwest Pipeline, LLC, 51828 2017-24274 Combined Filings, 51823-51824, 51827-51828 2017-24269 2017-24277 Determinations of Qualifying Conduit Hydropower Facilities: White River Electric Association, Inc., 51825-51826 2017-24276 Initial Market-Based Rate Filings Including Requests for Blanket Section 204 Authorizations: Southern Partners, Inc., 51826 2017-24270 Petitions for Declaratory Orders: Marathon Pipe Line, LLC, 51826-51827 2017-24271 Requests for Temporary Waivers: Marathon Pipe Line, LLC, 51825 2017-24272 Federal Highway Federal Highway Administration PROPOSED RULES National Performance Management Measures: Assessing Performance of National Highway System, Freight Movement on Interstate System, and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program, 51786-51787 2017-24345 Federal Mine Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 51833-51834 2017-24405 2017-24406 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System RULES Reserve Requirements of Depository Institutions, 51754-51756 2017-24297 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 51908-51936 2017-24310 Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies, 51834 2017-24337 Federal Trade Federal Trade Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 51834-51835 2017-24243 Financial Crimes Financial Crimes Enforcement Network RULES Imposition of Special Measure against Bank of Dandong as Financial Institution of Primary Money Laundering Concern, 51758-51765 2017-24238 Fish Fish and Wildlife Service RULES 2017-2018 Refuge-Specific Hunting and Sport Fishing Regulations, 51940-51962 2017-24329 NOTICES Permit Applications: Endangered Species; Marine Mammal, 51856-51857 2017-24249 Requests for Nominations: International Wildlife Conservation Council Establishment, 51857-51858 2017-24328 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Draft Guidance for Industry and Review Staff on Target Product Profile—A Strategic Development Process Tool, 51849-51850 2017-24335 Guidance for Industry on Expedited Programs for Serious Conditions—Drugs and Biologics, 51846-51847 2017-24296 Analysis Data Reviewer's Guide, 51847-51848 2017-24237 Guidance: Recurrent Herpes Labialis—Developing Drugs for Treatment and Prevention, 51844-51846 2017-24308 Food and Nutrition Food and Nutrition Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: User Access Request Form, 51801-51802 2017-24348 Foreign Claims Foreign Claims Settlement Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 51877 2017-24361 General Services General Services Administration RULES Federal Acquisition Regulations: Removal of Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Rule, 51773-51777 R1--2017--23590 Government Accountability Government Accountability Office RULES Public Availability of Government Accountability Office Records, 51753-51754 2017-24340 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

See

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

See

Food and Drug Administration

See

National Institutes of Health

Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

See

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

Housing Housing and Urban Development Department NOTICES Section 8 Housing Assistance Payments Program: Annual Adjustment Factors, Fiscal Year 2018, 51853-51856 2017-24330 Interior Interior Department See

Fish and Wildlife Service

See

National Park Service

NOTICES Environmental Assessments; Availability, etc.: Florida Trustee Implementation Group Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Draft Phase V.2 Restoration Plan and Supplemental Environmental Assessment; Florida Coastal Access Project, 51858-51860 2017-24197 Meetings: Tribal Consultation on Indian Trust Asset Reform Act, Transition Plan for Office of Special Trustee for American Indians, 51860-51861 2017-24319
International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Mexico, 51819-51821 2017-24186 Certain Lined Paper Products from India and the People's Republic of China, 51812-51813 2017-24188 Certain Softwood Lumber Products from Canada, 51814-51819 2017-24204 Large Residential Washers from Mexico, 51810-51811 2017-24198 Large Residential Washers from Republic of Korea, 51813-51814 2017-24200 Determinations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Softwood Lumber Products from Canada, 51806-51810 2017-24203 International Trade Com International Trade Commission NOTICES Investigations; Determinations, Modifications, and Rulings, etc.: Certain LED Lighting Devices, LED Power Supplies, and Components Therof, 51872-51873 2017-24323 Recent Trends in U.S. Services Trade, 2018 Annual Report, 51870-51872 2017-24261 Justice Department Justice Department See

Drug Enforcement Administration

See

Foreign Claims Settlement Commission

NOTICES Proposed Consent Decrees under Clean Air Act, 51877-51878 2017-24250
NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration RULES Federal Acquisition Regulations: Removal of Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Rule, 51773-51777 R1--2017--23590 National Institute Food National Institute of Food and Agriculture NOTICES Draft Scientific Assessments, 51802 2017-24347 National Institute National Institutes of Health NOTICES Meetings: Center for Scientific Review, 51850-51852 2017-24262 2017-24263 2017-24264 National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 51851 2017-24265 2017-24266 National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, 51851-51852 2017-24267 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RULES Fisheries of Northeastern United States: Revisions to Framework Adjustment 56 to Northeast Multispecies Fishery Management Plan, 51778-51781 2017-24346 Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; 2017 Commercial Accountability Measure and Closure for South Atlantic Gray Triggerfish; July through December Season, 51777-51778 2017-24311 Fisheries of the Northeastern United States: Summer Flounder Fishery; Quota Transfer, 51778 2017-24321 NOTICES Meetings: Fisheries of Gulf of Mexico; Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review, 51821-51822 2017-24241 Permit Applications: Marine Mammals; File No. 21158, 51822 2017-24248 National Park National Park Service NOTICES Inventory Completions: Department of Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Washington, DC, 51867-51868 2017-24233 Fish and Wildlife Service, Alaska Region, Anchorage, AK, 51861-51862 2017-24231 Tuzigoot National Monument, Clarkdale, AZ, 51863-51864 2017-24235 Tuzigoot National Monument, Clarkdale, AZ; Correction, 51866-51867 2017-24234 Repatriations of Cultural Items: Museum of Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, 51862-51863 2017-24232 New York State Museum, Albany, NY, 51864-51866, 51868-51870 2017-24228 2017-24229 2017-24230 2017-24227 Requests for Nominations: Made in America Outdoor Recreation Advisory Committee Establishment, 51870 2017-24325 National Science National Science Foundation NOTICES Meetings: Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Green Bank Observatory, Green Bank, WV, 51878-51879 2017-24322 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Guidance: Nuclear Power Plant Instrumentation for Earthquakes, 51879-51880 2017-24333 License Transfer Applications: AREVA, Inc.; Correction, 51880-51883 2017-24239 Personnel Personnel Management Office NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Financial Resources Questionnaire and Notice of Amount Due Because of Annuity Overpayment, 51883-51884 2017-24301 Request for Change to Unreduced Annuity, 51884 2017-24302 Verification of Who is Getting Payments, 51883 2017-24303 Postal Service Postal Service NOTICES Product Changes: Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, & First-Class Package Service Negotiated Service Agreement, 51885 2017-24342 Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement, 51884 2017-24343 Presidential Documents Presidential Documents PROCLAMATIONS Special Observances: Honoring the Victims of the Sutherland Springs, TX Shooting (Proc. 9671), 51963-51965 2017-24463 ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS Burundi; Continuation of National Emergency (Notice of November 6, 2017), 51967 2017-24464 Iran; Continuation of National Emergency (Notice of November 6, 2017), 51969 2017-24465 Weapons of Mass Destruction; Continuation of National Emergency (Notice of November 6, 2017), 51971 2017-24466 Rural Business Rural Business-Cooperative Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 51802-51803 2017-24244 Rural Housing Service Rural Housing Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 51802-51804 2017-24244 2017-24245 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Depository Trust Co.; National Securities Clearing Corp.; Fixed Income Clearing Corp., 51892-51894 2017-24257 Miami International Securities Exchange, LLC, 51897-51899 2017-24252 Nasdaq PHLX, LLC, 51899-51902 2017-24253 NASDAQ PHLX, LLC, 51887-51889 2017-24256 NASDAQ Stock Market, LLC, 51885-51887, 51894-51897 2017-24251 2017-24254 NYSE Arca, Inc., 51890-51892 2017-24255 Surface Transportation Surface Transportation Board NOTICES Acquisition Exemptions: IHR Holdings, LLC; Santa Teresa Capital, LLC at Santa Teresa, Dona Ana County, NM, 51902 2017-24304 Susquehanna Susquehanna River Basin Commission NOTICES Meetings, 51903 2017-24240 Tennessee Tennessee Valley Authority RULES Privacy Act Regulations, 51757-51758 2017-24300 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

Federal Highway Administration

Treasury Treasury Department See

Comptroller of the Currency

See

Financial Crimes Enforcement Network

Customs U.S. Customs and Border Protection NOTICES Automated Commercial Environments: Sole CBP-Authorized Electronic Data Interchange System for Generating, Transmitting and Updating Daily and Monthly Statements, 51852-51853 2017-24336 Veteran Affairs Veterans Affairs Department RULES Ecclesiastical Endorsing Organizations, 51770-51773 2017-24320 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Interior Department, Fish and Wildlife Service, 51940-51962 2017-24329 Part III Presidential Documents, 51963-51965, 51967, 51969, 51971 2017-24463 2017-24464 2017-24465 2017-24466 Reader Aids

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

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

82 215 Wednesday, November 8, 2017 Rules and Regulations GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE 4 CFR Part 81 Public Availability of Government Accountability Office Records AGENCY:

Government Accountability Office.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

These revisions clarify procedures to obtain Government Accountability Office (GAO) records. Specifically, the revisions add procedures for requesting records of GAO's Office of Inspector General. The revisions also clarify that documents prepared by GAO or GAO's Office of Inspector General for referral to another agency for law enforcement purposes are not subject to the regulations in this part. The previous regulatory language on this point was imprecise.

DATES:

This rule is effective as of December 8, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

John A. Bielec, Assistant General Counsel, [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

GAO is amending 4 CFR 81.2 by specifically providing that GAO's Office of Inspector General (OIG) will process any requests under this part for OIG records. The OIG, which was established by statute in 2008, audits and investigates matters related to GAO's operations. The OIG executes its responsibilities independently of and free from interference or control by any other office or body within GAO. In keeping with and to best preserve this independence, the OIG itself should process requests for its records. However, when the OIG receives a request for records that originated in GAO, the OIG will refer the requester to GAO. These revisions provide that with respect to any request for OIG records, other than records that originated in GAO, throughout this part the term “Counsel to the Inspector General” would be substituted for “Chief Quality Officer” and the term “Inspector General” would be substituted for “Comptroller General.”

In addition, § 81.6(g) is amended to clarify that documents prepared by GAO for referral to another agency for law enforcement purposes are exempt from the procedures in this part. Section 81.6(g) previously provided that records that GAO has already provided to another agency for law enforcement purposes are exempt. However, § 81.6(g) did not specifically address requests for records that GAO, including the OIG, created for referral to another agency for law enforcement purposes, but has not yet provided to another agency. For instance, during an investigation into possible criminal activity, the GAO OIG creates documents that may be forwarded to another agency for law enforcement purposes at the conclusion of the OIG's investigation. Section 81.6(g) was unclear as to whether such records, which have not yet been forwarded to another agency, would be subject to this part if requested before the conclusion of the investigation. These changes clarify that records compiled for referral to another agency for law enforcement purposes are exempt from this part.

GAO is not subject to the Administrative Procedure Act and accordingly is not required by law to seek comments before issuing a final rule. Application of the Administrative Procedure Act to GAO is not to be inferred from GAO's invitation of comments on the proposed rule.

Nevertheless, GAO published a proposed rule regarding these changes and invited comments at 82 FR 37545 (August 11, 2017). GAO received two comments on the proposed rule. Neither comment specifically addressed the proposed changes to this part. As a result, the final rule does not reflect these comments.

GAO added a sentence to the final version of § 81.2 that did not appear in the proposed version. This sentence clarifies that when the OIG receives a request for records that originated in GAO, the OIG will refer the requester to GAO. The final rule otherwise does not differ substantively from the proposed rule.

List of Subjects in 4 CFR Part 81

Administrative practice and procedure, Archives and records, Freedom of information, Requests for records.

For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Government Accountability Office amends 4 CFR part 81 as follows:

PART 81—PUBLIC AVAILABILITY OF GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE RECORDS 1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows: Authority:

31 U.S.C. 711.

2. Amend § 81.2 by designating the undesignated paragraph as paragraph (a) and adding paragraph (b) to read as follows:
§ 81.2 Administration.

(b) Requests for records of GAO's Office of Inspector General (OIG) shall be processed by the Counsel to the Inspector General in accordance with this part. The Inspector General shall decide any administrative appeals of decisions of the Counsel to the Inspector General concerning such requests. However, if any of the requested records of the OIG originated in GAO, the Counsel to the Inspector General shall refer the requester to GAO's Chief Quality Officer for processing of the request for those records in accordance with this part. With regard to any public request to inspect or copy records of the OIG, other than records that originated in GAO, in this part the term “Counsel to the Inspector General” is to be substituted for “Chief Quality Officer” and the term “Inspector General” is to be substituted for “Comptroller General”. All requests to inspect or obtain a copy of an identifiable record of the OIG must be submitted in writing to the Counsel to the Inspector General, U.S. Government Accountability Office, Suite 1808, 441 G Street NW., Washington, DC 20548 or emailed to [email protected]

3. Amend § 81.6 by revising paragraph (g) to read as follows:
§ 81.6 Records which may be exempt from disclosure.

(g) Records compiled for law enforcement purposes that originate in another agency, or records prepared for referral to and/or provided by GAO or the OIG to another agency for law enforcement purposes.

Dated: November 3, 2017. Susan A. Poling, General Counsel, Government Accountability Office.
[FR Doc. 2017-24340 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1610-02-P
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 12 CFR Part 204 Regulation D; Docket No. OP-1582; Reserve Requirements of Depository Institutions AGENCY:

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Board is amending Regulation D, Reserve Requirements of Depository Institutions, to reflect the annual indexing of the reserve requirement exemption amount and the low reserve tranche for 2018. The Regulation D amendments set the amount of total reservable liabilities of each depository institution that is subject to a zero percent reserve requirement in 2018 at $16.0 million (up from $15.5 million in 2017). This amount is known as the reserve requirement exemption amount. The Regulation D amendments also set the amount of net transaction accounts at each depository institution (over the reserve requirement exemption amount) that is subject to a three percent reserve requirement in 2018 at $122.3 million (up from $115.1 million in 2017). This amount is known as the low reserve tranche. The adjustments to both of these amounts are derived using statutory formulas specified in the Federal Reserve Act.

The Board is also announcing changes in two other amounts, the nonexempt deposit cutoff level and the reduced reporting limit, that are used to determine the frequency at which depository institutions must submit deposit reports.

DATES:

Effective Date: December 8, 2017.

Compliance Dates: The new low reserve tranche and reserve requirement exemption amount will apply to the fourteen-day reserve maintenance period that begins January 18, 2018. For depository institutions that report deposit data weekly, this maintenance period corresponds to the fourteen-day computation period that begins December 19, 2017. For depository institutions that report deposit data quarterly, this maintenance period corresponds to the seven-day computation period that begins December 19, 2017. The new values of the nonexempt deposit cutoff level, the reserve requirement exemption amount, and the reduced reporting limit will be used to determine the frequency at which a depository institution submits deposit reports effective in either June or September 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Clinton N. Chen, Senior Attorney (202-452-3952), Legal Division, or Kristen R. Payne, Financial Analyst (202-452-2872), Division of Monetary Affairs; for users of Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (TDD) only, contact (202/263-4869); Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 20th and C Streets NW., Washington, DC 20551.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Section 19(b)(2) of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 461(b)(2)) requires each depository institution to maintain reserves against its transaction accounts and nonpersonal time deposits, as prescribed by Board regulations, for the purpose of implementing monetary policy. Section 11(a)(2) of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 248(a)(2)) authorizes the Board to require reports of liabilities and assets from depository institutions to enable the Board to conduct monetary policy. The Board's actions with respect to each of these provisions are discussed in turn below.

I. Reserve Requirements

Pursuant to section 19(b) of the Federal Reserve Act (Act), transaction account balances maintained at each depository institution are subject to reserve requirement ratios of zero, three, or ten percent. Section 19(b)(11)(A) of the Act (12 U.S.C. 461(b)(11)(A)) provides that a zero percent reserve requirement shall apply at each depository institution to total reservable liabilities that do not exceed a certain amount, known as the reserve requirement exemption amount.

Section 19(b)(11)(B) provides that, before December 31 of each year, the Board shall issue a regulation adjusting the reserve requirement exemption amount for the next calendar year if total reservable liabilities held at all depository institutions increase from one year to the next. No adjustment is made to the reserve requirement exemption amount if total reservable liabilities held at all depository institutions should decrease during the applicable time period. The Act requires the percentage increase in the reserve requirement exemption amount to be 80 percent of the increase in total reservable liabilities of all depository institutions over the one-year period that ends on the June 30 prior to the adjustment.

Total reservable liabilities of all depository institutions increased by 3.9 percent, from $7,531 billion to $7,821 billion, between June 30, 2016, and June 30, 2017. Accordingly, the Board is amending Regulation D to set the reserve requirement exemption amount for 2018 at $16.0 million, an increase of $0.5 million from its level in 2017.1

1 Consistent with Board practice, the low reserve tranche and reserve requirement exemption amounts have been rounded to the nearest $0.1 million.

Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act (12 U.S.C. 461(b)(2)), transaction account balances maintained at each depository institution over the reserve requirement exemption amount and up to a certain amount, known as the low reserve tranche, are subject to a three percent reserve requirement. Transaction account balances over the low reserve tranche are subject to a ten percent reserve requirement. Section 19(b)(2) also provides that, before December 31 of each year, the Board shall issue a regulation adjusting the low reserve tranche for the next calendar year. The Act requires the adjustment in the low reserve tranche to be 80 percent of the percentage increase or decrease in total transaction accounts of all depository institutions over the one-year period that ends on the June 30 prior to the adjustment.

Net transaction accounts of all depository institutions increased 7.8 percent, from $2,200 billion to $2,372 billion, between June 30, 2016, and June 30, 2017. Accordingly, the Board is amending Regulation D to set the low reserve tranche for net transaction accounts for 2018 at $122.3 million, an increase of $7.2 million from 2017.

The new low reserve tranche and reserve requirement exemption amount will be effective for all depository institutions for the fourteen-day reserve maintenance period beginning Thursday, January 18, 2018. For depository institutions that report deposit data weekly, this maintenance period corresponds to the fourteen-day computation period that begins December 19, 2017. For depository institutions that report deposit data quarterly, this maintenance period corresponds to the seven-day computation period that begins December 19, 2017.

II. Deposit Reports

Section 11(b)(2) of the Federal Reserve Act authorizes the Board to require depository institutions to file reports of their liabilities and assets as the Board may determine to be necessary or desirable to enable it to discharge its responsibility to monitor and control the monetary and credit aggregates. The Board screens depository institutions each year and assigns them to one of four deposit reporting panels (weekly reporters, quarterly reporters, annual reporters, or nonreporters). The panel assignment for annual reporters is effective in June of the screening year; the panel assignment for weekly and quarterly reporters is effective in September of the screening year.

In order to ease reporting burden, the Board permits smaller depository institutions to submit deposit reports less frequently than larger depository institutions. The Board permits depository institutions with net transaction accounts above the reserve requirement exemption amount but total transaction accounts, savings deposits, and small time deposits below a specified level (the “nonexempt deposit cutoff”) to report deposit data quarterly. Depository institutions with net transaction accounts above the reserve requirement exemption amount and with total transaction accounts, savings deposits, and small time deposits greater than or equal to the nonexempt deposit cutoff are required to report deposit data weekly. The Board requires certain large depository institutions to report weekly regardless of the level of their net transaction accounts if the depository institution's total transaction accounts, savings deposits, and small time deposits exceeds or is equal to a specified level (the “reduced reporting limit”). The nonexempt deposit cutoff level and the reduced reporting limit are adjusted annually, by an amount equal to 80 percent of the increase, if any, in total transaction accounts, savings deposits, and small time deposits of all depository institutions over the one-year period that ends on the June 30 prior to the adjustment.

From June 30, 2016, to June 30, 2017, total transaction accounts, savings deposits, and small time deposits at all depository institutions increased 6.1 percent, from $11,457 billion to $12,157 billion. Accordingly, the Board is increasing the nonexempt deposit cutoff level by $21.3 million to $457.5 million for 2018 (up from $436.2 million for 2017). The Board is also increasing the reduced reporting limit by $97.2 million to $2.086 billion for 2018 (up from $1.989 billion in 2017).2

2 Consistent with Board practice, the nonexempt deposit cutoff level has been rounded to the nearest $0.1 million, and the reduced reporting limit has been rounded to the nearest $1 million.

Beginning in 2018, the boundaries of the four deposit reporting panels will be defined as follows. Those depository institutions with net transaction accounts over $16.0 million (the reserve requirement exemption amount) or with total transaction accounts, savings deposits, and small time deposits greater than or equal to $2.086 billion (the reduced reporting limit) are subject to detailed reporting, and must file a Report of Transaction Accounts, Other Deposits and Vault Cash (FR 2900 report) either weekly or quarterly. Of this group, those with total transaction accounts, savings deposits, and small time deposits greater than or equal to $457.5 million (the nonexempt deposit cutoff level) are required to file the FR 2900 report each week, while those with total transaction accounts, savings deposits, and small time deposits less than $457.5 million are required to file the FR 2900 report each quarter. Those depository institutions with net transaction accounts less than or equal to $16.0 million (the reserve requirement exemption amount) and with total transaction accounts, savings deposits, and small time deposits less than $2.086 billion (the reduced reporting limit) are eligible for reduced reporting, and must either file a deposit report annually or not at all. Of this group, those with total deposits greater than $16.0 million (but with total transaction accounts, savings deposits, and small time deposits less than $2.086 billion) are required to file the Annual Report of Deposits and Reservable Liabilities (FR 2910a) report annually, while those with total deposits less than or equal to $16.0 million are not required to file a deposit report. A depository institution that adjusts reported values on its FR 2910a report in order to qualify for reduced reporting will be shifted to an FR 2900 reporting panel.

Regulatory Analysis Administrative Procedure Act

The provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553(b) relating to notice of proposed rulemaking have not been followed in connection with the adoption of these amendments. The amendments involve expected, ministerial adjustments prescribed by statute and by the Board's policy concerning reporting practices. The adjustments in the reserve requirement exemption amount, the low reserve tranche, the nonexempt deposit cutoff level, and the reduced reporting limit serve to reduce regulatory burdens on depository institutions. Accordingly, the Board finds good cause for determining, and so determines, that notice in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(b) is unnecessary.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) does not apply to a rulemaking where a general notice of proposed rulemaking is not required.3 As noted previously, the Board has determined that it is unnecessary to publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking for this final rule. Accordingly, the RFA's requirements relating to an initial and final regulatory flexibility analysis do not apply.

3 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.

Paperwork Reduction Act

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,4 the Board reviewed this final rule. No collections of information pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act are contained in the final rule.

4 44 U.S.C. 3506; 5 CFR 1320.

List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 204

Banks, banking, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Board is amending 12 CFR part 204 as follows:

PART 204—RESERVE REQUIREMENTS OF DEPOSITORY INSTITUTIONS (REGULATION D) 1. The authority citation for part 204 continues to read as follows: Authority:

12 U.S.C. 248(a), 248(c), 461, 601, 611, and 3105.

2. Section 204.4 is amended by revising paragraph (f) to read as follows:
§ 204.4 Computation of required reserves.

(f) For all depository institutions, Edge and Agreement corporations, and United States branches and agencies of foreign banks, required reserves are computed by applying the reserve requirement ratios below to net transaction accounts, nonpersonal time deposits, and Eurocurrency liabilities of the institution during the computation period.

Reservable liability Reserve requirement Net Transaction Accounts: $0 to reserve requirement exemption amount ($16.0 million) 0 percent of amount. Over reserve requirement exemption amount ($16.0 million) and up to low reserve tranche ($122.3 million) 3 percent of amount. Over low reserve tranche ($122.3 million) $3,189,000 plus 10 percent of amount over $122.3 million. Nonpersonal time deposits 0 percent. Eurocurrency liabilities 0 percent.
By order of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, acting through the Director of the Division of Monetary Affairs under delegated authority, November 2, 2017. Ann E. Misback, Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2017-24297 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2017-0620; Airspace Docket No. 17-ASW-10] Establishment Class E Airspace; Cisco, TX AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This action establishes Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Gregory M. Simmons Memorial Airport, Cisco, TX, to accommodate a new public instrument approach procedure at the airport and for safety and management of instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at the airport. Also, a correction is made to the airport name in the regulatory text.

DATES:

Effective 0901 UTC, February 1, 2018. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under Title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES:

FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of FAA Order 7400.11B at NARA, call (202) 741-6030, or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jeffrey Claypool, Federal Aviation Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone (817) 222-5711.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it establishes Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Gregory M. Simmons Memorial Airport, Cisco, TX, to support IFR operations at this airport.

History

On August 1, 2017, the FAA published in the Federal Register (82 FR 35716) Docket No. FAA-2017-0620, a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to establish Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Gregory M. Simmons Memorial Airport, Cisco, TX, to support the new public instrument approach procedure and enhance the safety and management of IFR operations at this airport. Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.

Subsequent to publication, the FAA discovered that “Memorial” was inadvertently omitted from the airport name in the regulatory text of the NPRM and is corrected in this action.

Except for the edit noted above, this rule is the same as published in the NPRM.

Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Order 7400.11B, dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15, 2017, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

This document amends FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15, 2017. FAA Order 7400.11B is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11B lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

The Rule

This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 establishes Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.6-mile radius of Gregory M. Simmons Memorial Airport, Cisco, TX, due to the establishment of a new public instrument approach procedure at the airport. Controlled airspace is necessary for the safety and management of instrument approach procedures for IFR operations at the airport. The airport name is corrected to Gregory M. Simmons Memorial Airport, from Gregory M. Simmons Airport, as set forth in the regulatory text of the NPRM.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, “Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures,” paragraph 5-6.5.a. This airspace action is not expected to cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows: Authority:

49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

§ 71.1 [Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15, 2017, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. ASW TX E5 Cisco, TX [New] Gregory M. Simmons Memorial Airport, TX (Lat. 32°21′57″ N., long. 99°01′25″ W.)

That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.6-mile radius of Gregory M. Simmons Memorial Airport.

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on November 1, 2017. Walter Tweedy, Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2017-24222 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY 18 CFR Part 1301 Privacy Act Regulations AGENCY:

Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA).

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Tennessee Valley Authority issues this final rule amending its Privacy Act (PA) regulation to redesignate section numbering.

DATES:

This rule is effective November 8, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

Tennessee Valley Authority, 400 W. Summit Hill Drive, Knoxville, TN 37902-1401.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Christopher A. Marsalis, Senior Privacy Program Manager, Tennessee Valley Authority, 400 W. Summit Hill Drive (WT 5D), Knoxville, Tennessee 47902-1401; telephone (865) 632-2467 or by email to [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

TVA's Privacy Act Regulations originally were published at §§ 1301.11 through 1301.24. With this amendment TVA is redesignating these sections to be numbered §§ 1301.21 through 1301.34.

Lists of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 1301

Freedom of Information, Privacy, Government in the Sunshine.

For the reasons stated in the preamble, TVA amends 18 CFR part 1301 as follows:

PART 1301—PROCEDURES 1. The authority citation for part 1301 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

5 U.S.C. 552 and 552a; 16 U.S.C. 831-831dd.

§ § 1301.20 through 1301.24 [Removed]
2. Amend subpart B by removing §§ 1301.20 through 1301.24.
§ § 1301.11 through 1301.24 [Redesignated as §§ 1301.21 through 1301.34]
3. Amend subpart B, by redesignating §§ 1301.11 through 1301.24 as §§ 1301.21 through 1301.34 as demonstrated in the following table: Subpart B—Privacy Act

Redesignate §§ 1301.11 through 1301.24 as follows:

Old section New section 1301.11 1301.21 1301.12 1301.22 1301.13 1301.23 1301.14 1301.24 1301.15 1301.25 1301.16 1301.26 1301.17 1301.27 1301.18 1301.28 1301.19 1301.29 1301.20 1301.30 1301.21 1301.31 1301.22 1301.32 1301.23 1301.33 1301.24 1301.34
§ 1301.21 [Amended]
4. Amend newly redesignated § 1301.21 as follows: a. In paragraph (a), by removing “1301.11 to 1301.24” and adding in its place “1301.21 to 1301.34”. b. In paragraph (b), by removing “1301.11 to 1301.24” and adding in its place “1301.21 to 1301.34”.
§ 1301.22 [Amended]
5. Amend newly redesignated § 1301.22 as follows: a. In the introductory text, by removing “1301.11 to 1301.24” and adding in its place “1301.21 to 1301.34”. b. In paragraph (e), by removing “1301.19(a)” and adding in its place “1301.29(a)”. c. In paragraph (f), by removing “1301.19” and adding in its place “1301.29”.
§ 1301.23 [Amended]
6. Amend newly redesignated § 1301.23 by wrapping the undesignated sentence following paragraph (b)(6) into paragraph (b)(6), removing “1301.14” and adding in its place “1301.24”, and removing “1301.14(g)” and adding in its place “1301.24(g)”.
§ 1301.24 [Amended]
7. Amend newly designated § 1301.24 in paragraph (a) by removing “1301.15” and adding in its place “1301.25” and removing “1301.13” and adding in its place “1301.23”.
§ 1301.25 [Amended]
8. Amend newly redesignated § 1301.25 as follows: a. In paragraph (a), by removing “1301.21” and adding in its place “1301.31”. b. In paragraph (b), removing “1301.14” and adding in its place “1301.24” and removing “1301.21” and adding in its place “1301.31”.
§ 1301.27 [Amended]
9. Amend newly redesignated § 1301.27 as follows: a. In paragraph (b), by removing “1301.14” and adding in its place “1301.24”. b. In paragraph (d), by removing “1301.11 to 1301.24” and adding in its place “1301.21 to 1301.34”.
§ 1301.30 [Amended]
10. Amend newly redesignated § 1301.30 by removing “1301.11 to 1301.24” and adding in its place “1301.21 to 1301.34”. Christopher A. Marsalis, Senior Privacy Program Manager Enterprise Information Security & Policy, Tennessee Valley Authority.
[FR Doc. 2017-24300 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8120-08-P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Financial Crimes Enforcement Network 31 CFR Part 1010 RIN 1506-AB38 Imposition of Special Measure Against Bank of Dandong as a Financial Institution of Primary Money Laundering Concern AGENCY:

Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”), Treasury.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

FinCEN is issuing this final rule to prohibit covered U.S. financial institutions from opening or maintaining a correspondent account for, or on behalf of, Bank of Dandong Co., Ltd. (Bank of Dandong) as a financial institution of primary money laundering concern pursuant to Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act (Section 311). The rule further requires covered U.S. financial institutions to take reasonable steps not to process transactions for the correspondent account of a foreign banking institution in the United States if such a transaction involves Bank of Dandong. It also requires covered institutions to apply special due diligence to their foreign correspondent accounts that is reasonably designed to guard against their use to process transactions involving Bank of Dandong.

DATES:

This final rule is effective December 8, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

The FinCEN Resource Center, (800) 949-2732.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background A. Statutory Provisions

On October 26, 2001, the President signed into law the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001, Public Law 107-56 (the USA PATRIOT Act). Title III of the USA PATRIOT Act amended the anti-money laundering (AML) provisions of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), codified at 12 U.S.C. 1829b, 12 U.S.C. 1951-1959, and 31 U.S.C. 5311-5314, 5316-5332, to promote the prevention, detection, and prosecution of international money laundering and the financing of terrorism. Regulations implementing the BSA appear at 31 CFR chapter X. The authority of the Secretary of the Treasury (the Secretary) to administer the BSA and its implementing regulations has been delegated to the Director of FinCEN.1

1 Therefore, references to the authority of the Secretary of the Treasury under Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act apply equally to the Director of FinCEN.

Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act (Section 311), codified at 31 U.S.C. 5318A, grants FinCEN the authority, upon finding that reasonable grounds exist for concluding that a foreign jurisdiction, financial institution, class of transactions, or type of account is of “primary money laundering concern,” to require domestic financial institutions and financial agencies to take certain “special measures” to address the primary money laundering concern. The special measures enumerated under Section 311 are prophylactic safeguards that protect the U.S. financial system from money laundering and terrorist financing. FinCEN may impose one or more of these special measures in order to protect the U.S. financial system from these threats. Special measures one through four, codified at 31 U.S.C. 5318A(b)(1)-(b)(4), impose additional recordkeeping, information collection, and reporting requirements on covered U.S. financial institutions. The fifth special measure, codified at 31 U.S.C. 5318A(b)(5), allows FinCEN to prohibit or impose conditions on the opening or maintaining of correspondent or payable-through accounts for the identified institution by U.S. financial institutions. Section 311 identifies factors for the Secretary to consider and requires consultations with certain Federal agencies before making a finding that reasonable grounds exist for concluding that a jurisdiction, institution, class of transactions or type of account is of primary money laundering concern. The statute also provides similar procedures, including factors to consider and consultation requirements for selecting and imposing special measures.

II. Background on North Korea Sanctions Evasion and Bank of Dandong A. North Korea's Evasion of Sanctions

North Korea continues to advance its nuclear and ballistic missile programs despite international censure and U.S. and international sanctions. In response to North Korea's continued actions to proliferate weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) has issued a number of United Nations Security Council resolutions (UNSCRs), including 1718 (2006), 1874 (2009), 2087 (2013), 2094 (2013), 2270 (2016), 2321 (2016), 2371 (2017), and 2375 (2017) that restrict North Korea's financial and operational activities related to its nuclear and ballistic missile programs. Additionally, Executive Orders 13466, 13551, 13570, 13687, 13722, and 13810 have been issued to impose economic sanctions on North Korea pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, and the U.S. Department of the Treasury has designated North Korean persons for asset freezes pursuant to other Executive Orders, such as Executive Order 13382, which targets WMD proliferators worldwide.

To further protect the United States from North Korea's illicit financial activity, FinCEN has issued multiple advisories since 2005 detailing its concerns surrounding the deceptive financial practices used by North Korea and North Korean entities and called on U.S. financial institutions to take appropriate risk mitigation measures. Moreover, on November 9, 2016, FinCEN finalized a rule under Section 311 prohibiting the opening or maintaining of correspondent accounts in the United States by covered financial institutions for, or on behalf of, North Korean banks.2 The final rule also requires U.S. financial institutions to apply additional due diligence measures in order to prevent North Korean financial institutions from gaining improper indirect access to U.S. correspondent accounts. The notice of finding associated with the final rule highlighted North Korea's use of state-controlled financial institutions and front companies to conduct international financial transactions that, among other things, support the proliferation of its WMD and conventional weapons programs.3 As explained below, Bank of Dandong facilitates such activity through the U.S. financial system.

2 81 FR 78715 (November 9, 2016).

3 81 FR 35441 (June 2, 2016).

B. Bank of Dandong

Established in 1997, Bank of Dandong is a small commercial bank located in Dandong, China that offers domestic and international financial services to both individuals and businesses. According to commercial database research, Bank of Dandong is ranked as the 148th-largest financial institution out of a total of 196 financial institutions in China's banking sector. As discussed further below, FinCEN is concerned that Bank of Dandong serves as a financial conduit between North Korea and the U.S. and international financial systems in violation of U.S. and UN sanctions.

III. FinCEN's Section 311 Rulemaking Regarding Bank of Dandong A. Finding Regarding Bank of Dandong

In a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) published in the Federal Register on July 7, 2017, FinCEN found that reasonable grounds exist for concluding that Bank of Dandong is a financial institution of primary money laundering concern pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 5318A.4

4 82 FR 31537 (July 7, 2017).

As described in the NPRM, FinCEN believes that Bank of Dandong serves as a gateway for North Korea to access the U.S. and international financial systems despite U.S. and UN sanctions. Increasing U.S. and international sanctions on North Korea have caused most banks worldwide to sever their ties with North Korean banks, impeding North Korea's ability to gain direct access to the global financial system. As a result, North Korea uses front companies and banks outside North Korea to conduct financial transactions, including transactions in support of its WMD and conventional weapons programs. For example, as of mid-February 2016, North Korea was using bank accounts under false names and conducting financial transactions through banks located in China, Hong Kong, and various Southeast Asian countries. The primary bank in China was Bank of Dandong.

In early 2016, accounts at Bank of Dandong were used to facilitate millions of dollars of transactions on behalf of companies involved in the procurement of ballistic missile technology. This includes facilitating financial activity for North Korean entities designated by the United States and listed by the United Nations (UN) for WMD proliferation, as well as for front companies acting on their behalf.

Bank of Dandong has, for example, facilitated financial activity for Korea Mining Development Trading Corporation (KOMID), a U.S.- and UN-designated entity. As of early 2016, a front company for KOMID maintained multiple bank accounts with Bank of Dandong. The President blocked KOMID by listing it in the Annex of Executive Order 13382 in 2005, and the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) designated KOMID pursuant to Executive Order 13687 in January 2015 for being North Korea's primary arms dealer and its main exporter of goods and equipment related to ballistic missiles and conventional weapons.

FinCEN is concerned that Bank of Dandong uses the U.S. financial system to facilitate financial activity for Korea Kwangson Banking Corporation (KKBC) and KOMID, as well as other entities connected to North Korea's WMD and ballistic missile programs. KKBC is a U.S.- and UN-designated North Korean bank that has provided financial services in support of WMD proliferators. For example, based on FinCEN's analysis of financial transactional data provided to FinCEN by U.S. financial institutions pursuant to the BSA as well as other information available to the agency, FinCEN assesses that at least 17 percent of Bank of Dandong customer transactions conducted through the Bank of Dandong's U.S. correspondent accounts from May 2012 to May 2015 were conducted by companies that have transacted with, or on behalf of, U.S.- and UN-sanctioned North Korean entities, including designated North Korean financial institutions and WMD proliferators. In addition, U.S. banks have identified a substantial amount of suspicious activity processed by Bank of Dandong, including: (i) Transactions that have no apparent economic, lawful, or business purpose and may be tied to sanctions evasion; (ii) transactions that have a possible North Korean nexus and include activity between unidentified companies and individuals and behavior indicative of shell company activity; and (iii) transactions that include transfers from offshore accounts with apparent shell companies that are domiciled in jurisdictions known for their financial secrecy and banking in another country.

FinCEN is also concerned that, until recently, an entity designated by OFAC for its ties to North Korea's WMD proliferation maintained an ownership stake in Bank of Dandong. Specifically, this entity, Dandong Hongxiang Industrial Development Co. Ltd. (DHID), maintained a minority ownership interest in Bank of Dandong until December 2016. The United States designated DHID in 2016 for acting for, or on behalf of, KKBC. KKBC maintained a direct relationship with Bank of Dandong since approximately 2013. FinCEN believes that DHID's ownership stake in Bank of Dandong allowed DHID to access the U.S. financial system through the bank. Based on FinCEN's analysis of financial transactional data provided to FinCEN by U.S. financial institutions pursuant to the BSA, Bank of Dandong processed approximately $56 million through U.S. banks for DHID between October 2012 and December 2014. Even though DHID may no longer maintain an ownership stake in Bank of Dandong, FinCEN is concerned that the close relationship between the two entities helped establish Bank of Dandong as a prime conduit for North Korean activity.

B. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

In the NPRM, FinCEN (1) proposed to prohibit covered financial institutions from opening or maintaining a correspondent account in the United States for, or on behalf of, Bank of Dandong; (2) proposed to prohibit covered financial institutions from processing a transaction involving Bank of Dandong through the United States correspondent account of a foreign banking institution; and (3) proposed a requirement for covered financial institutions to apply special due diligence to their foreign correspondent accounts that is reasonably designed to guard against their use to process transactions involving Bank of Dandong.5 The comment period for the NPRM closed on September 5, 2017.

5 82 FR 31543 (July 7, 2017).

As further described below, FinCEN is adopting the proposal, with one minor definitional change, as a final rule. In so doing, FinCEN has considered public comments and the relevant statutory factors, and has engaged in the required consultations prescribed by 31 U.S.C. 5318A.

C. Subsequent Developments

FinCEN is not aware of any steps taken by Bank of Dandong or its relevant banking regulators to address the money laundering issues of concern at Bank of Dandong that were noted in the NPRM.

D. Consideration of Comments

Following the issuance of the NPRM on July 7, 2017, FinCEN opened a comment period that closed on September 5, 2017. FinCEN received two substantive comments; they are described below, along with FinCEN's response.

1. Comment Purporting To Be From Bank of Dandong

In response to the NPRM, FinCEN received a comment from an anonymous submitter that was signed “Bank of Dandong.” Because no further information was provided, FinCEN is unable to confirm whether the comment was, in fact, submitted by Bank of Dandong. The submitter disagreed with FinCEN's determination in the NPRM and stated “we do not believe that Bank of Dandong is being used to facilitate or promote money laundering, including by entities involved in the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction or missiles.” The submitter claimed to take FinCEN's “allegations very seriously,” and further stated that “we immediately began to research the relevant facts surrounding the allegations made in the NPRM.” The submitter stated that it had found, “during our preliminary review that certain key aspects of the allegations do not match the reality of the situation.” For these reasons, the submitter requested that FinCEN hold this matter “in abeyance and not act on the NPRM” until the “misunderstanding about our bank and our business have been corrected.”

Regardless of the true identity of the commenter, the comment does not allay FinCEN's concerns about Bank of Dandong. As outlined in the NPRM, FinCEN has a reasonable basis for its concern that Bank of Dandong is being used for money laundering and proliferation financing. Although the submitter has claimed to have conducted a preliminary review that differs from FinCEN's findings in certain key aspects, the submitter has not provided any specific information or documentation regarding the review, or even identified any of the key aspects that it claims to have found to be contrary to the NPRM.

2. Comment From SIFMA

The Securities and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA) submitted a comment that requested several clarifications and modifications to the proposed rulemaking with respect to Bank of Dandong. In particular, SIFMA requested that FinCEN: (1) Identify all known subsidiaries, branches, and offices of Bank of Dandong; (2) modify the proposed rule text to explicitly provide that the reasonable, risk-based procedures apply to identifying branches, offices, and subsidiaries of Bank of Dandong; (3) eliminate the notice provision of the special due diligence requirement; and (4) eliminate a reference to “agent” from the definition of “Bank of Dandong.”

SIFMA requested that FinCEN amend the proposed regulatory text to explicitly provide that the reasonable, risk-based procedures apply to identifying branches, offices, and subsidiaries of Bank of Dandong. FinCEN believes that the current regulatory text is sufficient, as the definition of Bank of Dandong includes the branches, offices, and subsidiaries of Bank of Dandong. While FinCEN does not believe that it is necessary to amend the text of the rule, FinCEN agrees that covered financial institutions should use reasonable, risk-based procedures in identifying branches, offices, and subsidiaries of Bank of Dandong.

SIFMA has requested that FinCEN eliminate the requirement to provide notice to foreign correspondent accounts, arguing that compliance with the requirement would require substantial time and expense involved in providing notice to foreign banks. While providing the required notice does impose a cost on U.S. financial institutions, FinCEN assesses this burden at one hour per institution. Additionally, FinCEN notes that the requirement applies only to those covered financial institutions that know or have reason to believe that their foreign correspondents are transacting with Bank of Dandong. FinCEN does not consider this to be an undue burden. In the NPRM, FinCEN addressed the burden associated with the rule and determined that providing the notice to foreign institutions would not impose a significant additional economic burden upon small U.S. financial institutions. FinCEN believes that the compliance burden associated with the rule is justified by the threat Bank of Dandong poses to the U.S. financial system.

Lastly, SIFMA argues that FinCEN has not previously identified “agents” in a special measure currently in effect against a financial institution, and that “agent” is a legal term with different meanings, and its intended use in the context of Bank of Dandong is unclear. Additionally, SIFMA argues that it is unclear how financial institutions should interpret this definition, or how an agent would be identified.

In connection with finalizing this rulemaking, and in light of the robust U.S. and international sanctions targeting illicit North Korean activity, FinCEN believes that the prohibitions set forth in the final rule are sufficient to protect the U.S. financial system from the threat posed by Bank of Dandong. In addition, the U.S. Department of the Treasury retains the ability to target any financial institution or others that might aid Bank of Dandong in evading the prohibitions set forth in the final rule. As such, in this final rule, FinCEN has removed “agents” from the definition of “Bank of Dandong.” Therefore, it is not necessary for FinCEN to address the points that SIFMA has raised with regard to the use of this term. Regarding SIFMA's request that FinCEN provide a list of known subsidiaries, branches, and offices of Bank of Dandong, FinCEN notes that commercially available information listing the known subsidiaries, branches, and offices of Bank of Dandong was provided and posted along with the NPRM for public consideration during the comment period. This information appears as Exhibits 2 and 41 posted on www.regulations.gov concerning the Bank of Dandong NPRM.

E. Summary of FinCEN's Ongoing Concerns Regarding Bank of Dandong

After considering comments received from the public, as well as other information available to the agency, including both public and non-public information, FinCEN is issuing this rule imposing a prohibition on U.S. financial institutions from opening or maintaining a correspondent account for, or on behalf of, Bank of Dandong. The information available to FinCEN provides reason to conclude that the money laundering risks posed by Bank of Dandong have not been mitigated, and that Bank of Dandong has not addressed FinCEN's concerns as described in the NPRM. FinCEN thus finds that Bank of Dandong continues to be a financial institution of primary money laundering concern.

IV. Imposition of a Special Measure Against Bank of Dandong as a Financial Institution of Primary Money Laundering Concern

Based upon this finding, FinCEN is authorized to impose one or more special measures. Following the required consultations and the consideration of all relevant factors discussed in the NPRM, FinCEN proposed a prohibition under the fifth special measure.6

6 Throughout the rulemaking process, including in the issuance of this final rule, FinCEN has consulted with relevant departments and agencies in accordance with 31 U.S.C. 5318A.

After the comment period closed, FinCEN considered all of the special measures, as well as measures short of a prohibition, and has concluded that a prohibition under the fifth special measure is still the appropriate choice. Consistent with the finding that Bank of Dandong is a financial institution of primary money laundering concern, and in consideration of additional relevant factors, this final rule imposes a prohibition on the opening or maintaining of correspondent accounts by covered financial institutions for, or on behalf of, Bank of Dandong. This prohibition will help guard against the money laundering and WMD proliferation finance risks to the U.S. financial system posed by Bank of Dandong, as identified in the NPRM and this final rule.

A. Discussion of Section 311 Factors

In determining which special measure to implement to address the finding that Bank of Dandong is of primary money laundering concern described in the NPRM, FinCEN considered the following factors:

1. Whether Similar Action Has Been or Will Be Taken by Other Nations or Multilateral Groups Against Bank of Dandong

Subsequent to FinCEN's finding on July 7, 2017, the Government of Japan designated Bank of Dandong on July 28, 2017. Additionally, the Government of South Korea issued an advisory on August 28, 2017, warning South Korean firms about the dangers of doing business with Bank of Dandong, and that conducting business with the bank may restrict their access to the U.S. financial system.

Furthermore, FinCEN's action is consistent with steps taken by the international community to address illicit financial activity tied to North Korea. Between 2006 and 2017, the United Nations Security Council has adopted multiple resolutions, 1718,7 1874,8 2087,9 2094,10 2270,11 2321,12 2371,13 and 2375 14 which generally restrict North Korea's financial and operational activities related to its nuclear and missile programs and conventional arms sales. In particular, UNSCR 2270, which imposes additional sanctions on North Korea in response to a January 6, 2016 nuclear test and February 7, 2016 launch using ballistic missile technology, contains provisions that generally require nations to: (1) Prohibit North Korean banks from opening branches in their territory or engaging in certain correspondent relationships with these banks; (2) terminate existing representative offices or subsidiaries, branches, and correspondent accounts with North Korean banks; (3) prohibit their financial institutions from opening new representative offices or subsidiaries, branches, or bank accounts in North Korea; and (4) close existing representative offices or subsidiaries, branches, or bank accounts in North Korea if reasonable grounds exist to believe such financial services could contribute to North Korea's nuclear or missile programs, or UNSCR violations.15 Additionally, UNSCR 2321, unanimously adopted by the UNSC in November 2016, requires, among other things, nations to close existing representative offices or subsidiaries, branches, or bank accounts in North Korea within 90 days, and expel individuals working on behalf of, or at the direction of, a North Korean bank or financial institution.16 UNSCR 2371, unanimously adopted by the UNSC in August 2017, requires, among other things, nations to prohibit the clearing of funds on behalf of North Korea through their territories.17 UNSCR 2375, unanimously adopted by the UNSC in September 2017, prohibits, among other things, the opening, maintenance, and operation of all joint ventures or cooperative entities, new and existing, with DPRK entities.18

7See United Nations Security Council Resolution (“UNSCR”) 1718 (http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/1718(2006)).

8See UNSCR 1874 (http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/1874(2009)).

9See UNSCR 2087 (http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/2087(2013)).

10See UNSCR 2094 (http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/2094(2013)).

11See UNSCR 2270 (http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/2270(2016)).

12See UNSCR 2321 (http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/2321(2016)).

13See UNSCR 2371 (http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/2371(2017)).

14See UNSCR 2375 (http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/2375(2017)).

15See UNSCR 2270.

16See UNSCR 2321.

17See UNSCR 2371.

18See UNSCR 2375.

Similarly, the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) has emphasized its concerns regarding the threat posed by North Korea's illicit activities related to the proliferation of WMDs and related financing. Reiterating the UNSCR requirements, the FATF called upon its members and urged all jurisdictions to take the necessary measures to close existing branches, subsidiaries, and representative offices of North Korean banks within their territories and terminate correspondent relationships with North Korean banks, where required by relevant UNSCRs.

Despite these actions, North Korea continues to access the U.S. and international financial systems through front companies and other surreptitious means. It is necessary to protect the U.S. financial system, directly and indirectly, from banks like Bank of Dandong that facilitate such access. Moreover, given the interconnectedness of the global financial system, the potential for Bank of Dandong to access the U.S. financial system indirectly, including through the use of nested correspondent accounts, exposes the U.S. financial system to the risks associated with conducting transactions with entities operating for, or on behalf of, North Korea.

2. Whether the Imposition of the Fifth Special Measure Would Create a Significant Competitive Disadvantage, Including Any Undue Cost or Burden Associated With Compliance, for Financial Institutions Organized or Licensed in the United States

A prohibition under the fifth special measure should not cause a significant competitive disadvantage or place an undue cost or burden on U.S. financial institutions. Pursuant to sanctions administered by OFAC, U.S. financial institutions are currently subject to a range of prohibitions related to financial activity involving North Korea. Accordingly, a prohibition on covered financial institutions from opening or maintaining correspondent accounts for, or on behalf of, a bank that facilitates North Korean financial activity should not create any competitive disadvantage for U.S. financial institutions.

Similarly, the final rule's due diligence obligations should not create any undue costs or burden on U.S. financial institutions. U.S. financial institutions already generally have systems in place to screen transactions in order to identify and report suspicious activity and comply with the sanctions programs administered by OFAC. Institutions can modify these systems to detect transactions involving Bank of Dandong. While there may be some additional burden in conducting due diligence on foreign correspondent account holders and notifying them of the prohibition (as described below), any such burden will likely be minimal, and certainly not undue, given the national security threat posed by Bank of Dandong's facilitation of activity for front companies associated with North Korea, some of which are involved in activities that support the proliferation of WMD or missiles.

3. The Extent to Which the Action or Timing of the Action Will Have a Significant Adverse Systemic Impact on the International Payment, Clearance, and Settlement System, or on Legitimate Business Activities of Bank of Dandong

Bank of Dandong is a relatively small financial institution in China's banking sector, is not a major participant in the international payment system, and is not relied upon by the international banking community for clearance or settlement services. Therefore, a prohibition under the fifth special measure with respect to Bank of Dandong will not have an adverse systemic impact on the international payment, clearance, and settlement system.

FinCEN also considered the extent to which this action could have an impact on the legitimate business activities of Bank of Dandong and has concluded that the need to protect the U.S. financial system from banks that facilitate North Korea's illicit financial activity strongly outweighs any such impact. Financial transactional data provided to FinCEN by U.S. financial institutions pursuant to the BSA indicates that Bank of Dandong's financial activity conducted through its U.S. correspondent accounts has consisted largely of letters of credit satisfaction, invoice payments, currency exchange activity, and transfers between individuals, which could be indicative of legitimate business activity. Nonetheless, FinCEN assesses that this financial activity also includes transactions conducted by companies that have transacted with, or on behalf of, entities that threaten the national security of the United States.

The NPRM stated that Bank of Dandong maintained euro, Japanese yen, Hong Kong dollar, pound sterling, and Australian dollar correspondent accounts. Subsequent to the publication of the NPRM, commercially available databases indicate that Bank of Dandong may no longer have correspondent accounts in any currency. While these accounts may no longer continue to exist, the fifth special measure would not prevent Bank of Dandong from conducting legitimate business activities in foreign currencies so long as such activity does not involve a correspondent account maintained in the United States.

4. The Effect of the Action on United States National Security and Foreign Policy

Excluding from the U.S. financial system foreign banks that serve as conduits for significant money laundering activity, for the financing of WMDs or their delivery systems, and for other financial crimes, enhances national security by making it more difficult for proliferators and money launderers to access the U.S. financial system. North Korea is a top national security concern, and Bank of Dandong has been used to facilitate financial activity related to North Korean entities designated by the United States and United Nations for their involvement in WMD proliferation. Imposing this rule serves as an additional measure to prevent North Korea from accessing the U.S. financial system and will both support and uphold U.S. national security and foreign policy goals. A prohibition under the fifth special measure will also complement the U.S. Government's worldwide efforts to expose and disrupt international money laundering.

B. Consideration of Alternative Special Measures

Under Section 311, special measures one through four enable FinCEN to impose additional recordkeeping, information collection, and information reporting requirements on covered financial institutions. The fifth special measure enables FinCEN to impose conditions as an alternative to a prohibition on the opening or maintaining of correspondent accounts. FinCEN considered these alternatives to a prohibition under the fifth special measure, but FinCEN believes that a prohibition under the fifth special measure will most effectively safeguard the U.S. financial system from the illicit finance risks posed by Bank of Dandong.

North Korea is subject to numerous U.S. and UN sanctions, and it has also been consistently identified by the Financial Action Task Force for its anti-money laundering deficiencies. Furthermore, FinCEN has issued multiple advisories since 2005 detailing its concerns surrounding the deceptive financial practices used by North Korea and North Korean entities and calling on U.S. financial institutions to take appropriate risk mitigation measures.

Despite these measures, North Korea continues to access the international financial system to support its WMD and conventional weapons programs through its use of aliases, agents, foreign individuals in multiple jurisdictions, and a long-standing network of front companies. Given Bank of Dandong's apparent disregard for numerous international calls to prevent North Korean illicit financial activity, FinCEN does not believe that any condition, additional recordkeeping requirement, or reporting requirement would be an effective measure to safeguard the U.S. financial system. Such measures will not prevent Bank of Dandong from accessing, directly or indirectly, the correspondent accounts of U.S. financial institutions, thus leaving the U.S. financial system vulnerable to processing illicit transfers that pose a national security risk. In addition, no recordkeeping requirement or conditions on correspondent accounts would be sufficient to guard against the risks posed by a bank that processes transactions that are designed to obscure the involvement of North Korea, and are ultimately for the benefit of sanctioned entities. Therefore, a prohibition under the fifth special measure is the only special measure that can adequately protect the U.S. financial system from the illicit finance risks posed by Bank of Dandong.

V. Section-by-Section Analysis for Imposition of a Prohibition Under the Fifth Special Measure 1010.660(a)—Definitions 1. Bank of Dandong

The final rule defines “Bank of Dandong” to mean all subsidiaries, branches, and offices of Bank of Dandong Co., Ltd. operating in any jurisdiction.

2. Correspondent Account

The final rule defines “Correspondent account” to have the same meaning as the definition contained in 31 CFR 1010.605(c)(1)(ii). In the case of a U.S. depository institution, this broad definition includes most types of banking relationships between a U.S. depository institution and a foreign bank that are established to provide regular services, dealings, and other financial transactions, including a demand deposit, savings deposit, or other transaction or asset account, and a credit account or other extension of credit. FinCEN is using the same definition of “account” for purposes of this final rule as was established for depository institutions in the final rule implementing the provisions of Section 312 of the USA PATRIOT Act requiring enhanced due diligence for correspondent accounts maintained for certain foreign banks.19 Under this definition, “payable through accounts” are a type of correspondent account.

19See 31 CFR 1010.605(c)(2)(i).

In the case of securities broker-dealers, futures commission merchants, introducing brokers-commodities, and investment companies that are open-end companies (“mutual funds”), FinCEN is also using the same definition of “account” for purposes of this final rule as was established for these entities in the final rule implementing the provisions of Section 312 of the USA PATRIOT Act requiring enhanced due diligence for correspondent accounts maintained for certain foreign banks.20

20See 31 CFR 1010.605(c)(2)(ii)-(iv).

3. Covered Financial Institution

The final rule defines “covered financial institution” with the same definition used in the final rule implementing the provisions of Section 312 of the USA PATRIOT Act, which in general includes the following:

• An insured bank (as defined in section 3(h) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1813(h)));

• a commercial bank;

• an agency or branch of a foreign bank in the United States;

• a Federally insured credit union;

• a savings association;

• a corporation acting under section 25A of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 611);

• a trust bank or trust company;

• a broker or dealer in securities;

• a futures commission merchant or an introducing broker-commodities; and

• a mutual fund.

4. Foreign Banking Institution

The final rule defines “foreign banking institution” to mean a bank organized under foreign law, or an agency, branch, or office located outside the United States of a bank. The term does not include an agent, agency, branch, or office within the United States of a bank organized under foreign law. This is consistent with the definition of “foreign bank” under 31 CFR 1010.100(u).

5. Subsidiary

The final rule defines “subsidiary” to mean a company of which more than 50 percent of the voting stock or analogous equity interest is owned by another company.

1010.660(b)—Prohibition on Accounts and Due Diligence Requirements for Covered Financial Institutions 1. Prohibition on Opening or Maintaining Correspondent Accounts

Section 1010.660(b)(1) and (2) of this final rule prohibits covered financial institutions from opening or maintaining in the United States a correspondent account for, or on behalf of, Bank of Dandong. It also requires covered financial institutions to take reasonable steps not to process a transaction for the correspondent account of a foreign banking institution in the United States if such a transaction involves Bank of Dandong. Such reasonable steps are described in § 1010.660(b)(3), which sets forth the special due diligence requirements a covered financial institution will be required to take when it knows or has reason to believe that a transaction involves Bank of Dandong.

2. Special Due Diligence for Correspondent Accounts

As a corollary to the prohibition set forth in § 1010.660(b)(1) and (2), § 1010.660(b)(3) of the final rule requires covered financial institutions to apply special due diligence to all of their foreign correspondent accounts that is reasonably designed to guard against such accounts being used to process transactions involving Bank of Dandong. As part of that special due diligence, covered financial institutions are required to notify those foreign correspondent account holders that the covered financial institutions know or have reason to believe provide services to Bank of Dandong that such correspondents may not provide Bank of Dandong with access to the correspondent account maintained at the covered financial institution. A covered financial institution may satisfy this notification requirement using the following notice:

Notice: Pursuant to U.S. regulations issued under Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act, see 31 CFR 1010.660, we are prohibited from opening or maintaining in the United States a correspondent account for, or on behalf of, Bank of Dandong. The regulations also require us to notify you that you may not provide Bank of Dandong, including any of its subsidiaries, branches, and offices with access to the correspondent account you hold at our financial institution. If we become aware that the correspondent account you hold at our financial institution has processed any transactions involving Bank of Dandong, including any of its subsidiaries, branches, and offices we will be required to take appropriate steps to prevent such access, including terminating your account.

The purpose of the notice requirement is to aid cooperation with correspondent account holders in preventing transactions involving Bank of Dandong from accessing the U.S. financial system. FinCEN does not require or expect a covered financial institution to obtain a certification from any of its correspondent account holders that access will not be provided to comply with this notice requirement.

Methods of compliance with the notice requirement could include, for example, transmitting a notice by mail, fax, or email. The notice should be transmitted whenever a covered financial institution knows or has reason to believe that a foreign correspondent account holder provides services to Bank of Dandong.

Special due diligence also includes implementing risk-based procedures designed to identify any use of correspondent accounts to process transactions involving Bank of Dandong. A covered financial institution is expected to apply an appropriate screening mechanism to identify a funds transfer order that on its face listed Bank of Dandong as the financial institution of the originator or beneficiary, or otherwise referenced Bank of Dandong in a manner detectable under the financial institution's normal screening mechanisms. An appropriate screening mechanism could be the mechanisms used by a covered financial institution to comply with various legal requirements, such as the commercially available software programs used to comply with the economic sanctions programs administered by OFAC.

3. Recordkeeping and Reporting

Section 1010.660(b)(4) of the final rule clarifies that the rule does not impose any reporting requirement upon any covered financial institution that is not otherwise required by applicable law or regulation. A covered financial institution must, however, document its compliance with the notification requirement described above.

VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act

When an agency issues a final rule, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (“RFA”) requires the agency to “prepare and make available for public comment an initial regulatory flexibility analysis” that will “describe the impact of the final rule on small entities.” (5 U.S.C. 603(a)). Section 605 of the RFA allows an agency to certify a rule, in lieu of preparing an analysis, if the final rule is not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

A. Prohibition on Covered Financial Institutions From Opening or Maintaining Correspondent Accounts With Certain Foreign Banks Under the Fifth Special Measure 1. Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Whom the Fifth Special Measure Will Apply

For purposes of the RFA, both banks and credit unions are considered small entities if they have less than $550,000,000 in assets.21 Of the estimated 5,787 banks, 99 percent of institutions have less than $550,000,000 in assets and are considered small entities.22 Of the estimated 5,696 credit unions, 91 percent have less than $550,000,000 in assets.23

21Table of Small Business Size Standards Matched to North American Industry Classification System Codes, Small Business Administration Size Standards (SBA Feb. 26, 2016) [hereinafter “SBA Size Standards”]. (https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/files/Size_Standards_Table.pdf).

22 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Find an Institution, http://www5.fdic.gov/idasp/advSearchLanding.asp;select Status Dates Financials: Total Assets, type Equal or less than $: “550000,000” and select Find.

23 National Credit Union Administration, Credit Union Data, http://webapps.ncua.gov/customquery/; select Search Fields: Total Assets, select Operator: Less than or equal to, type Field Values: “550000000” and select Go.

Broker-dealers are defined in 31 CFR 1010.100(h) as those broker-dealers required to register with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). For the purposes of the RFA, FinCEN relies on the SEC's definition of small business as previously submitted to the Small Business Administration (SBA). The SEC has defined the term small entity to mean a broker or dealer that: (1) Had total capital (net worth plus subordinated liabilities) of less than $500,000 on the date in the prior fiscal year as of which its audited financial statements were prepared pursuant to Rule 17a-5(d) or, if not required to file such statements, a broker or dealer that had total capital (net worth plus subordinated debt) of less than $500,000 on the last business day of the preceding fiscal year (or in the time that it has been in business if shorter); and (2) is not affiliated with any person (other than a natural person) that is not a small business or small organization as defined in this release.24 Based on SEC estimates, 17 percent of broker-dealers are classified as small entities for purposes of the RFA.25

24 17 CFR 240.0-10(c).

25 76 FR 37572, 37602 (June 27, 2011) (the SEC estimates 871 small broker-dealers of the 5,063 total registered broker-dealers).

Futures commission merchants (FCMs) are defined in 31 CFR 1010.100(x) as those FCMs that are registered or required to be registered as a FCM with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) under the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA), except persons who register pursuant to section 4f(a)(2) of the CEA, 7 U.S.C. 6f(a)(2). Because FinCEN and the CFTC regulate substantially the same population, for the purposes of the RFA, FinCEN relies on the CFTC's definition of small business as previously submitted to the SBA. In the CFTC's “Policy Statement and Establishment of Definitions of `Small Entities' for Purposes of the Regulatory Flexibility Act,” the CFTC concluded that registered FCMs should not be considered to be small entities for purposes of the RFA.26 The CFTC's determination in this regard was based, in part, upon the obligation of registered FCMs to meet the capital requirements established by the CFTC.

26 47 FR 18618, 18619 (Apr. 30, 1982).

For purposes of the RFA, an introducing broker-commodities dealer is considered small if it has less than $35,500,000 in gross receipts annually.27 Based on information provided by the National Futures Association, 95 percent of introducing brokers-commodities dealers have less than $35.5 million in adjusted net capital and are considered to be small entities.

27 SBA Size Standards at 28.

Mutual funds are defined in 31 CFR 1010.100(gg) as those investment companies that are open-end investment companies that are registered or are required to register with the SEC. For the purposes of the RFA, FinCEN relies on the SEC's definition of small business as previously submitted to the SBA. The SEC has defined the term “small entity” under the Investment Company Act to mean “an investment company that, together with other investment companies in the same group of related investment companies, has net assets of $50 million or less as of the end of its most recent fiscal year.” 28 Based on SEC estimates, seven percent of mutual funds are classified as “small entities” for purposes of the RFA under this definition.29

28 17 CFR 270.0-10.

29 78 FR 23637, 23658 (April 19, 2013).

As noted above, 99 percent of banks, 91 percent of credit unions, 17 percent of broker-dealers, 95 percent of introducing broker-commodities dealers, no FCMs, and seven percent of mutual funds are small entities.

2. Description of the Projected Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements of the Fifth Special Measure

The prohibition under the fifth special measure could require covered financial institutions to provide a notification intended to aid cooperation from foreign correspondent account holders in preventing transactions involving Bank of Dandong from being processed by the U.S. financial system. FinCEN estimates that the burden on institutions providing this notice is one hour.

Covered financial institutions are also required to take reasonable measures to detect use of their correspondent accounts to process transactions involving Bank of Dandong. All U.S. persons, including U.S. financial institutions, currently must comply with OFAC sanctions, and U.S. financial institutions have suspicious activity reporting requirements. The systems that U.S. financial institutions have in place to comply with these requirements can easily be modified to adapt to this final rule. Thus, the special due diligence that is required under the final rule—i.e., preventing the processing of transactions involving Bank of Dandong and the transmittal of notice to certain correspondent account holders—does not impose a significant additional economic burden upon small U.S. financial institutions.

B. Certification

For these reasons, FinCEN certifies that this final rulemaking should not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small businesses.

VII. Paperwork Reduction Act

The collection of information contained in this rule is being submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)), and has been assigned OMB Control Number 1506-0072. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number.

A. Information Collection Under the Fifth Special Measure

The notification requirement in § 1010.660(b)(3)(i)(A) is intended to aid cooperation from correspondent account holders in denying Bank of Dandong access to the U.S. financial system. The information required to be maintained by § 1010.660(b)(4)(i) will be used by federal agencies and certain self-regulatory organizations to verify compliance by covered financial institutions with the provisions of 31 CFR 1010.660. The collection of information is mandatory.

Description of Affected Financial Institutions: Banks, broker-dealers in securities, futures commission merchants and introducing brokers-commodities, money services businesses, and mutual funds.

Estimated Number of Affected Financial Institutions: 5,787.

Estimated Average Annual Burden in Hours per Affected Financial Institution: The estimated average burden associated with the collection of information in this rule is one hour per affected financial institution.

Estimated Total Annual Burden: 5,787 hours.

VIII. Executive Order 12866

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. It has been determined that this rule is not a “significant regulatory action” for purposes of Executive Order 12866.

List of Subjects in 31 CFR Part 1010

Administrative practice and procedure, Banks and banking, Brokers, Counter-money laundering, Counter-terrorism, Foreign banking.

Authority and Issuance

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, part 1010, chapter X of title 31 of the Code of Federal Regulations, is amended as follows:

PART 1010—GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. The authority citation for part 1010 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

12 U.S.C. 1829b and 1951-1959; 31 U.S.C. 5311-5314, 5316-5332; Title III, sec. 314, Pub. L. 107-56, 115 Stat. 307; sec. 701, Pub. L. 114-74, 129 Stat. 599.

2. Add § 1010.660 to read as follows:
§ 1010.660 Special measures against Bank of Dandong.

(a) Definitions. For purposes of this section:

(1) Bank of Dandong means all subsidiaries, branches, and offices of Bank of Dandong Co., Ltd. operating in any jurisdiction.

(2) Correspondent account has the same meaning as provided in § 1010.605(c)(1)(ii).

(3) Covered financial institution has the same meaning as provided in § 1010.605(e)(1).

(4) Foreign banking institution means a bank organized under foreign law, or an agency, branch, or office located outside the United States of a bank. The term does not include an agent, agency, branch, or office within the United States of a bank organized under foreign law.

(5) Subsidiary means a company of which more than 50 percent of the voting stock or analogous equity interest is owned by another company.

(b) Prohibition on accounts and due diligence requirements for covered financial institutions—(1) Opening or maintaining correspondent accounts for Bank of Dandong. A covered financial institution shall not open or maintain in the United States a correspondent account for, or on behalf of, Bank of Dandong.

(2) Prohibition on use of correspondent accounts involving Bank of Dandong. A covered financial institution shall take reasonable steps not to process a transaction for the correspondent account of a foreign banking institution in the United States if such a transaction involves Bank of Dandong.

(3) Special due diligence of correspondent accounts to prohibit use. (i) A covered financial institution shall apply special due diligence to its foreign correspondent accounts that is reasonably designed to guard against their use to process transactions involving Bank of Dandong. At a minimum, that special due diligence must include:

(A) Notifying those foreign correspondent account holders that the covered financial institution knows or has reason to believe provide services to Bank of Dandong that such correspondents may not provide Bank of Dandong with access to the correspondent account maintained at the covered financial institution; and

(B) Taking reasonable steps to identify any use of its foreign correspondent accounts by Bank of Dandong, to the extent that such use can be determined from transactional records maintained in the covered financial institution's normal course of business.

(ii) A covered financial institution shall take a risk-based approach when deciding what, if any, other due diligence measures it reasonably must adopt to guard against the use of its foreign correspondent accounts to process transactions involving Bank of Dandong.

(iii) A covered financial institution that knows or has reason to believe that a foreign bank's correspondent account has been or is being used to process transactions involving Bank of Dandong shall take all appropriate steps to further investigate and prevent such access, including the notification of its correspondent account holder under paragraph (b)(3)(i)(A) of this section and, where necessary, termination of the correspondent account.

(4) Recordkeeping and reporting. (i) A covered financial institution is required to document its compliance with the notice requirement set forth in paragraph (b)(3)(i)(A) of this section.

(ii) Nothing in this paragraph (b) shall require a covered financial institution to report any information not otherwise required to be reported by law or regulation.

Dated: November 2, 2017. Jamal El-Hindi, Acting Director, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.
[FR Doc. 2017-24238 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810-02-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 100 [Docket No. USCG-2017-0972] Special Local Regulations; Key West World Championship, Atlantic Ocean, Key West, FL AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Notice of enforcement of regulation.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard will enforce the Key West World Championship Special Local Regulation from 9:30 a.m. until 4:30 p.m. on November 8, 10, and 12, 2017. This action is necessary to ensure safety of life on navigable waters of the United States and to protect race participants, participant vessels, spectators, and the general public from the hazards associated with high-speed boat races. During the enforcement period, and in accordance with previously issued special local regulations, no person or vessel may enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated area without permission from the Captain of the Port Key West or a designated representative.

DATES:

The regulations in 33 CFR 100.701 will be enforced for the location listed in item (c)(9) in the Table to 33 CFR 100.701 from 9:30 a.m. until 4:30 p.m. on November 8, 10, and 12, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

If you have questions on this notice of enforcement, call or email Lieutenant Scott Ledee, Sector Key West Waterways Management Department, Coast Guard; telephone (305) 292-8768, email [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

On November 8, 10, and 12, 2017, Super Boat International Productions, Inc. is hosting the Key West World Championship, a series of high-speed boat races. The Coast Guard will enforce the special local regulation for the annual Key West World Championship Super Boat Race in 33 CFR 100.701, table item (c)(9) from 9:30 a.m. until 4:30 p.m. on November 8, 10, 11, and 12, 2017.

Under the provisions of 33 CFR 100.701, no unauthorized person or vessel may enter, transit through, anchor within, or remain in the established regulated areas unless permission to enter has been granted by the Captain of the Port Key West or designated representative. This action is to provide enforcement action of regulated area that will encompass portions of the waters of the Atlantic Ocean located southwest of Key West, Florida. The Coast Guard may be assisted by other Federal, State, or local law enforcement agencies in enforcing this regulation.

This notice of enforcement is issued under authority of 33 CFR 100.701 and 5 U.S.C. 552(a). The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated area by Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and on-scene designated representatives. If the Captain of the Port Key West determines that the regulated area need not be enforced for the full duration stated in this publication, he or she may use a Broadcast Notice to Mariners to grant general permission to enter the regulated area.

Dated: November 2, 2017. Jeffrey A. Janszen, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Key West.
[FR Doc. 2017-24291 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG-2017-0976] RIN 1625-AA09 Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Lake Washington, Seattle, WA AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard is removing the existing drawbridge operation regulation for the Evergreen Point Floating Bridge (SR-520 Floating Bridge) across Lake Washington, mile 4.3, at Seattle, WA. The drawbridge was replaced with a fixed bridge in 2016, and the operating regulation is no longer applicable or necessary. The SR-520 Floating Bridge was rebuilt, and the center span was built with a fixed span that replaced the draw.

DATES:

This rule is effective November 8, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2017-0976. In the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

If you have questions on this rule, call or email Mr. Steven Fischer, Bridge Administrator, Thirteenth Coast Guard District; telephone 206-220-7282, email [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations CFR Code of Federal Regulations DHS Department of Homeland Security FR Federal Register Pub. L. Public Law § Section U.S.C. United States Code II. Background Information and Regulatory History

The Coast Guard is issuing this final rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that notice and comment procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) because the Evergreen Point Floating Bridge (SR-520 Floating Bridge), that once required draw operations in 33 CFR 117.1049, was removed from Lake Washington and replaced with a fixed bridge in 2016. Therefore, the regulation is no longer applicable and needs to be removed. It is unnecessary to publish a NPRM because drawbridge regulations are only used for bridges that have an operational span that is intended to be opened for the passage of waterway traffic. The Evergreen Point Floating Bridge identified in 33 CFR 117.1049 no longer exists and has been replaced by a bridge without an operational span.

For the same reasons stated in the preceding paragraph, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective in less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. The bridge at issue no longer has an operational span and therefore has no need of a drawbridge regulation. The removal of the regulation will not affect mariners currently operating on this waterway. Therefore, a delayed effective date is unnecessary.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority 33 U.S.C. 499.

The Evergreen Point Floating Bridge (SR-520 Floating Bridge) was removed and replaced with a fixed bridge in 2016. The elimination of this drawbridge necessitates the removal of the drawbridge operation regulation (33 CFR 117.1049) that pertains to the former drawbridge. The purpose of this rule is to remove the section of 33 CFR 117.1049 that refers to the Evergreen Point Floating Bridge at mile 4.3 from the Code of Federal Regulations, because the bridge at that location is no longer has an operational span.

IV. Discussion of Final Rule

The Coast Guard is changing the regulation in 33 CFR 117.1049 by removing restrictions and the regulatory burden related to the draw operations for this bridge that is no longer a drawbridge. The change removes the regulation governing the Evergreen Point Floating Bridge since the bridge has been replaced with a fixed bridge. This final rule will update the Code of Federal Regulations by removing language that governs the operation of the Evergreen Point Floating Bridge, which in fact is no longer a drawbridge. This change does not affect waterway or land traffic.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 13771. See OMB's Memorandum “Guidance Implementing Executive Order 13771, Titled `Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs'” (April 5, 2017).

As previously explained, the Evergreen Point Floating Bridge was removed from Lake Washington and replaced with a fixed bridge in 2016 and no longer operates as a drawbridge. The removal of the operating schedule from 33 CFR part 117, subpart B, will have no effect on the movement of waterway or land traffic, but will serve to remove an outdated and obsolete provision from the CFR.

B. Impact on Small Entities

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

For the reasons stated in section IV.A above this final rule would not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.

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

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

C. Collection of Information

This rule calls for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Government

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

Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

F. Environment

We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a determination that this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule simply promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges. This action is categorically excluded from further review, under figure 2-1, paragraph (32) (e), of the Instruction.

A Record of Environmental Consideration and a Memorandum for the Record are not required for this rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

Bridges.

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows: Authority:

33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

§ 117.1049 [Removed]
2. Remove § 117.1049. David G. Throop, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Thirteenth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2017-24292 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2017-0982] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; Mamala Bay, Oahu, HI AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Temporary final rule.

SUMMARY:

On October 10, 2017, the commercial fishing vessel PACIFIC PARADISE ran aground off of the navigable waters of Mamala Bay approximately 400 yards southwest of Kaimana Beach, Oahu, Hawaii. The Coast Guard established a temporary safety zone around the grounded vessel to facilitate vessel salvage operations and on October 18, 2017, the safety zone was extended for two additional weeks. To date, the vessel remains grounded. Accordingly, effective November 1, 2017, the Coast Guard extends the safety zone for an additional thirty days to facilitate ongoing salvage and subsequent removal operations. The extension of this safety zone is necessary to protect personnel, vessels and the marine environmental from potential hazards associated with ongoing operations to salvage and remove a grounded vessel in this area. Entry of vessels or persons into this zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP) Honolulu.

DATES:

This rule is effective without actual notice from November 8, 2017 until 8:00 a.m. on December 1, 2017. For the purposes of enforcement, actual notice will be used from 8:00 a.m. on November 1, 2017 until November 8, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2017-0982 in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

If you have questions on this rule, call or email Lieutenant Commander John Bannon, Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Honolulu at (808) 541-4359 or [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

On October 10, 2017, the fishing vessel PACIFIC PARADISE ran aground off of the navigable waters of Mamala Bay approximately 400 yards southwest of Kaimana Beach, Oahu, Hawaii at position 21°15.69′ N.; 157°49.49′ W. On October 11, 2017, the Coast Guard established a seven day temporary safety zone encompassing all waters extending 500 yards in all directions around the grounded vessel to facilitate vessel salvage operations and protect personnel, vessels and the marine environment from the hazards associated with them. Due to the emergent nature of the grounding and subsequent removal operations, the temporary final rule (TFR) safety zone was not initially published in the Federal Register. On October 18, 2017, the safety zone was extended for two additional weeks to account for delays in salvage operations due to ocean and weather conditions. The safety zone extension was published in the Federal Register (82 FR 49111) on October 24, 2017. Ongoing challenges with the salvage efforts necessitate a second extension, this for thirty days, of the safety zone.

The safety zone continues to encompass all waters extending 500 yards in all directions around the grounded fishing vessel located approximately 400 yards southwest of Kaimana Beach at position 21°15.69′ N.; 157°49.49′ W. When the vessel is off the reef, the safety zone will shift to a moving safety zone extending 500 yards in all directions around the vessel and continue until the removal operation is complete.

The Coast Guard is extending the existing safety zone without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule because the initial estimate to salvage the vessel from the grounding was estimated at one week or less. Immediate action remains needed to respond to the safety hazards associated with this fishing vessel salvage effort for an estimated additional thirty days. Therefore, publishing an NPRM is impracticable and contrary to public interest.

We are issuing this rule, and under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making it effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. For the same reasons stated in the preceding paragraph, delaying the effective period of this safety zone would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

The Coast Guard is issuing this rule pursuant to 33 U.S.C. 1231. On October 10, 2017, the Coast Guard was informed the commercial fishing vessel PACIFIC PARADISE ran aground in Mamala Bay, Oahu, Hawaii, near Waikiki's Kaimana Beach. Coast Guard COTP Sector Honolulu determined that potential hazards associated with the salvage and removal operations constituted a safety concern and thus established a safety zone to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment during ongoing operations to remove the grounded vessel from a reef in high winds and seas followed by the towing and disposal of the disabled vessel.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

This rule is effective from 8:00 a.m. on November 1, 2017 through 8:00 a.m. on December 1, 2017, or until salvage operations are complete, whichever is earlier. If the safety zone is terminated prior to 8:00 a.m. on December 1, 2017, the Coast Guard will provide notice via a broadcast notice to mariners.

The temporary safety zone encompasses all waters extending 500 yards in all directions around the location of the grounded vessel 400 yards southwest of Kaimana Beach near position: 21°15.69′ N.; 157°49.49′ W. This zone extends from the surface of the water to the ocean floor. The safety zone is currently stationary around the grounded vessel. When the vessel is removed from the reef, the safety zone will shift to a moving safety zone and remain so until the tow and disposal operation is complete. The zone shall continue to encompass 500 yards in all directions around the commercial fishing vessel. When the vessel is off the reef and removal operations commence, the Coast Guard will provide notice via a broadcast notice to mariners. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the safety zone absent the express authorization of the COTP Honolulu or his designated representative.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.

This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location and duration of the safety zone. Vessel traffic will be able to safely transit around this safety zone away from the reef or during the salvage tow, which would impact only a small designated area of the waters off Kaimana Beach and Waikiki where vessel traffic is normally low. Closer to shore, the waterway is used primarily for beach recreation activities. Offshore of the beach, waterway traffic is primarily tourism related operations which will not be affected by the tow due to the open space in the area. Moreover, vessels wishing to enter the zone may seek permission as set forth below.

B. Impact on Small Entities

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

While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator. The safety zone is limited in size and duration, and the location of the grounded vessel is not in an actively used navigable waterway. Once the vessel is free from the reef, the tow evolution will not impact existing waterway users. Furthermore, mariners may request to enter the zone by contacting the COTP.

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

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

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

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

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

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

F. Environment

We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a safety zone extension for duration of thirty additional days, or until the salvage operation is suspended. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

G. Protest Activities

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

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

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

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

2. Add § 165.T14-0982 to read as follows:
§ 165.T14-0982 Safety Zone; Mamala Bay, Oahu, HI.

(a) Location. The safety zone is located within the COTP Honolulu Zone (See 33 CFR 3.70-10) and will encompass all navigable waters extending 500 yards in all directions from the fishing vessel PACIFIC PARADISE, which is grounded on a reef approximately 400 yards southwest of Kaimana Beach at position: 21°15.69′ N.; 157°49.49′ W. Once the commercial fishing vessel PACIFIC PARADISE is removed from the reef, the safety zone will become a moving safety zone extending 500 yards in all directions from the vessel to facilitate the towing and disposal of the vessel. The safety zone will be enforced and throughout the salvage, transit and removal operations within Mamala Bay, Keehi Lagoon, or Honolulu Harbor. This zone extends from the surface of the water to the ocean floor.

(b) Enforcement period. This rule is effective from 8:00 a.m. on November 1, 2017 through 8:00 a.m. on December 1, 2017, or until salvage recovery operations are complete, whichever is earlier. If the safety zone is terminated prior to 8:00 a.m. on December 1, 2017, the Coast Guard will provide notice via a broadcast notice to mariners.

(c) Regulations. The general regulations governing safety zones contained in § 165.23 apply to the safety zone created by this temporary final rule.

(1) All persons are required to comply with the general regulations governing safety zones found in this part.

(2) Entry into or remaining in this zone is prohibited unless expressly authorized by the COTP Honolulu or his designated representative.

(3) Persons desiring to transit the stationary or moving safety zone identified in paragraph (a) of this section may contact the COTP at the Command Center telephone number (808) 842-2600 and (808) 842-2601, fax (808) 842-2642 or on VHF channel 16 (156.8 Mhz) to seek permission to transit the zone. If permission is granted, all persons and vessels must comply with the instructions of the COTP Honolulu or his designated representative and proceed at the minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe course while in the zone.

(4) The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted in the patrol and enforcement of the safety zone by Federal, State, and local agencies.

(d) Notice of enforcement. The COTP will provide notice of enforcement of the safety zone described in this section via verbal broadcasts and written notice to mariners and the general public.

(e) Definitions. As used in this section, “designated representative” means any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer who has been authorized by the COTP to assist in enforcing the safety zone described in paragraph (a) of this section.

Dated: November 2, 2017. M.C. Long, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Honolulu.
[FR Doc. 2017-24290 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS 38 CFR Part 17 RIN 2900-AP83 Ecclesiastical Endorsing Organizations AGENCY:

Department of Veterans Affairs.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is amending its medical regulations by establishing in regulation the eligibility requirements that ecclesiastical endorsing organizations must meet in order to provide ecclesiastical endorsements of individuals seeking employment as VA chaplains, or of individuals who are seeking to be engaged by VA under contract or appointed as on-facility fee basis VA chaplains under the United States Code. VA considers veterans' spiritual care an integral part of their overall health care. As such, VA is committed to providing qualified VA chaplains to address the veterans' spiritual needs by engaging chaplains that are ecclesiastically endorsed. Ecclesiastical endorsement certifies that the individual is qualified to perform all the religious sacraments, rites, rituals, ceremonies and ordinances needed by members of a particular faith.

DATES:

This final rule is effective December 8, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

John Batten, Program Analyst, National Chaplain Center, Veterans Health Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, 100 Emancipation Dr., Hampton, VA 23667; (757) 728-7062 (this is not a toll-free number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

In a document published in the Federal Register on January 5, 2017, VA proposed to establish in its medical regulations the eligibility requirements that ecclesiastical endorsing organizations must meet in order to provide ecclesiastical endorsements of individuals seeking employment as VA chaplains or of individuals who are seeking to be engaged by VA under contract or appointed as on-facility fee basis VA chaplains under 38 U.S.C. 7405. See 82 FR 1288. VA provided a 60-day comment period, which ended on March 6, 2017. We received two comments on the proposed rule. Under 38 CFR 17.33, VA must make available to each patient the opportunity for religious worship. The VA National Chaplain Service was established on August 1, 1945, to provide veterans the opportunity for such worship and other forms of spiritual care. VA employs chaplains in accordance with 5 CFR 213.3102(a) to provide for the spiritual component of health care in accordance to the spiritual needs of veterans. VA may employ chaplains in temporary appointments, on an on-facility fee basis appointment under 38 U.S.C. 7405, and may engage chaplains under contract. By requiring that chaplains be ecclesiastically endorsed, VA ensures that chaplains are qualified to perform the rites, rituals, or ceremonies that are unique to each faith. Before the year 2000, VA did not have a process in place to address endorsement of chaplains and relied on criteria established by the Department of Defense's (DoD) Armed Forces Chaplain Board (AFCB) at DoD Instruction 1304.28. Under this criteria, an individual cannot serve as chaplain unless he or she is endorsed by an ecclesiastical endorsing organization. The purpose is to ensure that the chaplain is recognized as an individual who is authorized by that organization to perform pastoral duties. The ecclesiastical endorsing organization must submit a request to VA to designate an ecclesiastical endorser. This request provides VA with the information on the ecclesiastical endorsing organization and identifies the individual whom the organization designates as the official authorized to sign ecclesiastical endorsements. VA reviews the information provided and approves the request.

Before the year 2000, VA accepted endorsements from ecclesiastical endorsing organizations recognized by DoD to perform this function as a means of avoiding duplication of effort on VA's part and because such organizations would be better able to address veterans' needs, having provided for the veterans' spiritual care while on active duty. In 1998, VA determined that it needed to establish its own policy on accepting ecclesiastical endorsements. The rationale was that there might be organizations that would endorse members seeking to work for VA, but would not permit their members to work as military chaplains, either for theological or other reasons. VA has been successfully implementing since the year 2000, via internal policy, the eligibility requirements that ecclesiastical endorsing organizations must meet to endorse individuals who are seeking employment as VA chaplains or of individuals who are seeking to be engaged by VA under contract or appointed as on-facility fee basis VA chaplains under 38 U.S.C. 7405.1 However, VA subsequently determined a formal rulemaking is prudent in order to make the process transparent as well as safeguard VA from the appearance of favoritism of an ecclesiastical endorsing organization over another. We are establishing this process in 38 CFR 17.655.

1 Ecclesiastical Endorsing Organizations, VHA Handbook 1111.01 and VHA related policy VHA Directive 1111, Spiritual and Pastoral Care, which incorporates by specific reference the terms of VHA HB 1111.01.

One commenter stated that the proposed rule appears to favor one faith over another citing that the Oxford dictionary defines the term “ecclesiastical” as “relating to the Christian Church.” However, the proposed rule's definition of ecclesiastical endorsement and ecclesiastical endorsing organization expanded the commonly defined term “ecclesiastical” to include all other faith groups. By defining these terms, VA is not favoring ecclesiastical endorsing organizations of the Christian faith; rather, it is including all faith groups. We are not making any edits to the rule based on this comment.

The two commenters stated that VA should expend its resources on the health care of the veteran rather than their spiritual care. VA believes that a veteran's overall health care includes spiritual care. Chaplains are an integral part of the VA patient care team. Chaplains safeguard a veteran's right for religious worship, as well as safeguard the veterans who do not wish to have religion imposed on them. It is always a veteran's choice to receive or decline pastoral care. As stated in the proposed rule, patients' rights (for residents and inpatients) include the opportunity for religious worship under § 17.33(b)(7). Also, VA does not fund an ecclesiastical endorsing organization. This rule merely seeks to establish via regulation a point of contact within an ecclesiastical endorsing organization in order to verify if an individual who is seeking employment as VA chaplains or who is seeking to be engaged by VA under contract or appointed as on-facility fee basis VA chaplains under 38 U.S.C. 7405 is qualified to perform all of the religious rites, rituals, ceremonies, and ordinances needed by members of a particular faith. We are not making any edits to the rule based on this comment.

Proposed paragraph (d)(2) stated that an ecclesiastical endorsing organization must submit “A copy of an Internal Revenue Service document verifying that the organization currently holds a section 501(c)(3) exempt status (Reference (i)).” However, section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code does not contain any “references.” See 26 U.S.C. 501. We are amending proposed paragraph (d)(2) by eliminating the term “(Reference (i)).” This edit does not change the meaning of paragraph (d)(2) as proposed.

Based on the rationale set forth in the Supplementary Information to the proposed rule and in this final rule, VA is adopting the proposed rule with the edit discussed.

Effect of Rulemaking

Title 38 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as revised by this final rulemaking, represents VA's implementation of its legal authority on this subject. Other than future amendments to this regulation or governing statutes, no contrary guidance or procedures are authorized. All existing or subsequent VA guidance must be read to conform with this rulemaking if possible or, if not possible, such guidance is superseded by this rulemaking.

Paperwork Reduction Act

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507) requires that VA consider the impact of paperwork and other information collection burdens imposed on the public. Under 44 U.S.C. 3507(a), an agency may not collect or sponsor the collection of information, nor may it impose an information collection requirement unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. See also 5 CFR 1320.8(b)(2)(vi).

This final rule contains the following new information collection requirements. Section 17.655 contains a collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. VA was previously collecting this information under OMB control number 2900-0610, which expired on September 2, 2008. Paragraph (d) in § 17.655 states the documentation that an ecclesiastical endorsing organization needs to submit in order for VA to accept ecclesiastical endorsements of individuals of such organization. The information is needed to establish the eligibility requirements that an ecclesiastical endorsing organization must meet in order to provide ecclesiastical endorsements of an individual who is seeking employment as a VA chaplain or who is seeking to be engaged by VA under contract or appointed as on-facility fee basis VA chaplains under 38 U.S.C. 7405. VA has collected this information in the past through internal policy and guidance.2 As required by 44 U.S.C. 3507(d), VA submitted this information collection to OMB for its review. OMB approved these new information collection requirements associated with the final rule and assigned OMB control number 2900-0852.

2 Ecclesiastical Endorsing Organizations, VHA Handbook 1111.01 and VHA related policy VHA Directive 1111, Spiritual and Pastoral Care, which incorporates by specific reference the terms of VHA HB 1111.01.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

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 impose no burden on small entities. Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), this rulemaking would be exempt from the initial and final regulatory flexibility analysis requirements of 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 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 principles set forth in this Executive Order.”

The economic, interagency, budgetary, legal, and policy implications of this regulatory action have been examined, and it has been determined to be a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 because it is likely to result in a rule that may raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in this Executive Order. VA's impact analysis can be found as a supporting document at http://www.regulations.gov, usually within 48 hours after the rulemaking document is published. Additionally, a copy of the rulemaking and its impact analysis are available on VA's Web site at http://www.va.gov/orpm/, by following the link for “VA Regulations Published From FY 2004 Through Fiscal Year to Date.”

Unfunded Mandates

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.

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

There are no Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance numbers and titles for this rule.

List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 17

Administrative practice and procedure, Health professions, Veterans.

Signing Authority

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 August 31, 2017, for publication.

Dated: November 3, 2017. Janet Coleman, Chief, Office of Regulation Policy & Management, Office of the Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs.

For the reasons set out in the preamble, VA is amending 38 CFR part 17 as follows:

PART 17—MEDICAL 1. The authority citation for part 17 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

38 U.S.C. 501, and as noted in specific sections.

Section 17.38 also issued under 38 U.S.C. 101, 501, 1701, 1705, 1710, 1710A, 1721, 1722, 1782, and 1786.

Section 17.169 also issued under 38 U.S.C. 1712C.

Sections 17.380 and 17.412 are also issued under sec. 260, Public Law 114-223, 130 Stat. 857.

Section 17.410 is also issued under 38 U.S.C. 1787.

Section 17.415 is also issued under 38 U.S.C. 7301, 7304, 7402, and 7403.

Sections 17.640 and 17.647 are also issued under sec. 4, Public Law 114-2, 129 Stat. 30.

Sections 17.641 through 17.646 are also issued under 38 U.S.C. 501(a) and sec. 4, Public Law 114-2, 129 Stat. 30.

Section 17.655 also issued under 38 U.S.C. 501(a), 7304, 7405.

2. Add an undesignated center heading and § 17.655 to read as follows: Chaplain Services
§ 17.655 Ecclesiastical endorsing organizations.

(a) Purpose. This section establishes the eligibility requirements that an ecclesiastical endorsing organization must meet in order to provide ecclesiastical endorsements of individuals who are seeking employment as VA chaplains or seeking to be engaged by VA under contract or appointed as on-facility fee basis VA chaplains under 38 U.S.C. 7405. Acceptance of an ecclesiastical endorsement by VA does not imply any approval by VA of the theology or practices of an ecclesiastical endorsing organization, nor does it obligate VA to employ the endorsed individual or any other member of the organization.

(b) Definitions. The following definitions apply to this section:

(1) Ecclesiastical endorsement means a written statement addressed to VA and signed by the designated endorsing official of an ecclesiastical endorsing organization certifying that an individual is in good standing with the faith group or denomination and, in the opinion of the endorsing official, is qualified to perform the full range of ministry, including all sacraments, rites, ordinances, rituals, and liturgies required by members of the faith group. Ecclesiastical endorsement is a condition of employment as a VA chaplain. An individual must obtain and maintain a full and active ecclesiastical endorsement to be employed as a VA chaplain.

(2) Ecclesiastical endorsing official means an individual who is authorized to provide or withdraw ecclesiastical endorsements on behalf of an ecclesiastical endorsing organization.

(3) Ecclesiastical endorsing organization means an organization that meets the eligibility requirements of paragraph (c) of this section and has been properly designated as an endorsing organization in accordance with paragraph (e) of this section.

(c) Eligibility to serve as an ecclesiastical endorsing organization. An ecclesiastical endorsing organization must meet the following requirements before such organization can endorse an applicant for VA chaplaincy:

(1) Be organized and function exclusively or substantially to provide religious ministries to a lay constituency and possess authority to both grant and withdraw initial and subsequent ecclesiastical endorsements;

(2) Have tax-exempt status as a religious organization or church under the Internal Revenue Code, section 501(c)(3);

(3) Agree to abide by all Federal and VA laws, regulations, policies, and issuances on the qualification and endorsement of persons for service as VA chaplains;

(4) Agree to notify VA in writing of any withdrawal of an existing ecclesiastical endorsement within ten days after the date of such withdrawal;

(5) Provide VA the documents stated in paragraph (d) of this section;

(6) Notify VA in writing within 30 days of any change of the name, address or contact information of the individual that it designates as its ecclesiastical endorsing official; and

(7) An ecclesiastical endorsing organization that is part of an endorsing organization by which its members can be endorsed cannot become a separate endorsing organization without the written permission of the larger endorsing organization.

(d) Request to designate ecclesiastical endorser. In order for an ecclesiastical endorsing organization to be recognized by VA such organization must submit the following:

(1) A complete VA form that requests the designation of an ecclesiastical endorsing official;

(2) A copy of an Internal Revenue Service document verifying that the organization currently holds a section 501(c)(3) exempt status as a church for Federal tax purposes from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) (note “church” is used by the IRS not to denote a belief system, but to distinguish “churches” from other types of religious organizations; see IRS Instructions for Form 1023 Schedule A). Such rules stipulate that the particular religious beliefs of the organization are truly and sincerely held and that the practices and rituals associated with the organization's religious belief or creed are not illegal or contrary to clearly defined public policy. In order to determine whether a particular religious organization has properly acquired, and currently maintains, an IRS tax exempt status and does not engage in practices that are illegal or contrary to defined public policy, VA shall take appropriate steps to verify compliance with these requirements;

(3) A document verifying that the organization shall provide chaplains who shall function in a pluralistic environment, and who shall support directly and indirectly the free exercise of religion by all veterans, their family members, and other persons authorized to be served by VA;

(4) That it agrees to abide by all VA Directives, Instructions, and other guidance, regulations and policies on the qualification and endorsement of ministers for service as VA chaplains;

(5) Documentation that states the structure of the organization, including copies of the articles of incorporation, by-laws and constitution, membership requirements of the organization, if any, the religious beliefs and practices of the organization, and the organization's requirements to become clergy; and

(6) The name and address of the individual who is applying to become a VA chaplain.

(e) Approval of request to designate an ecclesiastical endorsing official. If an ecclesiastical endorsing organization meets the requirements of paragraph (c) of this section and has submitted the documents stated in paragraph (d) of this section, VA will notify the organization in writing that such organization has been designated as an ecclesiastical endorsing organization. The designation will be for a period of 3 years from the date of notification. Once an organization is designated as an ecclesiastical endorsing organization, VA will accept ecclesiastical endorsements from that organization without requiring any further documentation from the organization during the 3 year period, unless VA receives evidence that an organization no longer meets the requirements of this section. VA will only take action on an initial request to designate an ecclesiastical endorsing official when VA receives an application from an individual who is seeking employment as a VA chaplain or is seeking to be engaged under VA contract or appointed as on-facility fee basis VA chaplains under 38 U.S.C. 7405.

(f) Reporting requirement. (1) To certify that VA chaplains continue to be endorsed by an ecclesiastical endorsing organization, such organization must provide VA an alphabetical listing of individuals who are endorsed by that endorsing organization and are employed as VA chaplains or are engaged by VA under contract or appointed as on-facility fee basis VA chaplains under 38 U.S.C. 7405 by January 1 of every calendar year.

(2) In order for VA to continue to recognize an ecclesiastical endorsing organization, such organization must provide written documentation that it continues to meet the requirements of this section every 3 years.

(g) Rescission of ecclesiastical endorsing organization. VA may rescind an organization's status as an ecclesiastical endorsing organization and refuse to accept ecclesiastical endorsements from such organization if it no longer meets the requirements of paragraph (c) of this section. VA will take the following steps before it rescinds the organization's status:

(1) VA will give the ecclesiastical endorsing organization written notice stating the reasons for the rescission and give the organization 60 days to provide a written reply addressing VA's concerns.

(2) VA will notify the ecclesiastical endorsing organization and all VA chaplains endorsed by the organization in writing of its decision after VA reviews the evidence provided by the organization or after the 60 day time period has expired, whichever comes first.

(3) Ecclesiastical endorsing organizations that are notified that they may no longer endorse individuals for VA chaplaincy because they do not meet the requirements of paragraph (c) of this section must resubmit all of the evidence stated in paragraph (d) of this section in order to be reconsidered as an endorsing organization.

(4) If an ecclesiastical endorsing organization is no longer able to endorse individuals for VA chaplaincy in accordance with this section, all ecclesiastical endorsements issued by that organization are considered to be withdrawn.

(The Office of Management and Budget has approved the information collection requirements in this section under control number 2900-0852.)
[FR Doc. 2017-24320 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8320-01-P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION 48 CFR Parts 1, 4, 9, 17, 22, 42, and 52 [FAC 2005-96; FAR Case 2017-015; Docket No. 2017-0002; Sequence No. 1] RIN 9000-AN52 Federal Acquisition Regulation; Removal of Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Rule Republication Editorial Note:

Rule document 2017-23590 originally published on pages 51527 through 51531 in the issue of Monday, November 6, 2017, with an extraneous web address inadvertently inserted. The corrected document is published here in its entirety.

AGENCY:

Department of Defense (DoD), General Services Administration (GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

DoD, GSA, and NASA are issuing a final rule amending the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to implement a public law that disapproved the final rule, Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces (FAR Case 2014-025), and an Executive Order (E.O.) dated March 27, 2017, that rescinded the prior Executive orders authorizing that rule.

DATES:

Effective date: November 6, 2017.

Applicability dates: See section I.F of the Supplementary Information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Zenaida Delgado, Procurement Analyst, at 202-969-7207 for clarification of content. For information pertaining to status or publication schedules, contact the Regulatory Secretariat Division at 202-501-4755. Please cite FAC 2005-96, FAR Case 2017-015.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background A. The FAR Rule Implementing E.O. 13673

FAR Case 2014-025 implemented E.O. 13673, Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces, dated July 31, 2014 (79 FR 45309, August 5, 2014), amended by section 3 of E.O. 13683, dated December 11, 2014 (79 FR 75041, December 16, 2014) and E.O. 13738, dated August 23, 2016 (81 FR 58807, August 26, 2016).

The FAR Case final rule was published in the Federal Register on August 25, 2016, at 81 FR 58562. It was to be effective on October 25, 2016. Certain aspects of the rule were to be phased in. For example, the clause at FAR 52.222-60, Paycheck Transparency (Executive Order 13673), was to be inserted in solicitations starting January 1, 2017, if the estimated value of the resultant contract was to exceed $500,000.

The Department of Labor (DOL) published “Guidance for Executive Order 13673, `Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces' ” on the same day as the FAR final rule was published (81 FR 58653).

B. Injunction and Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council Memorandum

On October 7, 2016, the Associated Builders and Contractors of Southeast Texas, Inc., the Associated Builders and Contractors, Inc., and the National Association of Security Companies filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (Civil Action No. 1:16-CV-425) seeking to overturn the final rule. On October 13, 2016, the plaintiffs filed an “Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction.”

On October 24, 2016, the District Court issued a “Memorandum and Order Granting Preliminary Injunction.” The Court Order (on page 31) stated: “Defendants are enjoined [from] implementing any portion of the FAR Rule or the DOL Guidance relating to the new reporting and disclosure requirements regarding labor law violations as described in E.O. 13673 and implemented in the FAR Rule and DOL Guidance. Further, Defendants are enjoined from enforcing the restriction on arbitration agreements.”

The Court Order did not enjoin the Paycheck Transparency clause, FAR 52.222-60. Starting January 1, 2017, this clause was prescribed for solicitations if the estimated value of the resultant contract would exceed $500,000.

On October 25, 2016, the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council issued a memorandum to the Chief Acquisition Officers, Senior Procurement Executives, Defense Acquisition Regulations Council, and Civilian Agency Acquisition Council directing that all steps necessary be taken to ensure that the enjoined sections, provisions, and clauses of the final rule would not be implemented until such time as the injunction is terminated. The Council enumerated specific steps to be taken at a minimum, including the following:

1. Ensure that new solicitations do not include representations or clauses that the enjoined coverage of the rule would have required—i.e., the representation at FAR 52.222-57 and its commercial items version at paragraph (s) of 52.212-3, 52.222-58 and 52.222-59, which would have directed disclosure of labor law violation decisions by offerors or contractors, and 52.222-61, which would have required an offeror or contractor to agree to restrict the use of mandatory pre-dispute arbitration agreements.

2. If a solicitation had been issued with representations or clauses listed in the previous paragraph 1, amend those solicitations immediately to remove those representations and clauses. Additionally, agencies were directed not to take any action on information, if any, submitted in response to those representations and clauses.

3. Ensure that contracting officers do not implement the procedures in FAR 22.2004-2, 22.2004-3, 22.2004-4, or associated changes in FAR parts 9 and 42.

The FAR Council requested that agencies share these instructions widely among their workforces and posted the Memorandum online. Also, the DOL re-posted the Memorandum at the top of its then-existing information page on the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces E.O.

In further compliance with the terms of the Court Order, as explained by the FAR Council in its October 25, 2016 Memorandum, GSA's Integrated Award Environment immediately ceased all actions to release the changes for the System for Award Management (SAM) that would have supported bidder and contractor submission of information on labor law violation decisions, as well as the changes that would have supported public disclosure of this information in the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS).

C. FAR Rule Implementing the Injunction

As an additional step to ensure full awareness of, and compliance with, the Court Order, DoD, GSA, and NASA, on behalf of the FAR Council, took a more comprehensive administrative action to amend the August 25, 2016, final rule to include caveats throughout the rule for each section, provision, and clause that was enjoined by the terms of the Court Order. On December 16, 2016, the rule implementing the injunction was published as a final rule (81 FR 91636).

The Court Order did not enjoin implementation of the coverage on paycheck transparency; therefore, the December 16, 2016, amendments did not impact this aspect of the rule. Starting January 1, 2017, this clause was prescribed for solicitations if the estimated value of the resultant contract was to exceed $500,000.

D. H.J. Res. 37 (Pub. L. 115-11)

In March 2017, under the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 8), Congress passed House Joint Resolution 37 (Pub. L. 115-11), which stated the following:

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the Department of Defense, the General Services Administration, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration relating to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (published at 81 FR 58562 (August 25, 2016)), and such rule shall have no force or effect.

On March 27, 2017, House Joint Resolution 37 was signed into law and became Public Law 115-11.

Under 5 U.S.C. 801(b)(1), a rule shall not take effect or continue if the Congress enacts a joint resolution of disapproval, described under 5 U.S.C. 802. Under 5 U.S.C. 801(f), any rule that takes effect and later is made of no force or effect by enactment of a joint resolution under section 802 shall be treated as though such rule had never taken effect.

Congress disapproved the entire FAR rule that was published on August 25, 2016.

As a result, the rule being published today removes that entire rule including the amendments published on December 16, 2016.

By statute, the rule shall be treated as if it had never taken effect. Only FAR 52.222-60, Paycheck Transparency (Executive Order 13673), had gone into effect; it was authorized to be included in solicitations starting on January 1, 2017, and may have been included in recently awarded contracts. This and all other Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces provisions and clauses are unenforceable. See the Applicability paragraph under Dates at the beginning of this preamble for instructions to contracting officers on removal of the clause.

E. Executive Order 13782

On March 27, 2017, the same date on which H.J. Res 37 was signed, President Trump signed E.O. 13782 (82 FR 15607, March 30, 2017). This E.O. revoked E.O. 13673, section 3 of E.O. 13683, and E.O. 13738, which were the authority for the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces rule. E.O. 13782 also directed reconsideration of existing rules, regulations, guidance, guidelines, or policies implementing or enforcing E.O. 13673, section 3 of E.O. 13683, and E.O. 13738. The rule published today also implements E.O. 13782.

Public Law 115-11 and E.O. 13782 did not specifically address the DOL Guidance. However, that Guidance has no legal effect in the absence of the FAR rule. Accordingly, the DOL is publishing its own notice rescinding the DOL Guidance pursuant to Public Law 115-11 and E.O. 13782.

F. Applicability

This rule applies to solicitations issued and contracts awarded before, on, or after October 25, 2016—i.e., the effective date of the final FAR rule published in the Federal Register at 81 FR 58562 on August 25, 2016. All clauses identified in the final FAR rule are unenforceable by law and considered to have never taken effect, even if they were included in a contract. Contracting officers are directed to modify, to the maximum extent practicable, existing contracts to remove any solicitation provisions and contract clauses related to the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces rule because they are unenforceable by law. Since the FAR 52.222-60 clause, Paycheck Transparency (Executive Order 13673), had gone into effect, starting on January 1, 2017, that clause will need to be removed if it was included. Other provisions, i.e., paragraph(s) of FAR 52.212-3, 52.222-57, 52.222-58, 52.222-59, and 52.222-61, had been enjoined by a Court order prior to their effective date and should not have been incorporated into contracts.

II. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. The rule being removed (FAR Case 2014-025) was a significant regulatory action and, therefore, was subject to review under Section 6(b) of E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, dated September 30, 1993. It was a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804. This rule being published today is a significant regulatory action and, therefore, was subject to review under Section 6(b) of E.O. 12866; it has been determined to be a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804. This rule removes a prior rule that had been considered a major rule.

The Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) that included a detailed discussion and explanation about the assumptions and methodology used to estimate the cost of the final rule under FAR Case 2014-025 is available at https://www.regulations.gov as a supporting document under FAR-2014-0025-0933. Exhibit 8 of the RIA presented a summary of the first-year, second-year, and annualized quantifiable costs of implementing the disclosure and paycheck transparency requirements of the final rule to contractors and subcontractors, as well as the estimated Government costs. The chart below shows the total monetized cost in the first and second year, and annualized costs with a 3 and 7 percent discount to contractors and the Government.

Monetized year 1 costs Monetized year 2 costs Annualized costs, 3%
  • discounting
  • Annualized costs, 7%
  • discounting
  • Total employer costs $458,352,949 $413,733,272 $398,541,816 $400,939,861 Government costs 15,772,150 10,129,299 10,944,157 11,091,474 Total 474,075,099 423,862,572 409,535,973 412,031,335

    Most of the 2016 final rule's provisions were preliminarily enjoined before compliance would have been required. (In addition, on March 27, 2017, under E.O. 13782, the President rescinded E.O. 13673, the Order that served as the underpinning of the rule. On the same day, the President signed the Joint Resolution that Congress passed under the Congressional Review Act disapproving the final rule.) Therefore, if the impacts of this final rule are assessed relative to current (and anticipated future) practice, the resulting impacts are negligible. If, on the other hand, this final rule's effects are assessed relative to a baseline in which regulated entities comply with the 2016 final rule, the costs summarized in the preceding table (minus the relatively small portion that may already have been incurred as entities prepared to comply with the regulatory provisions that were not enjoined) would be eliminated as a result of this rulemaking's removal of the 2016 final rule.

    III. Executive Order 13771

    Consistent with E.O. 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017), Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs, and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance on implementing E.O. 13771 (April 5, 2017), the annualized cost savings of $412 million (with a 7 percent discount rate) associated with this final rule have been estimated, as shown in section II, above. (Of particular relevance is the statement in OMB's guidance that costs associated with “regulatory actions overturned by subsequently enacted laws. . . such as disapprovals of rules under the Congressional Review Act” qualify as cost savings under E.O. 13771.) This rulemaking constitutes a deregulatory action under E.O. 13771.

    IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act does not apply to this rule because this final rule does not constitute a significant FAR revision within the meaning of FAR 1.501-1, and 41 U.S.C. 1707 does not require publication for public comment. However, the rule reduces the burden on small entities as it rescinds the August 25, 2016, Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces (FAR Case 2014-025), major rule.

    V. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35) applies to this rule, because this rule removes information collection requirements currently cleared by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under OMB clearance 9000-0195, Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces. The final rule, published August 25, 2016, contained the following summary table of the annual estimated cost to the public of the reporting burden:

    Table 3—Summary of Table 1 Annual Estimated Total Cost to the Public of Reporting Burden Number of respondents 24,183 Responses per respondent 17.3 Total annual responses 417,808 Hours per response 5.19 Total hours 2,166,815 Rate per hour (average) $61.43 Total annual cost to public $133,109,793

    The requirements that would impose these burden hours are now removed from the FAR and OMB clearance 9000-0195 has been discontinued.

    List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 1, 4, 9, 17, 22, 42, and 52

    Government procurement.

    Dated: October 11, 2017. William F. Clark, Director, Office of Government-wide Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of Governmentwide Policy.

    Therefore DoD, GSA, and NASA amend 48 CFR parts 1, 4, 9, 17, 22, 42, and 52 as set forth below:

    1. The authority citation for 48 CFR parts 1, 4, 9, 17, 22, 42, and 52 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    40 U.S.C. 121(c); 10 U.S.C. chapter 137; and 51 U.S.C. 20113.

    PART 1—FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATIONS SYSTEM
    1.106 [Amended]
    2. Amend section 1.106, by removing FAR segments “52.222-57”, “52.222-58”, “52.222-59” and “52.222-60” and their corresponding OMB Control Number “9000-0195”, and the Note to 1.106.
    PART 4—ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
    4.1202 [Amended]
    3. Amend section 4.1202 by removing paragraph (a)(22), and Note to paragraph (a)(22), and redesignating paragraphs (a)(23) through (34) as paragraphs (a)(22) through (33), respectively.
    PART 9—CONTRACTOR QUALIFICATIONS
    9.104-4 [Amended]
    4. Amend section 9.104-4 by removing paragraph (b), and Note to paragraph (b), and redesignating paragraph (c) as paragraph (b).
    9.104-5 [Amended]
    5. Amend section 9.104-5 by removing paragraph (d), and Note to paragraph (d), and redesignating paragraph (e) as paragraph (d). 6. Amend section 9.104-6 by— a. Revising paragraph (b)(4), and removing Note to paragraph (b)(4); and b. Removing paragraph (b)(6), and Note to paragraph (b)(6).

    The revision reads as follows:

    9.104-6 Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System.

    (b) * * *

    (4) Since FAPIIS may contain information on any of the offeror's previous contracts and information covering a five-year period, some of that information may not be relevant to a determination of present responsibility, e.g., a prior administrative action such as debarment or suspension that has expired or otherwise been resolved, or information relating to contracts for completely different products or services.

    9.105-1 [Amended]
    7. Amend section 9.105-1 by removing paragraph (b)(4), and Note to paragraph (b)(4).
    9.105-3 [Amended]
    8. Amend section 9.105-3 by removing from paragraph (a) “9.105-2(b)(2)(iii) and”. PART 17—SPECIAL CONTRACTING METHODS
    17.207 [Amended]
    9. Amend section 17.207 by— a. Removing from paragraph (c)(6) “considered;” and adding “considered; and” in its place; b. Removing from paragraph (c)(7) “ratings; and” and adding “ratings.” in its place; and c. Removing paragraph (c)(8), and Note to paragraph (c)(8). PART 22—APPLICATION OF LABOR LAWS TO GOVERNMENT ACQUISITIONS 10. Revise section 22.000 to read as follows:
    22.0 Scope of part.

    This part—

    (a) Deals with general policies regarding contractor labor relations as they pertain to the acquisition process;

    (b) Prescribes contracting policy and procedures for implementing pertinent labor laws; and

    (c) Prescribes contract clauses with respect to each pertinent labor law.

    11. Amend section 22.102-2 by— a. Revising the section heading and paragraph (c)(1); and b. Removing paragraph (c)(3), and Note to paragraph (c)(3).

    The revision reads as follows:

    22.102-2 Administration.

    (c)(1) The U.S. Department of Labor is responsible for the administration and enforcement of the Occupational Safety and Health Act. The Department of Labor's Wage and Hour Division is responsible for administration and enforcement of numerous wage and hour statutes including—

    (i) 40 U.S.C. chapter 31, subchapter IV, Wage Rate Requirements (Construction);

    (ii) 40 U.S.C. chapter 37, Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards;

    (iii) The Copeland Act (18 U.S.C. 874 and 40 U.S.C. 3145);

    (iv) 41 U.S.C. chapter 65, Contracts for Materials, Supplies, Articles, and Equipment Exceeding $15,000;

    (v) 41 U.S.C. chapter 67, Service Contract Labor Standards.

    22.104 [Removed]
    12. Remove section 22.104. Subpart 22.20 [Removed and Reserved]
    13. Remove and reserve Subpart 22.20. PART 42—CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION AND AUDIT SERVICES
    42.1502 [Amended]
    14. Amend section 42.1502 by removing paragraph (j), and Note to paragraph (j).
    42.1503 [Amended]
    15. Amend section 42.1503 by— a. Removing from paragraph (a)(1)(i) “agency labor compliance advisor (ALCA) office (see subpart 22.20), ” and removing Note to paragraph (a)(1)(i); b. Removing from paragraph (a)(1)(ii) “ALCA,” and removing Note to paragraph (a)(1)(ii); and c. Removing paragraph (h)(5), and Note to paragraph (h)(5) introductory text.
    PART 52—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES 16. Amend section 52.204-8 by— a. Revising the date of the provision; b. Removing paragraph (c)(1)(xvi), and Note to Paragraph (c)(1)(xvi); and c. Redesignating paragraphs (c)(1)(xvii) through (xxv) as (c)(1)(xvi) through (xxiv), respectively.

    The revision reads as follows:

    52.204-8 Annual Representations and Certifications. Annual Representations and Certifications (NOV 2017)
    17. Amend section 52.212-3 by— a. Revising the date of the provision; b. Removing from paragraph (a), the following definitions “Administrative merits determination”, “Arbitral award or decision”, “Civil judgment”, “DOL Guidance”, “Enforcement agency”, “Labor compliance agreement”, Labor laws”, and “Labor law decision”; c. Removing Note to paragraph (a); and d. Removing and reserving paragraph (s), and removing the Note to paragraph (s).

    The revision reads as follows:

    52.212-3 Offeror Representations and Certifications— Commercial Items. Offeror Representations and Certifications—Commercial Items (NOV 2017)
    18. Amend section 52.212-5 by— a. Revising the date of the clause; b. Removing paragraphs (b)(35), Note to paragraph (b)(35), and (b)(36), and redesignating paragraphs (b)(37) through (61) as (b)(35) through (59), respectively; c. Removing paragraphs (e)(1)(xvii), Note to paragraph (e)(1)(xvii), and (e)(1)(xviii), and redesignating paragraphs (e)(1)(xix) through (xxii) as (e)(1)(xvii) through (xxi), respectively; and d. Amending Alternate II by— i. Revising the date of the Alternate; and ii. Removing paragraphs (e)(1)(ii)(P), Note to paragraph (e)(1)(ii)(P), and (e)(1)(ii)(Q) of Alternate II, and redesignating paragraphs (e)(1)(ii)(R) through (U) as (e)(1)(ii)(P) through (S), respectively.

    The revisions read as follows:

    52.212-5 Contract Terms and Conditions Required to Implement Statutes or Executive Orders—Commercial Items. Contract Terms and Conditions Required to Implement Statutes or Executive Orders—Commercial Items (NOV 2017)

    Alternate II (NOV 2017). * * *

    19. Amend section 52.213-4 by revising the date of the clause and paragraph (a)(2)(viii) to read as follows:
    52.213-4 Terms and Conditions—Simplified Acquisitions (Other Than Commercial Items). Terms and Conditions—Simplified Acquisitions (Other Than Commercial Items) (NOV 2017)

    (a) * * *

    (2) * * *

    (viii) 52.244-6, Subcontracts for Commercial Items (NOV 2017)

    52.222-57 through 52.222-61 [Removed and Reserved]
    20. Remove and reserve sections 52.222-57 through 52.222-61. 21. Amend section 52.244-6 by— a. Revising the date of the clause; and b. Removing paragraphs (c)(1)(xiv), Note to paragraph (c)(1)(xiv), and (c)(1)(xv), and redesignating paragraphs (c)(1)(xvi) through (xx) as (c)(1)(xiv) through (xviii), respectively.

    The revision reads as follows:

    52.244-6 Subcontracts for Commercial Items. Subcontracts for Commercial Items (NOV 2017)
    [FR Doc. 2017-23590 Filed: 11/3/2017 8:45 am; Publication Date: 11/6/2017] Editorial Note:

    Rule document 2017-23590 originally published on pages 51527 through 51531 in the issue of Monday, November 6, 2017, with an extraneous Web address inadvertently inserted. The corrected document is published here in its entirety.

    [FR Doc. R1-2017-23590 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1301-00-D
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 622 [Docket No. 141107936-5399-02] RIN 0648-XF810 Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; 2017 Commercial Accountability Measure and Closure for South Atlantic Gray Triggerfish; July Through December Season AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Temporary rule; closure.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS implements accountability measures for commercial gray triggerfish in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of the South Atlantic. NMFS projects commercial landings for gray triggerfish will reach the commercial annual catch limit (ACL) (commercial quota) for the period of July through December by October 29, 2017. Therefore, NMFS is closing the commercial sector for gray triggerfish in the South Atlantic EEZ on November 8, 2017. This closure is necessary to protect the gray triggerfish resource.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective 12:01 a.m., local time, November 8, 2017, until January 1, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mary Vara, NMFS Southeast Regional Office, telephone: 727-824-5305, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The snapper-grouper fishery of the South Atlantic includes gray triggerfish and is managed under the Fishery Management Plan for the Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the South Atlantic Region (FMP). The FMP was prepared by the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council and is implemented by NMFS under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) by regulations at 50 CFR part 622.

    The final rule implementing Amendment 29 to the FMP (80 FR 30947, June 1, 2015) divided the commercial ACL (commercial quota) for gray triggerfish in the South Atlantic into two 6-month commercial fishing seasons and allocated 50 percent of the total commercial quota of 312,324 lb (141,668 kg), round weight, to each of the January 1 through June 30 and July 1 through December 31 fishing seasons, as specified in 50 CFR 622.190(a)(8). As a result, the commercial quota is divided into two equal seasonal quotas of 156,162 lb (70,834 kg), round weight.

    The 2017 July through December quota includes 20,278 lb (9,198 kg), round weight, that was not harvested during the 2017 January through June fishing season. In accordance with 50 CFR 622.190(a)(8)(iii), the unused portion of the 2017 January through June quota was added to the 2017 July through December quota, for an adjusted commercial quota of 176,440 lb (80,032 kg), round weight.

    Under 50 CFR 622.193(q)(1)(i), NMFS is required to close the commercial sector for gray triggerfish when the commercial quota specified in § 622.190(a)(8)(i) or (ii) is reached, or is projected to be reached, by filing a notification to that effect with the Office of the Federal Register. NMFS has determined that the adjusted commercial quota for South Atlantic gray triggerfish will be reached by October 29, 2017. Accordingly, the commercial sector for South Atlantic gray triggerfish is closed effective 12:01 a.m., local time, November 8, 2017, until the start of the next commercial fishing season on January 1, 2018.

    The operator of a vessel with a valid commercial vessel permit for South Atlantic snapper-grouper having gray triggerfish onboard must have landed and bartered, traded, or sold such gray triggerfish prior to 12:01 a.m., local time, November 8, 2017. During the closure, the bag limit specified in 50 CFR 622.187(b)(8), and the possession limits specified in 50 CFR 622.187(c), apply to all harvest or possession of gray triggerfish in or from the South Atlantic EEZ. Also, during the closure, the sale or purchase of gray triggerfish taken from the South Atlantic EEZ is prohibited. The prohibition on the sale or purchase does not apply to gray triggerfish that were harvested, landed ashore, and sold prior to 12:01 a.m., local time, November 8, 2017, and were held in cold storage by a dealer or processor.

    For a person onboard a vessel for which a Federal commercial or charter vessel/headboat permit for the South Atlantic snapper-grouper fishery has been issued, the bag and possession limits and sale and purchase prohibitions applicable after the commercial quota closure for gray triggerfish apply regardless of whether the fish are harvested in state or Federal waters, as specified in 50 CFR 622.193(q)(1)(i).

    Classification

    The Regional Administrator, Southeast Region, NMFS, has determined this temporary rule is necessary for the conservation and management of gray triggerfish and the South Atlantic snapper-grouper fishery and is consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable laws.

    This action is taken under 50 CFR 622.193(q)(1)(i) and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

    These measures are exempt from the procedures of the Regulatory Flexibility Act because the temporary rule is issued without opportunity for prior notice and comment.

    This action responds to the best scientific information available. The NOAA Assistant Administrator for Fisheries (AA), finds that the need to immediately implement this action to close the commercial sector for gray triggerfish constitutes good cause to waive the requirements to provide prior notice and opportunity for public comment pursuant to the authority set forth in 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), as such procedures are unnecessary and contrary to the public interest. Such procedures are unnecessary because the rule implementing Amendment 29, which established the split commercial seasons and quotas for gray triggerfish, and the accountability measures have already been subject to notice and comment, and all that remains is to notify the public of the closure. Such procedures are contrary to the public interest because of the need to immediately implement this action to protect gray triggerfish since the capacity of the fishing fleet allows for rapid harvest of the commercial quota. Prior notice and opportunity for public comment would require time and could potentially result in a harvest well in excess of the established commercial quota.

    For the aforementioned reasons, the AA also finds good cause to waive the 30-day delay in the effectiveness of this action under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: November 3, 2017. Emily Menashes, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24311 Filed 11-3-17; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 648 [Docket No. 161017970-6999-02] RIN 0648-XF806 Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Summer Flounder Fishery; Quota Transfer AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Temporary rule; quota transfer.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS announces that the State of Maine is transferring a portion of its 2017 commercial summer flounder quota to the State of Connecticut. This quota adjustment is necessary to comply with the Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass Fishery Management Plan quota transfer provisions. This announcement informs the public of the revised commercial quotas for Maine and Connecticut.

    DATES:

    Effective November 7, 2017, through December 31, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Cynthia Hanson, Fishery Management Specialist, (978) 281-9180.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Regulations governing the summer flounder fishery are found in 50 CFR 648.100 through 648.110. These regulations require annual specification of a commercial quota that is apportioned among the coastal states from Maine through North Carolina. The process to set the annual commercial quota and the percent allocated to each state is described in § 648.102, and the initial 2017 allocations were published on December 22, 2016 (81 FR 93842).

    The final rule implementing Amendment 5 to the Summer Flounder Fishery Management Plan, as published in the Federal Register on December 17, 1993 (58 FR 65936), provided a mechanism for transferring summer flounder commercial quota from one state to another. Two or more states, under mutual agreement and with the concurrence of the NMFS Greater Atlantic Regional Administrator, can transfer or combine summer flounder commercial quota under § 648.102(c)(2). The Regional Administrator is required to consider the criteria in § 648.102(c)(2)(i)(A) through (C) in the evaluation of requests for quota transfers or combinations.

    Maine is transferring 2,500 lb (1,134 kg) of summer flounder commercial quota to Connecticut. This transfer was requested by state officials in Connecticut to ensure their commercial summer flounder quota is not exceeded. The revised summer flounder quotas for calendar year 2017 are now: Maine, 192 lb (87 kg); and Connecticut, 130,234 lb (59,073 kg); based on the initial quotas published in the 2017 Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass Specifications and subsequent transfers.

    Classification

    This action is taken under 50 CFR part 648 and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: November 3, 2017. Emily H. Menashes, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24321 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 648 [Docket No. 170919911-7911-01] RIN 0648-XF710 Revisions to Framework Adjustment 56 to the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Management Plan AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Final rule; adjustment to specifications.

    SUMMARY:

    We are adjusting the 2017 fishing year Georges Bank cod allocation for the common pool and making minor corrections to the 2017 sector carryover and annual catch entitlement. This action is necessary to respond to a 2016 overage of the Georges Bank cod allocation for the common pool fishery and correct an error in the carryover and annual catch entitlement available to sectors in 2017. These adjustments are routine and formulaic and are intended to ensure that final allocations are based on the best scientific information available.

    DATES:

    Effective November 8, 2017, through April 30, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Emily Keiley, Fishery Management Specialist, (978) 281-9116.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    We recently approved Framework Adjustment 56 to the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Management Plan (FMP), which set annual catch limits (ACLs) for groundfish stocks and three jointly managed U.S./Canada stocks for the 2017 fishing year. This action became effective on August 1, 2017 (82 FR 16133). The possibility of minor adjustments and corrections was noted in the Framework 56 proposed and final rules because final allocations are not always available at the time of the rulemaking for the upcoming fishing year. This action revises the Georges Bank (GB) cod common pool sub-ACL due to a 2016 overage as required by regulation and corrects an error in the 2017 sector carryover and annual catch entitlement (ACE) included in the Framework 56 final rule.

    Georges Bank Cod Common Pool Sub-Annual Catch Limit

    If the common pool sub-ACL for any stock is exceeded, we are required to reduce the common pool sub-ACL by the amount of the overage in the next fishing year. The fishing year 2016 common pool sub-ACL for GB cod was exceeded by 2.8 mt. Therefore, this action reduces the fishing year 2017 GB cod common pool sub-ACL by 2.8 mt resulting in a sub-ACL of 7.0 mt. The revised trimester total allowable catches (TACs), based on the overage deduction, are provided in Table 1.

    Table 1—Initial and Revised Georges Bank Cod Trimester TACs Trimester 1 Trimester 2 Trimester 3 Allocation Percentage 25% 37% 38% Initial Trimester TAC 2.4 mt 3.6 mt 3.7 mt Revised Trimester TAC 1.7 mt 2.6 mt 2.7 mt Correction to Sector Carryover

    The Framework 56 final rule included the amount of allocation that sectors may carry over from the 2016 to the 2017 fishing year based on the final 2016 sector catch. An error was made when calculating the de minimis amount of GB haddock carryover and the total Eastern GB haddock ACE available to sectors in 2017. The corrected Eastern GB haddock ACE available to sectors in 2017 and the revised de minimis carryover ACE for GB haddock are provided in Tables 2 and 3. These adjustments are minor, increase available catch, will not affect fishery operations, and have already been provided to sectors.

    Table 2—Comparison of De Minimis GB Haddock Carryover ACE From Fishing Year 2016 to Fishing Year 2017 (lb) Published in Framework 56 and the Corrected Values Sector Framework 56
  • Table 14
  • Revised
    Fixed Gear Sector 60,981 73,563 MCCS 1 2,679 2,679 NCCS 1 3,379 4,076 NEFS 1 0 0 NEFS 2 102,574 123,738 NEFS 3 486 586 NEFS 4 51,454 62,071 NEFS 5 7,843 9,461 NEFS 6 28,146 33,953 NEFS 7 13,006 15,690 NEFS 8 57,191 68,991 NEFS 9 108,123 130,432 NEFS 10 1,583 1,910 NEFS 11 358 432 NEFS 12 904 1,091 NEFS 13 193,422 233,331 Sustainable Harvest Sector 1 24,260 29,265 Sustainable Harvest Sector 2 3863 4,659 Sustainable Harvest Sector 3 287,713 347,077 Sectors Total 947,965 1,143,005 1 Maine Coast Community Sector (MCCS), Northeast Coastal Community Sector (NCCS).
    Table 3—Comparison of Total Eastern GB Haddock ACE Available to Sectors in Fishing Year 2017 With Finalized Carryover (mt and 1,000 lb) Published in Framework 56 and as Revised Sector Total ACE available to sectors in fishing year 2017 with finalized carryover (mt) Framework 56
  • Table 15
  • Revised (1,000 lb) Framework 56
  • Table 16
  • Revised
    Fixed Gear Sector 1,300 1,871 2,866 4,124 MCCS 197 283 434 625 Maine Permit Bank 9 13 20 29 NCCS 72 104 159 228 NEFS 1 0 0 0 0 NEFS 2 2,187 3,147 4,821 6,937 NEFS 3 10 15 23 33 NEFS 4 1,097 1,578 2,418 3,480 NEFS 5 167 241 369 530 NEFS 6 600 863 1,323 1,903 NEFS 7 277 399 611 880 NEFS 8 1,219 1,754 2,688 3,868 NEFS 9 2,305 3,317 5,081 7,312 NEFS 10 34 49 74 107 NEFS 11 8 11 17 24 NEFS 12 19 28 42 61 NEFS 13 4,123 5,934 9,090 13,081 New Hampshire Permit Bank 0 0 0 0 Sustainable Harvest Sector 1 517 744 1,140 1,641 Sustainable Harvest Sector 2 82 118 182 261 Sustainable Harvest Sector 3 6,133 8,826 13,522 19,458 Sectors Total 20,375 29,295 44,880 64,583
    Classification

    The NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this final rule is consistent with the FMP, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, and other applicable law.

    This action is exempt from the procedures of Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 because this action contains no implementing regulations.

    Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), we find good cause to waive prior public notice and opportunity for public comment on the catch limit and allocation adjustments because allowing time for notice and comment is impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to the public interest. We also find good cause to waive the 30-day delay in effectiveness pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), so that this final rule may become effective upon publication.

    There are several reasons that notice and comment are impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to the public interest. The proposed and final rules for Framework 56 explained the possibility of minor adjustments and corrections because final allocations are not always available at the time of the rulemaking for the upcoming fishing year. These adjustments are routine and formulaic, required by regulation, and necessary to ensure that overfishing does not occur. Because these adjustments are part of the annual allocation process, and are highlighted in the proposed and final rules for the upcoming fishing year, industry anticipates an annual adjustment rule. No comments were received on the potential for these adjustments, which provide an accurate accounting of a sector and common pool allocations. Additionally, the adjustments in this rule are based on either a pre-determined accountability measure, and are not subject to NMFS' discretion, or a need to correct an error, so there would be no benefit to allowing time for prior notice and comment. Data regarding final 2016 catch only became available after publication of the Framework 56 final rule.

    If this rule is not effective immediately, common pool and sector vessels will be operating under incorrect information on the catch limits for each stock. The adjustment of the common pool GB cod TAC requires immediate action to ensure that additional overages do not occur. TAC overages have negative economic impacts, as well as increasing the risk of overfishing. Fishermen may make both short- and long-term business decisions based on the catch limits in a given sector or the common pool. Any delays in adjusting these limits may cause the affected fishing entities to slow down or speed up their fishing activities during the interim period before this rule becomes effective. Both of these reactions could negatively affect the fishery and the businesses and communities that depend on them. Therefore, it is important to implement adjusted catch limits and allocations as soon as possible. For these reasons, we are waiving the public comment period and delay in effectiveness for this rule, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) and (d), respectively.

    The Chief Counsel for Regulation, Department of Commerce, previously certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration at the proposed rule stage that Framework 56 would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. These minor adjustments will not change the conclusions drawn from that framework. Because advanced notice and the opportunity for public comment are not required for the correction under the Administrative Procedure Act, or any other law, the analytical requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq., do not apply to this rule. Therefore, no new regulatory flexibility analysis is required and none has been prepared.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: November 3, 2017. Samuel D. Rauch, III, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24346 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    82 215 Wednesday, November 8, 2017 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2017-0288; Product Identifier 2017-CE-007-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Textron Aviation Inc. Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM); reopening of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    We are revising an earlier proposal for all Textron Aviation Inc. Models A36TC and B36TC airplanes. This action revises the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) by adding all Textron Aviation Inc. Models S35, V35, V35A, and V35B airplanes that have the optional turbocharger engine installed to the applicability and adding an annual visual inspection of the exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling (clamp). We are proposing this airworthiness directive (AD) to address the unsafe condition on these products. Since these actions would impose an additional burden over those in the NPRM, we are reopening the comment period to allow the public the chance to comment on these changes.

    DATES:

    The comment period for the NPRM published in the Federal Register on April 12, 2017 (82 FR 17594), is reopened.

    We must receive comments on this SNPRM by December 26, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

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

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

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

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

    Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-0288; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this SNPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Thomas Teplik, Aerospace Engineer, Wichita ACO Branch, FAA, 1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Wichita, Kansas 67209; phone: (316) 946-4196; fax: (316) 946-4107; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2017-0288; Product Identifier 2017-CE-007-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this SNPRM. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this SNPRM because of those comments.

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

    Discussion

    We issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to Textron Aviation Inc. (Textron) Models A36TC and B36TC airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on April 12, 2017 (82 FR 17594). The NPRM was prompted by a fatal accident where the exhaust tailpipe fell off during takeoff. The NPRM proposed to add a life limit to the exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling (clamp) and, if the coupling is removed for any reason before the life limit is reached, require an inspection of the v-band coupling before reinstalling.

    Actions Since the NPRM Was Issued

    Since we issued the NPRM, we received information that Textron Models S35, V35, V35A, and V35B airplanes could have a turbocharged reciprocating engine installed, either at manufacture as an optional installation or post-manufacture as a supplemental type certificate (STC) installation. Either engine installation would include installation of an affected v-band coupling. We also received comments to the NPRM requesting an annual visual inspection of the v-band couplings and requesting language changes to address the replacement of the engine with a non-turbocharged engine.

    Comments

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

    Request Repetitive Visual Inspections of the V-Band Coupling

    The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) requested we add repetitive visual inspections of the v-band coupling. The NTSB noted that the FAA included repetitive visual inspections of the v-band coupling in a previous AD affecting Piper Aircraft Inc. airplanes. They believe a similar repetitive visual inspection of the v-band coupling for the airplanes affected by this proposed AD, in addition to the proposed life limit, would help identify the cracks before failure.

    We agree with the comment, and we have added a repetitive visual inspection of the v-band coupling to this SNPRM.

    Request To Remove Airplanes Without a Turbocharged Engine From the Applicability

    Gerard Terpstra requested we exclude Model A36TC airplanes that have STC SA3523NM installed from the applicability of the AD. This STC removes the turbocharged engine and replaces it with a turbine engine, which does not include a v-band coupling affected by the proposed AD. Therefore, it would be impossible to comply with the AD.

    We agree with this comment, and we have modified the Applicability, paragraph (c), to only apply to airplanes with engine installations with a turbocharger that include exhaust tailpipe v-band couplings affected by this SNPRM.

    In Favor of the AD

    Thomas P. Turner of the American Bonanza Society Air Safety Foundation responded in favor of the proposed AD action.

    FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design. Certain changes described above expand the scope of the NPRM. As a result, we have determined that it is necessary to reopen the comment period to provide additional opportunity for the public to comment on this SNPRM.

    Proposed Requirements of This SNPRM

    This SNPRM would require repetitive visual inspections of the exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling and add a life limit to the exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling (clamp).

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 731 airplanes of U.S. registry.

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

    Estimated Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Cost on U.S.
  • operators
  • Visual inspection of the exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling (Installed) .5 work-hour × $85 per hour = $42.50 Not applicable $42.50 $31,067.50 Replacement of the exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling 2 work-hours × $85 per hour = $170 $300 470 343,570

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary inspection that would require removal and reinstallation of the exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling. We have no way of determining the number of airplanes that might need this inspection:

    On-Condition Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Inspection of the exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling (Not installed, includes removal and reinstallation) 1.5 work-hours × $127.50 per hour = $127.50 Not applicable $127.50

    We estimate the following costs for the installation of part number N1000897-40 exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling on Models S35, V35, V35A, and V35B airplanes equipped with the Continental TSIO-520-D engine with AiResearch turbocharger during manufacture. We have no way of determining the number of airplanes that may do this installation:

    On-Condition Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Installation of part number N1000897-40 exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling 2 work-hours × $85 per hour = $170 $632 $802
    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

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

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

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

    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Textron Aviation Inc.: Docket No. FAA-2017-0288; Product Identifier 2017-CE-007-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by December 26, 2017.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    (1) This AD applies to the following Textron Aviation Inc. airplanes; all serial numbers, that are certificated in any category:

    (i) Models A36TC and B36TC airplanes equipped with a turbocharged engine.

    (ii) Models S35, V35, V35A, and V35B airplanes equipped with the Continental TSIO-520-D engine with AiResearch turbocharger during manufacture; and

    (iii) Models S35, V35, V35A, and V35B airplanes equipped with StandardAero Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) SA1035WE.

    (2) If the one-piece v-band coupling (clamp), part number (P/N) NH1000897-40, is installed on Textron Aviation Inc. Models S35, V35, V35A, and V35B airplanes equipped with the Continental TSIO-520-D engine with AiResearch turbocharger during manufacture, this AD does not apply to those airplanes.

    (d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 81, Turbocharging.

    (e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a fatal accident where the exhaust tailpipe fell off during takeoff. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of the exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling (clamp) that may lead to detachment of the exhaust tailpipe from the turbocharger and allow high-temperature exhaust gases to enter the engine compartment, which could result in an inflight fire.

    (f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done. For the purposes of this AD, the exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling may also be referred to as the exhaust tailpipe v-band clamp.

    (g) Review of the Maintenance Records

    Within 50 hours time-in-service (TIS) after the effective date of this AD, do a maintenance records review to determine the hours TIS of the exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling. If unable to determine the hours TIS of the exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling, use the compliance time specified in paragraph (h)(2) of this AD.

    (h) Compliance Times for Repetitive Replacement of the V-Band Coupling

    Use the following compliance times in paragraph (h)(1) or (2) for the repetitive replacement of the exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling as specified in paragraph (i) of this AD.

    (1) If from a review of the maintenance records you can positively identify that the hours TIS for the exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling is less than 500 hours TIS: Do the initial replacement within 500 hours TIS on the exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling or within the next 50 hours TIS after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, and replace repetitively thereafter at intervals not to exceed 500 hours TIS on the exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling.

    (2) If from a review of the maintenance records you can positively identify that the hours TIS for the exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling is 500 hours TIS or more or you cannot positively identify the hours TIS for the exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling: Do the initial replacement within 50 hours TIS after the effective date of this AD and replace repetitively thereafter at intervals not to exceed 500 hours TIS on the exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling.

    (i) Replacement of the Exhaust Tailpipe V-Band Coupling

    Replace the exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling for the airplanes in paragraphs (i)(1) through (3) at the applicable compliance time as specified in paragraph (h).

    Note 1 to paragraph (i) of this AD:

    We recommend after installation of the exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling, you do an engine run and recheck the torque of the v-band coupling.

    (1) Models A36TC and B36TC airplanes: Replace the exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling part number (P/N) N4211-375-M or P/N 5322C-375-Z with a new exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling. When installing the new part, tighten the v-band coupling to 40 in-lbs., tap the periphery of the band to distribute tension, and torque again to 40 in-lbs.

    Note 2 to paragraph (i)(1) of this AD:

    P/Ns N4211-375-M and P/N 5322C-375-Z are also known as P/N N4211-375M and P/N 5322C3752. The engineering drawings list the applicable part number v-band couplings as P/N N4211-375-M and P/N 5322C-375-Z; however, the parts catalog lists the applicable v-band couplings as P/N N4211-375M and P/N 5322C3752.

    (2) Models S35, V35, V35A, and V35B airplanes:

    (i) For airplanes equipped with the Continental TSIO-520-D engine with AiResearch turbocharger during manufacture: Replace the exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling P/N U4211-375-M or P/N 4404C375-M with a new exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling. When installing a new P/N U4211-375-M, tighten the v-band coupling to 60 in-lbs., tap the periphery of the band to distribute tension, and torque again to 60 in-lbs. When installing a new P/N 4404C375-M, add 20 in-lbs after the running torque is overcome. Replacement of exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling P/N U4211-375-M or P/N 4404C375-M with the one-piece v-band coupling, P/N NH1000897-40, terminates the requirements of this AD.

    Note 3 to paragraph (i)(2)(i) and (ii) of this AD:

    P/Ns U4211-375-M and 4404C375-M may also be known as P/Ns U4211-375M and 4404C375M or 4404C-375-M.

    (ii) For airplanes equipped with STC SA1035WE: Replace the exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling P/N U4211-375-M with a new exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling. When installing the new part, tighten the v-band coupling to 60 in-lbs., tap the periphery of the band to distribute tension, and torque again to 60 in-lbs.

    (j) Repetitive Visual Inspection of the Installed Exhaust Tailpipe V-Band Coupling

    (1) If you remove the exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling during your annual inspection or within the compliance time specified in paragraph (j)(2) of this AD, you may do the inspection specified in paragraph (k) of this AD in lieu of the inspection required in paragraph (j) of this AD. If you already have the v-band coupling removed, doing the detailed inspection as specified in paragraph (k) of this AD eliminates the possibility of having to remove and reinstall the v-band coupling more than once if certain conditions are found during the inspection required in paragraph (j) of this AD.

    (2) At the next annual inspection after the effective date of this AD or within the next 12 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, and repetitively thereafter at intervals not to exceed 12 months, do a visual inspection of the installed exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling. Use the inspection steps listed in paragraphs (j)(2)(i) through (vii) of this AD.

    (i) Inspect the coupling and area around the coupling for signs of exhaust stains, sooting, or other evidence of exhaust leakage. If any of those conditions are found, remove the coupling and go to the inspection steps in paragraph (k) of this AD for inspection of a v-band coupling that has been removed.

    (ii) Inspect the coupling outer band for cracks, paying particular attention to the spot weld areas. If cracks are found, before further flight, you must replace the v-band coupling with a new v-band coupling and restart the hours TIS for the repetitive replacement of the v-band coupling.

    (iii) Inspect the coupling for looseness or separation of the outer band to the v-retainer segments(s) at all spot welds. If looseness or separation of the outer band to any or multiple retainer segments(s) is found, before further flight, you must replace the v-band coupling with a new v-band coupling and restart the hours TIS for the repetitive replacement of the v-band coupling.

    (iv) Inspect the coupling outer band for cupping, bowing, or crowning. If any of these conditions are found, before further flight, remove the coupling and go to the inspection steps in paragraph (k) of this AD for inspection of a v-band coupling that has been removed.

    (v) Inspect the area of the coupling, including the outer band, opposite the t-bolt for damage or distortion. If any damage or distortion is found, before further flight, you must replace the v-band coupling with a new v-band coupling and restart the hours TIS for the repetitive replacement of the v-band coupling.

    (vi) Using a mirror, verify there is a space between each v-retainer coupling segment below the t-bolt. If there is no space between each v-retainer coupling segment below the t-bolt, before further flight, you must replace the v-band coupling with a new v-band coupling and restart the hours TIS for the repetitive replacement of the v-band coupling.

    (vii) Verify the v-band coupling nut is properly torqued as specified in paragraphs (j)(2)(vii)(A) through (C) of this AD:

    (A) For P/N N4211-375-M or P/N 5322C-375-Z exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling, torque to 40 in-lbs.

    (B) For P/N U4211-375-M exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling, torque to 60 in-lbs.

    (C) For 4404C375-M exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling, verify the nut is secure. If not secure, before further flight, loosen and verify running torque and add 20 in-lbs to the running torque when tightened.

    (3) These inspections do not terminate the 500-hour TIS repetitive replacement of the v-band coupling and do not restart the hours TIS for the repetitive replacement of the v-band coupling.

    (k) Visual Inspection of a Removed Exhaust Tailpipe V-Band Coupling

    (1) If during the visual inspection required in paragraph (j) of this AD you are required to remove of the exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling to do a more detailed inspection, you must do the inspection steps listed in paragraphs (k)(1) and (2) of this AD. If you removed the exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling during the annual inspection or within the compliance time specified in paragraph (j)(2) of this AD, you may do the inspection specified in paragraph (k) of this AD in lieu of the inspection required in paragraph (j) of this AD. If you already have the v-band coupling removed, doing the detailed inspection as specified in paragraph (k) of this AD eliminates the possibility of having to remove and reinstall the v-band coupling more than once if certain conditions are found during the inspection required in paragraph (j) of this AD.

    (i) Use crocus cloth and mineral spirits/Stoddard solvent, to clean the outer band of the v-band coupling. Pay particular attention to the spot weld areas on the coupling. If during cleaning corrosion cannot be removed or pitting of the v-band coupling is found, do not re-install the v-band coupling. Before further flight, you must install a new v-band coupling and restart the hours TIS for the repetitive replacement of the v-band coupling.

    (ii) Use a 10X magnifier to visually inspect the outer band for cracks, paying particular attention to the spot weld areas. If cracks are found during this inspection, do not re-install the v-band coupling. Before further flight, you must install a new v-band coupling and restart the hours TIS for the repetitive replacement of the v-band coupling.

    (iii) Visually inspect the flatness of the outer band using a straight edge. Lay the straight edge across the width of the outer band. The gap must be less than 0.062 inches. See figure 1 to paragraphs (k)(1)(iii) and (v) of this AD. If the gap exceeds 0.062 inches between the outer band and the straight edge, do not re-install the v-band coupling. Before further flight, you must install a new v-band coupling and restart the hours TIS for the repetitive replacement of the v-band coupling.

    EP08NO17.000

    (iv) With the t-bolt in the 12 o'clock position, visually inspect the coupling for the attachment of the outer band to the v-retainer coupling segments by inspecting for gaps between the outer band and the v-retainer coupling segments between approximately the 1 o'clock through 11 o'clock position. It is recommended to use backlighting to see gaps. If gaps between the outer band and the v-retainer coupling segments are found, do not re-install the v-band coupling. Before further flight, you must install a new v-band coupling and restart the hours TIS for the repetitive replacement of the v-band coupling.

    (v) Visually inspect the bend radii of the coupling v-retainer coupling segments for cracks. Inspect the radii throughout the length of the segment. See figure 1 to paragraphs (k)(1)(iii) and (v) of this AD. If any cracks are found, do not re-install the v-band coupling. Before further flight, you must install a new v-band coupling and restart the hours TIS for the repetitive replacement of the v-band coupling.

    (vi) Visually inspect the outer band opposite the t-bolt for damage (distortion, creases, bulging, or cracks), which may be caused from excessive spreading of the coupling during installation and/or removal. If any damage is found, do not re-install the v-band coupling. Before further flight, you must install a new v-band coupling and restart the hours TIS for the repetitive replacement of the v-band coupling.

    (2) If the removed exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling passes all of the inspection steps listed in paragraphs (k)(1)(i) through (vi) of this AD, you may re-install the same v-band coupling. After the coupling is re-installed and torqued as specified in Replacement of the V-Band Coupling, paragraph (i) of this AD, verify there is space between each v-retainer coupling segment below the t-bolt. If there is no space between each v-retainer coupling segment below the t-bolt, before further flight, you must install a new v-band coupling and restart the hours TIS for the repetitive replacement of the v-band coupling.

    (3) The inspections required in paragraphs (k)(1) and (2) of this AD only apply to re-installing the same exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling that was removed as specified in paragraph (j) of this AD. It does not apply to installation of a new v-band coupling. These inspections do not terminate the 500-hour TIS repetitive replacement of the v-band coupling and do not restart the hours TIS for the repetitive replacement of the v-band coupling.

    (4) As of the effective date of this AD, do not install a used exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling on the airplane except for the reinstallation of the inspected exhaust tailpipe v-band coupling that was removed as specified in paragraphs (j) and (k) of this AD.

    (l) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Wichita ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. The Manager, Chicago ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs concerning STC SA1035WE, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the Wichita ACO Branch, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (m) of this AD. If sending information directly to the manager of the Chicago ACO Branch, send it to the attention of John Tallarovic, Aerospace Engineer, AIR-7C3 Chicago ACO Branch, 2300 East Devon Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60018-4696; telephone: (847) 294-8180; fax: (847) 294-7834; email: [email protected]

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

    (m) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Thomas Teplik, Aerospace Engineer, Wichita ACO Branch, FAA, 1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Wichita, Kansas 67209; phone: (316) 946-4196; fax: (316) 946-4107; email: [email protected]

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on October 23, 2017. William Schinstock, Acting Deputy Director, Policy & Innovation Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24065 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Highway Administration 23 CFR Part 490 [FHWA Docket No. FHWA-2017-0025] RIN 2125-AF776 National Performance Management Measures; Assessing Performance of the National Highway System, Freight Movement on the Interstate System, and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program AGENCY:

    Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking; extension of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    The FHWA is extending the comment period for a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) and request for comments, which was published on October 5, 2017. The original comment period is set to close on November 6, 2017. The extension is based on concern expressed by stakeholders that this closing date does not provide sufficient time to review and provide comprehensive comments on the proposal. The FHWA recognizes that others interested in commenting may have similar concerns, but is mindful of commenters who have expressed opposition to a lengthy rulemaking process. Therefore, the closing date for comments is extended, which will provide stakeholders interested in commenting additional time to submit responses to the docket.

    DATES:

    The comment period for the proposed rule published October 5, 2017, at 82 FR 46427, is extended. Comments must be received on or before November 15, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Mail or hand deliver comments to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Dockets Management Facility, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, or submit electronically at http://www.regulations.gov. All comments should include the docket number that appears in the heading of this document. All comments received will be available for examination and copying at the above address from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Those desiring notification of receipt of comments must include a self-addressed, stamped postcard or may print the acknowledgment page that appears after submitting comments electronically. Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70, Pages 19477-78) or you may visit http://www.regulations.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Susanna Hughes-Reck, Office of Infrastructure, (202) 366-1548, or Janet Myers, Office of Chief Counsel, (202) 366-2019, Federal Highway Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Electronic Access and Filing

    You may submit or access all comments received by DOT online through: http://www.regulations.gov. Electronic submission and retrieval help and guidelines are available on the Web site. It is available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. Please follow the instructions. An electronic copy of this document may also be downloaded from the Federal Register's home page at: http://www.federalregister.gov.

    Background

    Section 150 of title 23, U.S.C., identifies the national transportation goals and requires the Secretary by rule to establish performance measures in specified Federal-aid highway program areas. One of the measures FHWA created to assess the performance of the NHS under the National Highway Performance Program (NHPP) is Percent Change in Tailpipe Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Emissions on the NHS from the Calendar Year 2017 (also referred to as the GHG measure). It was created to advance a policy preference of the prior Administration. On October 5th at 82 FR 46427, FHWA published an NPRM proposing to repeal the measure.

    The original comment period for the NPRM closes on November 6, 2017. Clean Air Carolina, Natural Resources Defense Council, Southern Environmental Law Center, U.S. Public Interest Research Group, and The City of New York Law Department have expressed concern that this closing date does not provide sufficient time to review and provide comprehensive comments on the proposal. The FHWA is mindful, however, of requests by the State Department of Transportation of Michigan, Idaho, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming, and Missouri to complete the rulemaking as expeditiously as possible to provide them certainty in their investment and programming activities. As such, FHWA is extending the closing date from November 6, 2017, to November 15, 2017.

    Authority:

    23 U.S.C. 104(b)(1), 119, and 150.

    Brandye L. Hendrickson, Acting Administrator, Federal Highway Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24345 Filed 11-3-17; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 4910-22-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 60 [EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0355; FRL-9970-58-OAR] RIN 2060-AT55 Repeal of Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule; notice of public hearing and extension of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    On October 16, 2017, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a proposal to announce its intention to repeal the Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units, commonly referred to as the Clean Power Plan (CPP), as promulgated on October 23, 2015. The proposal also requested public comment on the proposed rule. The EPA is announcing that a public hearing will be held. In addition, the EPA is extending the public comment period.

    DATES:

    The public hearing for the proposed rule (82 FR 48035) will be held November 28 and 29, 2017. The deadline for accepting written comments is being extended by 32 days to January 16, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    The public hearing will be held on November 28 and 29, 2017, at the West Virginia Capitol Complex, 1900 Kanawha Boulevard East, Charleston, West Virginia 25305. The hearing will convene at 9:00 a.m. (Eastern Standard Time) and will conclude at 5:00 p.m. (Eastern Standard Time). If the EPA receives a high volume of requests, we may continue the public hearing to November 30, 2017, at the Capitol Complex. The EPA may also hold an additional hearing to be announced at a later date. The EPA will make every effort to accommodate all speakers. The EPA's Web site for the rulemaking, which includes the proposal and information about the hearing, can be found at: https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/electric-utility-generating-units-repealing-clean-power-plan. Written comments on the proposed rule may be submitted to the EPA electronically, by mail, by facsimile or through hand delivery/courier. Please refer to the proposal (82 FR 48035) for the addresses and detailed instructions.

    How To Register: If you would like to present oral testimony at the public hearing, registration will begin on November 8, 2017. The last day to register to present oral testimony will be November 16, 2017. To register to speak at the hearing, please use the online registration form available at: https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/electric-utility-generating-units-repealing-clean-power-plan or contact Tanya Johnson at (888) 627-7764; email address: [email protected] We request the following information: The time you wish to speak (morning or afternoon), name, affiliation, email address, and telephone number. If you require the service of a translator or accommodation, please let us know at the time of registration. Once registration closes, the EPA will allocate available morning and afternoon pre-registered speaking slots and confirm those via email starting on November 17, 2017. Please note that updates made to any aspect of the hearing will be posted online at: https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/electric-utility-generating-units-repealing-clean-power-plan. While the EPA expects the hearing to go forward as set forth above, it asks that you monitor its Web site or contact Tanya Johnson at (888) 627-7764; email address [email protected] to determine if there are any updates to the information on the hearing. The EPA does not intend to publish a notice in the Federal Register announcing any such updates.

    Questions concerning the proposed rule that was published in the Federal Register on October 16, 2017, should be addressed to Mr. Peter Tsirigotis, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Sector Policies and Programs Division (D205-01), Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number: (888) 627-7764; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The proposal for which the EPA is holding the public hearing was published in the Federal Register on October 16, 2017, and is available at: https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/electric-utility-generating-units-repealing-clean-power-plan and also in the docket identified below. The public hearing will provide interested parties the opportunity to present oral comments regarding the EPA's proposed repeal, including data, views, or arguments concerning the proposal. The EPA may ask clarifying questions during the oral presentations, but will not respond to the presentations at that time. Written statements and supporting information submitted during the comment period will be considered with the same weight as any oral comments and supporting information presented at the public hearing. The period for providing written comments to the EPA will remain open until January 16, 2018.

    Once the EPA learns how many people have registered to speak at the public hearing, it will allocate speaking times, allowing time for necessary breaks. In addition, a block of time will be reserved for anyone in the audience who wants to give testimony. For planning purposes, each speaker should anticipate speaking for no more than 5 minutes, although we might need to shorten that time if there is a large turnout. The EPA encourages commenters to submit to the docket a copy of their testimony electronically (via email or CD) or in hard copy form.

    The public hearing schedule, including lists of speakers, will be posted on the EPA's Web site at: https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/electric-utility-generating-units-repealing-clean-power-plan. Verbatim transcripts of the hearing and written statements will be included in the docket for the rulemaking. The EPA will make every effort to follow the schedule as closely as possible on the day of the hearing; however, please plan for the hearing to run either ahead of schedule or behind schedule.

    How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    The EPA has established a docket for the proposed rule, “Repeal of Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units” under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0355, available at: http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: November 2, 2017. E. Scott Pruitt, Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24216 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 60 [EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505; FRL-9970-55-OAR] RIN 2060-AT59 Oil and Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standards for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources: Stay of Certain Requirements AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule; notice of data availability.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is issuing this notice of data availability (NODA) in support of the proposed rule titled “Oil and Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standards for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources: Stay of Certain Requirements,” which was published on June 16, 2017. In this document, the EPA is providing additional information on several topics raised by stakeholders and is soliciting comment on the information presented. The two topic areas are the legal authority to issue a stay and the technological, resource, and economic challenges with implementing the fugitive emissions requirements, well site pneumatic pump standards, and the requirements for certification of closed vent systems by a professional engineer. This notice also provides an updated cost savings and forgone benefits analysis for the 2-year stay.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before December 8, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505, at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the Web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Peter Tsirigotis, Sector Policies and Programs Division (D205-01), Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number: (888) 627-7764; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Organization of This Document. The information presented in this document is organized as follows:

    I. Background II. Legal Authority III. Stakeholder Input on Sources' Ability To Implement Requirements A. Fugitive Emissions Requirements B. Well Site Pneumatic Pump Requirements C. Professional Engineering Certification Requirements IV. Estimated Cost Savings, Forgone Benefits, and Net Benefits of the Proposed Stay I. Background

    On June 16, 2017, the EPA proposed to stay for 2 years certain requirements that are contained within the final rule titled “Oil and Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standards for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources,” published in the Federal Register at 81 FR 35824, June 3, 2016 (2016 Rule). This action proposed to stay the fugitive emissions requirements, the well site pneumatic pump requirements, and the requirements for certification of closed vent systems by a professional engineer for 2 years, in order to provide the EPA with sufficient time to propose, take public comment on, and issue a final action on the issues concerning the specific requirements on which the EPA has granted reconsideration. 82 FR 27645, June 16, 2017. While the proposed 2-year stay was based on the time needed to complete a rulemaking to address the issues for which we have granted reconsideration, during this time, the EPA plans to also address all remaining issues raised in these reconsideration petitions regarding fugitive emissions, pneumatic pumps, and certification by professional engineer requirements. The EPA believes that addressing all issues related to these requirements would provide the regulated entities and the general public clarity and certainty regarding these requirements.

    Subsequent to the 82 FR 27645, June 16, 2017, proposal, the Agency has heard a broad range of questions, concerns, and constructive suggestions from stakeholders on how the proposed rule could be improved. This document is not intended to address all of the issues that have been raised; we will summarize and respond to all comments in the final rule. Rather, the purpose of this document is to describe and seek comment on several ideas raised by stakeholders that may go beyond those for which the Agency sought comment in the June 16, 2017, proposal. In this document, we describe the specific issues and ideas raised by stakeholders and explain which of those ideas we consider to be within or possibly beyond the scope of comment already requested. The purpose of this document is to bring these ideas to the attention of other stakeholders and the public so that they may also provide comments to assist in developing a final rule.

    The feedback the EPA has received since proposing the stay relates to the EPA's legal authority to stay these requirements and lack of clarity and other challenges in implementing these three requirements. With respect to the implementation challenges, the commenters recommend, as an alternative to the proposed stay, that the EPA amend the 2016 Rule to extend the periods currently provided in the 2016 Rule for establishing the necessary infrastructure and phasing in the requirements for conducting the initial monitoring survey of fugitive emissions and for routing well site pneumatic pump emissions to onsite controls or processes. The feedback similarly suggests the need for a phase-in period to allow a scale-up of the number of qualified professional engineers to meet the demand imposed by the 2016 Rule. The EPA is soliciting comments on this recommendation. Specifically, the EPA is soliciting relevant data and information, in particular those related to the EPA's analyses and assumptions that were used to establish the phase-in periods in the 2016 Rule, to help inform the EPA why the appropriate duration of these periods may have been underestimated, as the feedback suggests. Further, with respect to the requirement for certification of closed vent systems by a professional engineer, while in the preamble to the 2015 proposed New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) the EPA had suggested such certification as a potential remedy where a storage vessel is improperly designed,1 the final 2016 Rule requires such certification for demonstrating compliance with not only the storage vessel emission standards, but a number of other emission standards, thereby affecting a large number of affected sources.2 According to the feedback received, the immediate high demand for qualified professional engineers to meet this certification requirement has made implementation of this requirement quite challenging. In light of the feedback, the EPA is soliciting comments, data, and any other information that would help the EPA determine whether a phase-in period for this requirement is needed and, if so, the length of such period. While the comment period on the June 16, 2017, proposal closed on August 9, 2017, comments on this action may include further commentary on statements made in the proposed 2-year stay.

    1 80 FR 56649, September 18, 2015.

    2 40 CFR 60.5411a(d).

    This action also provides an updated cost analysis for the 2-year stay, which reflects a revised time frame, as well as corrects a technical error in the initial analysis. This correction results in a slight increase in cost savings associated with the proposed 2-year stay. The EPA has also updated this analysis to include forgone benefits and net benefits from the proposed 2-year stay. For more information, see section IV of this document.

    II. Legal Authority

    The EPA received comments from stakeholders on our legal authority to stay these requirements or otherwise amend the 2016 Rule to extend the “phase-in” periods currently provided in that rule. See Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505-10577. Specifically, noting that these requirements are not mandated by Clean Air Act (CAA) section 111(b)(1)(B), the commenter interprets CAA section 111 as authorizing the EPA to extend compliance deadlines or establish future compliance dates. The commenter also cites section 705 of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) to provide the EPA authority to stay these requirements pending judicial review. The commenter interprets the term “postpone” in section 705 of the APA to include “delay, defer, adjourn, shelve, table, and put on hold.” Id. at 7. Lastly, the commenter argues that the EPA's general rulemaking authority under section 301(a) of the CAA authorizes a rulemaking staying these requirements because “Congress has not written a `clear impediment to the issuance' ” of such stay. Id. at 12 (citations omitted). The EPA solicits comments on these legal theories provided in this comment document. See Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505-10577.

    For the reasons stated below, the EPA has legal authority to amend the 2016 Rule to either stay certain provisions or otherwise revise certain aspects of the rule. The EPA promulgated the 2016 Rule pursuant to section 111(b)(1)(B) of the CAA in accordance with the notice-and-comment rulemaking procedures under section 307(d) of the CAA. 81 FR 35828. The EPA is using the same statutory authority and following the same procedures in the present rulemaking to amend the 2016 Rule to stay certain requirements (as described in the June 16, 2017, proposal) or make the suggested changes to aspects of these requirements as described in this action (i.e., extension or provision of “phase-in” periods). In addition, section 301(a) of the CAA provides the Agency with broad authority to prescribe regulations, including revisions to prior rulemakings, as necessary to carry out the Administrator's authorized functions under the statute. “The power to decide in the first instance carries with it the power to reconsider.” Trujillo v. Gen. Elec. Co., 621 F.2d 1084, 1086 (10th Cir. 1980); see also, United Gas Improvement Co. v. Callery Properties, Inc., 382 U.S. 223, 229 (1965); Mazaleski v. Treusdell, 562 F.2d 701, 720 (D.C. Cir. 1977).

    Section 111 of the CAA requires the EPA to list a source category under that section if, “in [the EPA Administrator's] judgment it causes, or contributes significantly to, air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.” Once a source category is listed, CAA section 111(b)(1)(B) requires that the EPA promulgate “standards of performance” for new sources in such source category. In addition, CAA section 111(b)(1)(B) requires the EPA to “at least every 8 years review and, if appropriate, revise” performance standards unless the “Administrator determines that such review is not appropriate in light of readily available information on the efficacy” of the standard. In 1979, the EPA published a list of source categories, including Oil and Natural Gas, under section 111(b) of the CAA. See Priority List and Additions to the List of Categories of Stationary Sources, 44 FR 49222 (August 21, 1979) (“1979 Priority List”). In 1985, the EPA promulgated NSPS for this source category that addressed volatile organic compound(s) (VOC) emissions from leaking components at onshore natural gas processing plants (40 CFR part 60, subpart LLL) and sulfur dioxide emissions from natural gas processing plants (40 CFR part 60, subpart KKK). In 2012, the EPA conducted its required review under CAA section 111(b)(1)(B), and promulgated NSPS subpart OOOO, which included updates to subparts KKK and LLL standards as well as additional VOC standards for this source category.

    In addition to the mandatory obligations described above, the EPA has discretion under CAA section 111(b)(1)(B) to add new standards of performance for additional pollutants or emission sources not previously covered concurrent with, or independent of, the 8-year review. Pursuant to section 111(b)(1)(B) of the CAA, the EPA has promulgated new performance standards for previously unregulated sources concurrent with the 8-year review. See, e.g., 71 FR 9866 (February 27, 2006) (new particular matter standards for boilers); 73 FR 35838 (June 24, 2008) (new nitrogen oxide standards for additional sources at refineries); 77 FR 49490 (August 16, 2012) (new VOC standards for additional sources at oil and gas facilities). However, the appropriate time for promulgating such new standards may not always align with the 8-year review cycle. See, e.g., 73 FR 35838, 35859. (The EPA did not promulgate performance standards for greenhouse gas emissions as part of the 8-year review of the NSPS for refineries because the Agency was still in the process of gathering information and reviewing controls.) While the EPA could conduct the required periodic review sooner than every 8 years, which would potentially allow the EPA to conduct the review and set additional standards concurrently, the EPA does not believe that the schedule for the statutorily required review should be driven by the timing for promulgating additional performance standards that are discretionary. On the other hand, there is no reason that the EPA's authority and discretion to promulgate such standards should be constrained by the timing of the 8-year review. The EPA, therefore, reasonably interprets CAA section 111(b)(1)(B) to allow the Agency to exercise its discretion to promulgate new performance standards for additional sources or pollutants when appropriate (concurrent with or independent of the 8-year review).

    Pursuant to this authority under section 111(b)(1)(B) of the CAA, the EPA promulgated the 2016 Rule which contained, among other things, a number of new performance standards for emission sources not previously covered, including the fugitive emissions components at well sites and compressor stations, as well as pneumatic pumps at well sites.3 The EPA promulgated the fugitive emissions requirements for well sites and compressor stations pursuant to section 111(h) of the CAA, which authorizes the EPA to set a design, equipment, work practice, or operational standard where it is not technically feasible to prescribe or enforce an emission standard. 80 FR 56593, 56637 (September 18, 2015). A work practice standard generally consists of a set of activities that sources must perform and a time period for completing the activities. See, e.g., 40 CFR 60.632 (180 days from initial startup to comply with the requirements to detect and repair leaks at onshore oil and natural gas processing plants). Similar to existing work practice standards, the fugitive emissions requirements in the 2016 Rule specify a set of activities (e.g., developing an emission monitoring plan, conducting initial and subsequent surveys, repair or replacement, and resurvey of fugitive emissions components according to the plan) and time frames for performing the activities. 40 CFR 60.5397a. Specifically, the 2016 Rule specifies a period of time (i.e., until June 3, 2017, or 60 days after starting up production, whichever is later) for sources to establish the necessary infrastructure, develop a monitoring plan, secure the required personnel and equipment, and conduct the initial monitoring survey of fugitive emissions components at well sites and compressor stations. 81 FR 35858-9 and 35863, June 3, 2016.

    3 The 2016 Rule also includes standards for reducing methane emissions from the oil and natural gas sector, as well as revisions to the previously promulgated Oil and Natural Gas NSPS (40 CFR part 60, subpart OOOO).

    The 2016 Rule similarly did not establish an emission limit for well site pneumatic pumps, but instead requires that emissions from well site pneumatic pumps be routed to an available control or process onsite, unless a qualified professional engineer certifies that it is not technically feasible to do so. As with the fugitive emissions requirements, the 2016 Rule similarly provided a period of time (until November 30, 2016) for owners and operators to conduct the ground work required for routing well site pneumatic pumps to an available onsite control or process (or, if it is not technically feasible to do so, for obtaining a certification by a qualified engineer of the technical infeasibility). 81 FR 35859, June 3, 2016.

    The 2016 Rule also added a requirement that all closed vent systems routing emissions from storage vessels, compressors, and pneumatic pump affected facilities be certified by a qualified professional engineer. This certification requirement is not an emission standard under CAA section 111(a)(1) or a design, equipment, work practice, or operational standard under CAA section 111(h); it is a compliance measure that would provide additional assurance that sources are meeting the emission standards for storage vessels, compressors, and pneumatic pumps. Some of these emission standards, such as those for storage vessels and compressors, were promulgated in 2012 under section 111(b)(1)(B) of the CAA.

    Through the June 16, 2017, action, the EPA is proposing to amend the 2016 Rule to stay the fugitive emissions requirements, the well site pneumatic pump requirements, and the certification requirement described above. Since then, the EPA has received suggestions that, instead of staying these requirements, the EPA extend the current phase-in periods for the fugitive emissions requirements and well site pneumatic pump requirements, as well as providing one for the requirement for certification of closed vent systems by a professional engineer. Agencies have inherent authority to reconsider past decisions and to revise, replace, or repeal a decision to the extent permitted by law and supported by a reasoned explanation. FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 556 U.S. 502, 515 (2009); Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass'n v. State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co., 463 U.S. 29, 42 (1983) (“State Farm”). This includes a decision regarding the appropriate length of the phase-in periods provided in the 2016 Rule for specific requirements, as well as whether to provide one for phasing in an additional compliance assurance measure, or whether to stay these three requirements at issue while they are being revised through rulemaking.

    Section 301(a) of the CAA provides the EPA with broad rulemaking authority to carry out the CAA. Notwithstanding the potential constraint that other parts of the CAA may have on the EPA's authority to stay a rule pursuant to CAA section 301(a), see Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. Reilly, 976 F.2d 36, 41 (D.C. Cir. 1992), there is no such constraint here with respect to staying the fugitive emissions requirements, the well site pneumatic pump requirements, and the certification requirement in the 2016 Rule, the promulgation of which was discretionary and not compelled by CAA section 111(b)(1)(B). In a case analyzing a similar general rulemaking authority granted to the Federal Reserve Board by the Truth in Lending Act, the Supreme Court held quite broadly that, where “the empowering provision of a statute states simply that an agency may make such rules and regulations as necessary to carry out the provisions of an act, the validity of a regulation promulgated thereunder will be sustained so long as it is `reasonably related to the purposes of the enabling legislation.' ” Mourning v. Family Publications Service, Inc., 411 U.S. 356, 369 (1973) (quoting Thorpe v. Housing Authority of City of Durham, 393 U.S. 268, 280-81 (1969)). In a CAA section 301(a) case, the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals held that CAA section 301(a) authorizes the EPA to use rulemaking to issue the enhanced vehicle inspection and maintenance programs guidance under section 182 of the CAA. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc. v. EPA, 22 F.3d 1125 (D.C. Cir. 1994). Noting the absence of any provision in CAA section 182 preventing issuing such guidance through rulemaking, the Court deferred to the Agency's determination that the regulation was necessary as long as it provided a reasoned explanation. Id. at 1148.

    The EPA's proposed stay, as well as the stakeholder-suggested extension or provision of “phase-in” periods for the three requirements at issue, is consistent with the purposes of the CAA and, therefore, authorized under section 301(a) of the CAA. The EPA promulgated these requirements for purposes of achieving meaningful emission reductions under the regulatory schemes established in the 2016 Rule to complement other emission reduction efforts and address certain challenges (e.g., technical infeasibility and time needed for building up for necessary equipment and trained personnel). For instance, the EPA promulgated both the fugitive emissions requirements and a process for applying and obtaining an alternative means of emissions limitations (AMEL) with the clear intent to achieve emission reductions from currently uncontrolled sources while still allowing sources subject to effective existing state fugitive emissions programs an avenue to continue implementing such programs, as well as to encourage the use of innovative technology. Therefore, in promulgating the fugitive emissions requirements, the EPA clearly intended and anticipated the implementation of alternatives in lieu of such requirements. However, stakeholders indicated that this purpose of the 2016 Rule was frustrated by the fact that the current AMEL provisions are not sufficiently clear to allow sources to take advantage of them. Stakeholders suggested that further revision or clarification would be required before sources can apply and obtain approval to use an innovative technology or implement their current state program in lieu of the 2016 Rule requirements. The EPA received input from stakeholders stating that without staying the fugitive emissions requirements pending the EPA's reconsideration, the regulated entities would incur significant and potentially unnecessary additional costs and compliance burden to implement the 2016 Rule, and, in some cases, at the expense of disrupting or complicating compliance with applicable state programs, just to later revert back to what they were doing in the first place. These were the consequences that the EPA sought to avoid by promulgating the AMEL in the 2016 Rule. While not all states have fugitive emissions programs, considering that many states with high oil and gas production do have such programs in place,4 it is not clear that the marginal additional emission reductions achieved during the EPA's reconsideration process outweigh the potential disruption to existing state programs and company-specific programs. In light of the discussion above, the EPA believes that the proposed stay of the fugitive emission requirements pending its reconsideration process is reasonable and authorized under sections 111 and 301 of the CAA.

    4 Including California, Colorado, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming.

    With respect to the well site pneumatic pump requirements, the 2016 Rule acknowledges that routing the pneumatic pump emissions to an available onsite control or process may not always be technically feasible and, therefore, provides a technical infeasibility exemption for such routing except for pneumatic pumps located at a “greenfield site.” However, some sources could not tell based on the 2016 Rule definition of “greenfield site,” which was not proposed for notice and comment, whether they are “greenfield sites,” even though they are encountering technical infeasibility, and, therefore, risk being in noncompliance. Delaying these requirements until the EPA resolves this potential problem through its reconsideration process is consistent with the 2016 Rule to require emission reductions from well site pneumatic pumps only where it is technically feasible to do so.

    Lastly, as mentioned above, the closed vent certification by professional engineer requirement is a compliance measure included in the 2016 Rule to provide additional assurance that sources are meeting the emission standards for a wide range of equipment, some of which have been in place since 2012. The EPA granted reconsideration of this requirement because the EPA had not considered its cost and whether the additional assurance justifies such expenditure. The EPA's proposed stay while conducting this evaluation is clearly consistent with section 111 of the CAA, which expressly identifies cost as a factor for consideration when promulgating emission standards. See CAA section 111(a)(1).

    For the reasons stated above, both the proposed stay and the suggestion by stakeholders to extend (or provide) the phase-in periods are lawful exercises of the EPA's statutory authority and discretion under the CAA. The EPA solicits comment on the EPA's legal authorities for taking these actions. In addition, as mentioned above, the EPA solicits comment on stakeholder input 5 on the EPA's legal authorities to take these actions.

    5 See, for example, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505-10577 and Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505-12142.

    III. Stakeholder Input on Sources' Ability To Implement Requirements

    In the June 16, 2017, proposal, the EPA explained that it is proposing to stay the requirements at issue pending reconsideration due to its concern that sources should not be compelled to comply with these requirements pending the EPA's reconsideration of issues associated with these requirements, as these issues impact the ability of a wide range of sources to achieve and show compliance with their applicable standards. 82 FR 27646-8, June 16, 2017. In that action, the EPA proposed to amend the 2016 Rule by staying these requirements pending reconsideration.

    Since proposing to stay the requirements pending reconsideration, the EPA received feedback from some stakeholders indicating that there are additional issues affecting sources' ability to implement the above mentioned requirements besides those for which the EPA has granted reconsideration.6 Some stakeholders suggested that the EPA should amend the 2016 Rule by extending the “phase-in” periods provided in the 2016 Rule for a build-up of the number of trained personnel (i.e., certified monitoring survey contractors, qualified professional engineers) and equipment (i.e., monitoring instruments) required to meet the demand imposed by the fugitive emissions requirements and the well site pneumatic pump requirements. The EPA anticipated that during these periods, “sources will begin to phase in these requirements as additional devices and personnel become available.” 81 FR 35859 and 35863, June 3, 2016. We solicit comment on the suggestion that these periods be extended.

    6 See, for example, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505-11108 and Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505-12337.

    Some stakeholders suggested that these concerns may also exist with respect to other provisions requiring professional engineer certifications. The EPA solicits comment on whether to similarly provide a phase-in period to allow a scale-up of the number of qualified professional engineers to meet the demand imposed by the 2016 Rule, which requires certification by such professionals of (1) the closed vent systems routing emissions from various equipment and (2) technical infeasibility of routing emissions from a well site pneumatic pump to an existing control device or process onsite. The EPA additionally solicits comment on the length of the phase-in period necessary in order to achieve this scale-up.

    As mentioned above, the EPA previously anticipated that some of these issues might be present for a more limited period and, therefore, provided in the 2016 Rule a “phase-in” period for both the fugitive emissions requirements and the pneumatic pump requirements. 81 FR 35851, 35858-9, 35863, June 3, 2016. Specifically, in regards to the fugitive emissions requirements, in light of the large number of sources, the EPA concluded that time was needed to allow an increase in production of the required equipment and scale-up of trained personnel, as well as for sources to establish the groundwork and secure the necessary monitoring equipment and personnel. The 2016 Rule, therefore, provided a “phase-in” period by allowing sources to conduct initial monitoring by June 3, 2017, or within 60 days after production starts, whichever is later. 81 FR 35858-9, 35863, June 3, 2016. Some stakeholders suggested that some sources continue to have difficulty securing the necessary equipment and/or personnel to conduct the required monitoring survey of fugitive emissions. For a similar reason, the 2016 Rule provided a phase-in period until November 30, 2016, to connect well site pneumatic pumps to an existing control or process onsite. 81 FR 35851, June 3, 2016.

    However, some stakeholders suggested that the time provided in the 2016 Rule may not have been adequate to accommodate the number of affected sources subject to these requirements. In addition, some stakeholders indicated that sources that must now comply with these requirements upon startup may be particularly affected by these challenges. Therefore, the EPA solicits comment and information on these challenges that sources are experiencing in carrying out these requirements. Further, the EPA is soliciting comment on whether, in light of the numerous ongoing compliance issues, the EPA should amend the above mentioned phase-in periods in the 2016 Rule instead of simply staying the requirements. The EPA additionally is soliciting comment on the appropriate length of a phase-in period to address the challenges sources are experiencing in carrying out the requirements in the 2016 Rule. A stay would mean that sources do not have to comply while the stay is in place. It would not, however, change any dates in the 2016 Rule. This could create some uncertainty for sources regarding their obligations upon expiration of the stay. A change to the phase-in periods (or the addition of such a period where the rule does not currently provide one) could provide greater certainty to sources.

    Some stakeholders suggested that the challenges regarding acquiring necessary equipment and trained personnel may also exist with respect to the requirement of certification of closed vent systems by a professional engineer. We note that the 2016 Rule does not have a phase-in period associated with the closed vent system certification by professional engineer requirement, which must be met by a wide range of sources (i.e., storage vessels, compressors, and pneumatic pumps), even though the EPA acknowledged that securing such professional engineer certification may take time. 81 FR 35851, June 3, 2016. The EPA, therefore, solicits comment on whether time (and how much) should be provided to allow a further building up of the number of professional engineers experienced in these requirements to meet the demand posed by this certification requirement.

    As mentioned above, the EPA solicits comment on the appropriate length of time needed to address the challenges sources are experiencing in carrying out these requirements in the 2016 Rule and the suggestion to extend the “phase-in” periods established in the 2016 Rule for the fugitive emissions requirements and the well site pneumatic pump requirements, as well as the suggestion to provide a phase-in period for the requirement for certification of closed vent systems by a professional engineer.

    A. Fugitive Emissions Requirements

    The EPA proposed to stay for 2 years the fugitive emissions requirements at well sites and compressor stations while it reconsiders the process and criteria for requesting and receiving approval for the use of an AMEL and the applicability of the fugitive emissions requirements to low production well sites. 82 FR 27646, June 16, 2017. These issues determine the universe of sources that must implement the fugitive emissions requirements. Id. The EPA has received feedback from some stakeholders that securing certified monitoring survey contractors and monitoring instruments has been more difficult than predicted, and, therefore, the EPA is soliciting comment on the availability of contractors and monitoring instruments, and the impact on owners and operators complying with the requirements of the 2016 Rule. The EPA is soliciting comment on extending the phase-in period and the appropriate length of the phase-in period to allow for an adequate build-up of the personnel and equipment required for meeting the fugitive emissions requirements. Specifically, the EPA solicits comment on whether the impact of this requirement and any feasibility issues are relevant to few sources or a systemic issue related to many sources.

    The EPA also received feedback regarding the applicability of the fugitive emissions requirements to third-party equipment at well sites which is ancillary to production (e.g., equipment such as meters owned by midstream operators). The 2016 Rule requires that all fugitive emissions components at a well site be monitored and repaired, but there has been confusion as to the appropriate scope of components that are included in the definition of the well site for the fugitive emissions requirements. During the public comment period on the 2016 Rule, the EPA received feedback that ancillary midstream assets (e.g., meters) should be excluded from the fugitive emissions requirements because they are owned by legally distinct companies from the well site owner and operator and could have limited emissions.7 The EPA's response to this comment was to state in its Response to Comments that “the resolution for any leaking components identified during surveys can be managed by the operator through cooperative agreements with other potential owners at the site.” 8 The EPA has since received feedback that there are complicated site configurations and contractual arrangements that the EPA did not consider in the 2016 Rule that could prevent compliance, including situations where the third-party equipment could be made subject to the 2016 Rule based on actions made by another operator.9 The EPA is soliciting comment on this feedback, specifically, legal and logistical issues that could prevent midstream operators, or other operators of ancillary third-party equipment, from compliance with the 2016 Rule, and suggestions for addressing this issue. The EPA additionally solicits comment on the number of contracts that would need to be renegotiated and associated burden. The EPA is further soliciting comment on whether, in light of the above, the EPA should stay or otherwise extend the phase-in period as it applies to third-party equipment on well sites until after the EPA has addressed this compliance issue.

    7 See Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505-7237.

    8 See Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505-7632, p. 4-282.

    9 See Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505-12245 and Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0346-0328.

    The EPA additionally received feedback regarding technical, safety, and environmental issues associated with the delay of repair provisions in the 2016 Rule. The EPA proposed that if “repair or replacement [of a leaking fugitive emissions component] is technically infeasible or unsafe to repair during operation of the unit, the repair or replacement must be completed during the next scheduled shutdown or within 6 months, whichever is earlier.” 80 FR 56668, September 18, 2015. Stakeholders responded with concerns about “delays lasting longer than six months due to availability of supplies needed to complete repairs and information regarding the frequency of delayed repairs. Some commenters also indicated that in some cases, requiring prompt repairs could lead to more emissions than if repairs were able to be delayed, for example if a well shut-in or vent blow-down is required.” 81 FR 35858, June 3, 2016. In response to these comments, the EPA extended the time a component can be placed on delay of repair from 6 months to 2 years, and, in conjunction with this extension, added that “however, if an unscheduled or emergency vent blowdown, compressor station shutdown, well shutdown, or well shut-in occurs during the delay of repair period, the fugitive emissions components would need to be fixed at that time.” Id.

    Since publication of the 2016 Rule, the EPA has received feedback that requiring repair or replacement of fugitive emissions components during unscheduled or emergency vent blowdowns could result in natural gas supply disruptions, safety concerns, and increased emissions.10 In particular, stakeholder feedback suggests that compliance with this provision could result in prolonged shutdowns impacting natural gas supply if necessary parts and skilled labor is unavailable, and avoidable blowdowns resulting in greater emissions than the leaking component.11 This feedback additionally indicates that these events may not necessarily result in the blowdown of all equipment located onsite and, thus, the equipment needing repair may not have been affected by the blowdown.12 13 The EPA is soliciting comment on this feedback, specifically, the shutdown, shut-in, or blowdown scenarios that result in the technical, safety, and environmental issues described, and suggestions for addressing these issues. The EPA is further soliciting comment on whether, in light of the above, the EPA should stay or otherwise extend the phase-in period as it applies to equipment requiring delay of repair at well sites and compressor stations until after the EPA has addressed this compliance issue.

    10 See Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0346-0328 and Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505-12245.

    11Id.

    12Id.

    13 Blowdown refers to the release of entrained gas from equipment that causes a reduction in system pressure or a complete depressurization. For example, a blowdown may occur to reduce line pressure and discharge gas to ensure safe working conditions during maintenance and repair activities.

    B. Well Site Pneumatic Pump Requirements

    The EPA proposed to stay for 2 years the requirements for well site pneumatic pump standards while it reconsiders the technical infeasibility exemption and the definition of “greenfield site.” 82 FR 27647, June 16, 2017. The EPA acknowledges that the technical infeasibility exemption that the EPA finalized in the 2016 Rule adopted a different approach than previously applied to the oil and gas industry and created an unanticipated and unnoticed distinction between “greenfield” (new development) and “non-greenfield” sites. For a discussion on the technical infeasibility exemption provided in the 2016 Rule, please see 81 FR 35844-5, June 3, 2016. Some stakeholders have suggested that this distinction has caused confusion among owners and operators on what sites qualify for the technical infeasibility exemption. The EPA received stakeholder feedback that some owners and operators may have been unintentionally restricted in the design of new sites that, for technical reasons, could not employ controls or processes for certain pneumatic pump installations. The EPA is soliciting comment on technical constraints of new “greenfield” sites and specific site designs such as these which present challenges in implementing the well site pneumatic pump requirements in the 2016 Rule. The EPA is, therefore, soliciting comment on extending the phase-in period for 2 years, the time period the EPA estimates its reconsideration process and the issuance of the resulting rule would take, so that the EPA may provide the necessary clarification or revision in conjunction with its reconsideration process, thereby addressing all issues in one rulemaking. The EPA is also soliciting comment on extending the phase-in period and the appropriate length of the phase-in period for the well site pneumatic pump requirements as an alternative to the proposed stay of these requirements.

    C. Professional Engineering Certification Requirements

    The EPA proposed to stay for 2 years the requirement for closed vent system certification by professional engineer while the EPA evaluates the benefits, as well as the cost and other compliance burden, associated with this requirement. 82 FR 27647, June 16, 2017. Such costs and associated burden are significant in light of the number of affected sources. Based on the EPA's estimates, approximately 16,000 affected sources (i.e., pneumatic pumps, compressors, and storage vessels) came online between the proposed rule and the final 2016 Rule, not counting those that have and will come online since. The EPA received feedback that owners and operators had to reanalyze and potentially redesign the closed vent systems in order to meet this certification requirement. Subsequent to the proposed stay, the EPA received feedback from some stakeholders that owners and operators have struggled to obtain professional engineers to complete these certifications primarily because of a shortage of professional engineers certified in each state of operation with experience in the design of these systems. In light of this, the EPA is soliciting comment on the availability of professional engineers qualified in each state of operation and experienced in the oil and gas field and the costs associated with completing the certification requirements in the 2016 Rule. The EPA additionally solicits comment on the costs of reanalyzing and redesigning sites in order to comply with the requirements of the 2016 Rule. Lastly, in light of the challenges described above, the EPA is soliciting comment on providing a period to phase in this certification period as an alternative to staying this requirement. The EPA emphasizes that the proposed stay for this certification requirement would not affect sources' obligation to meet the underlying applicable emission standards during that time frame. As explained above, this certification requirement is not an emission standard, but a compliance measure to provide additional assurance that the emission standards are being met.

    IV. Estimated Cost Savings, Forgone Benefits, and Net Benefits of the Proposed Stay

    Since the June 16, 2017, proposal, the EPA has updated the economic analysis presented in the proposed stay to include estimates of the forgone benefits associated with the proposed rule. In addition, the updated analysis reflects a revised time frame and corrects a technical error in the calculation of cost savings, resulting in a minor increase in cost savings associated with the proposed rule. The previous analysis assumed that the proposed 2-year stay would cover the time period from September 2017 through September 2019. As September has passed, the analysis has been updated to reflect a time frame beginning in January 2018 and ending in December 2019.

    The present value of the updated cost savings of the proposed stay are $270 million at a discount rate of 7 percent and $280 million at a discount rate of 3 percent. The present value of the forgone climate benefits using the domestic social cost of methane estimates are $11 million at 7 percent and $37 million at 3 percent. The present value of net benefits is $250 million at 7 percent, and $240 million at 3 percent.

    The equivalent annualized values of the cost savings are $100 million per year when using a 7-percent discount rate and $99 million per year using a 3-percent discount rate. The equivalent annualized values are the annualized present values, or the even flow of the present values, over the years affected by the proposal. The equivalent annualized value of the forgone climate benefits is $4.3 million per year at 7 percent and $13 million per year at 3 percent. The equivalent annualized value of net benefits is $97 million per year at 7 percent, and $86 million per year at 3 percent. Please see the memorandum “Estimated Cost Savings and Forgone Benefits Associated with the Proposed Rule, Oil and Natural Gas: Emission Standards for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources: Stay of Certain Requirements” available in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505 for details.

    Dated: November 1, 2017. E. Scott Pruitt, Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24344 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 60 [EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0346; FRL-9970-56-OAR] RIN 2060-AT65 Oil and Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standards for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources: Three Month Stay of Certain Requirements AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule; notice of data availability.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is issuing this notice of data availability (NODA) in support of the proposed rule titled “Oil and Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standards for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources: Three Month Stay of Certain Requirements,” which was published on June 16, 2017. In this document, the EPA is providing additional information on topics raised by stakeholders and is soliciting comment on the information presented.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before December 8, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0346, at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the Web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Peter Tsirigotis, Sector Policies and Programs Division (D205-01), Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number: (888) 627-7764; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Organization of This Document. The information presented in this document is organized as follows:

    I. Background II. Legal Authority III. Stakeholder Input on Sources' Ability To Implement Requirements A. Fugitive Emissions Requirements B. Well Site Pneumatic Pump Requirements C. Professional Engineering Certification Requirements I. Background

    On June 16, 2017, the EPA proposed to stay for 2 years certain requirements that are contained within the final rule titled “Oil and Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standards for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources,” published in the Federal Register at 81 FR 35824, June 3, 2016 (2016 Rule). This action proposed to stay the fugitive emissions requirements, the well site pneumatic pump requirements, and the requirements for certification of closed vent systems by a professional engineer for 2 years, in order to provide the EPA with sufficient time to propose, take public comment on, and issue a final action on the issues concerning the specific requirements on which the EPA has granted reconsideration. 82 FR 27645, June 16, 2017.

    The 2-year proposed stay, if finalized as proposed, would likely be determined to be a major rule under the Congressional Review Act. Therefore, the 2-year stay would not take effect until 60 days after publication or after Congress receives the rule report, whichever is later. To avoid such a potential delay, the EPA concurrently proposed on June 16, 2017, a 3-month stay which would not qualify as a major rule and could become effective upon publication. 82 FR 27641. As such, the legal and factual basis for the shorter stay are the same as those for the proposed longer stay, except that the shorter stay is intended to cover only the period before the longer stay takes effect should the EPA finalize both rules.

    Subsequent to the June 16, 2017, proposals (82 FR 27641 and 82 FR 27645), the Agency has heard a broad range of questions, concerns, and constructive suggestions from stakeholders on how the proposed stays could be improved. Since the legal and factual basis for both the proposed shorter and longer stays are the same, this feedback is relevant to both proposals. Therefore, we are issuing a NODA regarding this feedback in both rulemakings. Similar to the NODA for the proposed 2-year stay also published today, this NODA for the proposed 3-month stay is not intended to address all of the issues that have been raised. Rather, the purpose of this document is to describe and seek comment on several ideas with respect to the proposed stay raised by stakeholders that may go beyond those for which the Agency sought comment in the June 16, 2017, proposals. In this document, we describe the specific issues and ideas raised by stakeholders and explain which of those ideas we consider to be within or possibly beyond the scope of comment already requested. The purpose of this document is to bring these ideas to the attention of other stakeholders and the public so that they may also provide comments to assist in developing a final rule.

    The feedback the EPA has received since proposing the stays relates to the EPA's legal authority to stay these requirements and lack of clarity and other challenges in implementing these three requirements. With respect to the implementation challenges, the commenters recommend, as an alternative to the proposed stays, that the EPA amend the 2016 Rule to extend the periods currently provided in the 2016 Rule for establishing the necessary infrastructure and phasing in the requirements for conducting the initial monitoring survey of fugitive emissions and for routing well site pneumatic pump emissions to onsite controls or processes. The feedback similarly suggests the need for a phase-in period to allow a scale-up of the number of qualified professional engineers to meet the demand imposed by the 2016 Rule. The EPA is soliciting comments on this recommendation. Specifically, the EPA is soliciting relevant data and information, in particular those related to the EPA's analyses and assumptions that were used to establish the phase-in periods in the 2016 Rule, to help inform the EPA why the appropriate duration of these periods may have been underestimated, as the feedback suggests. Further, with respect to the requirement for certification of closed vent systems by a professional engineer, while in the preamble to the 2015 proposed new source performance standards (NSPS) the EPA had suggested such certification as a potential remedy where a storage vessel is improperly designed,1 the final 2016 Rule requires such certification for demonstrating compliance with not only the storage vessel emission standards, but a number of other emission standards, thereby affecting a large number of affected sources.2 According to the feedback received, the immediate high demand for qualified professional engineers to meet this certification requirement has made implementation of this requirement quite challenging. In light of the feedback, the EPA is soliciting comments, data, and any other information that would help the EPA determine whether a phase-in period for this requirement is needed and, if so, the length of such period.

    1 80 FR 56649, September 18, 2015.

    2 40 CFR 60.5411a(d).

    As in the NODA for the proposed 2-year stay, the EPA is soliciting comment on this feedback, including whether a phase-in period would be an appropriate alternative to the proposed stay. The EPA is soliciting comment on whether a phase-in period would provide relief for implementation challenges described in this NODA and expedite regulatory certainty for owners and operators. While the comment period on the June 16, 2017, proposal for a 3-month stay closed on August 9, 2017, comments on this notice may include additional comments on statements made in that proposal.

    II. Legal Authority

    The EPA received comments from stakeholders on our legal authority to stay these requirements or otherwise amend the 2016 Rule to extend the “phase-in” periods currently provided in that rule.3 See Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505-10577. Specifically, noting that these requirements are not mandated by Clean Air Act (CAA) section 111(b)(1)(B), the commenter interprets CAA section 111 as authorizing the EPA to extend compliance deadlines or establish future compliance dates. The commenter also cites section 705 of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) to provide the EPA authority to stay these requirements pending judicial review. The commenter interprets the term “postpone” in section 705 of the APA to include “delay, defer, adjourn, shelve, table, and put on hold.” Id. at 7. Lastly, the commenter argues that the EPA's general rulemaking authority under section 301(a) of the CAA authorizes a rulemaking staying these requirements because “Congress has not written a `clear impediment to the issuance' ” of such stay. Id. at 12 (citations omitted). The EPA solicits comments on these legal theories provided in this comment document. See Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505-10577.

    3 While this document specifically addresses the proposed 2-year stay (82 FR 27645, June 16, 2017), it is discussing the EPA's legal authority to stay a rule and, as such, is relevant to the proposed 3-month stay.

    For the reasons stated below, the EPA has legal authority to amend the 2016 Rule to either stay certain provisions or otherwise revise certain aspects of the rule. The EPA promulgated the 2016 Rule pursuant to section 111(b)(1)(B) of the CAA in accordance with the notice-and-comment rulemaking procedures under section 307(d) of the CAA. 81 FR 35828, June 3, 2016. The EPA is using the same statutory authority and following the same procedures in the present rulemaking to amend the 2016 Rule to stay certain requirements for 3 months (as described in the June 16, 2017, notice) or make the suggested changes to aspects of these requirements as described in this action (i.e., extension or provision of “phase-in” periods). In addition, section 301(a) of the CAA provides the Agency with broad authority to prescribe regulations, including revisions to prior rulemakings, as necessary to carry out the Administrator's authorized functions under the statute. “The power to decide in the first instance carries with it the power to reconsider.” Trujillo v. Gen. Elec. Co., 621 F.2d 1084, 1086 (10th Cir. 1980); see also, United Gas Improvement Co. v. Callery Properties, Inc., 382 U.S. 223, 229 (1965); Mazaleski v. Treusdell, 562 F.2d 701, 720 (D.C. Cir. 1977).

    Section 111 of the CAA requires the EPA to list a source category under that section if, “in [the EPA Administrator's] judgment it causes, or contributes significantly to, air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.” Once a source category is listed, CAA section 111(b)(1)(B) requires that the EPA promulgate “standards of performance” for new sources in such source category. In addition, CAA section 111(b)(1)(B) requires the EPA to “at least every 8 years review and, if appropriate, revise” performance standards unless the “Administrator determines that such review is not appropriate in light of readily available information on the efficacy” of the standard. In 1979, the EPA published a list of source categories, including Oil and Natural Gas, under section 111(b) of the CAA. See Priority List and Additions to the List of Categories of Stationary Sources, 44 FR 49222 (August 21, 1979) (“1979 Priority List”). In 1985, the EPA promulgated NSPS for this source category that addressed volatile organic compound(s) (VOC) emissions from leaking components at onshore natural gas processing plants (40 CFR part 60, subpart LLL) and sulfur dioxide emissions from natural gas processing plants (40 CFR part 60, subpart KKK). In 2012, the EPA conducted its required review under CAA section 111(b)(1)(B), and promulgated NSPS subpart OOOO, which included updates to subparts KKK and LLL standards, as well as additional VOC standards for this source category.

    In addition to the mandatory obligations described above, the EPA has discretion under CAA section 111(b)(1)(B) to add new standards of performance for additional pollutants or emission sources not previously covered concurrent with, or independent of, the 8-year review. Pursuant to section 111(b)(1)(B) of the CAA, the EPA has promulgated new performance standards for previously unregulated sources concurrent with the 8-year review. See, e.g., 71 FR 9866 (February 27, 2006) (new particular matter standards for boilers); 73 FR 35838 (June 24, 2008) (new nitrogen oxide standards for additional sources at refineries); 77 FR 49490 (August 16, 2012) (new VOC standards for additional sources at oil and gas facilities). However, the appropriate time for promulgating such new standards may not always align with the 8-year review cycle. See, e.g., 73 FR 35838, 35859. (The EPA did not promulgate performance standards for greenhouse gas emissions as part of the 8-year review of the NSPS for refineries because the Agency was still in the process of gathering information and reviewing controls.) While the EPA could conduct the required periodic review sooner than every 8 years, which would potentially allow the EPA to conduct the review and set additional standards concurrently, the EPA does not believe that the schedule for the statutorily required review should be driven by the timing for promulgating additional performance standards that are discretionary. On the other hand, there is no reason that the EPA's authority and discretion to promulgate such standards should be constrained by the timing of the 8-year review. The EPA, therefore, reasonably interprets CAA section 111(b)(1)(B) to allow the Agency to exercise its discretion to promulgate new performance standards for additional sources or pollutants when appropriate (concurrent with or independent of the 8-year review).

    Pursuant to this authority under section 111(b)(1)(B) of the CAA, the EPA promulgated the 2016 Rule which contained, among other things, a number of new performance standards for emission sources not previously covered, including the fugitive emissions components at well sites and compressor stations, as well as pneumatic pumps at well sites.4 The EPA promulgated the fugitive emissions requirements for well sites and compressor stations pursuant to section 111(h) of the CAA, which authorizes the EPA to set a design, equipment, work practice, or operational standard where it is not technically feasible to prescribe or enforce an emission standard. 80 FR 56593, 56637 (September 18, 2015). A work practice standard generally consists of a set of activities that sources must perform and a time period for completing the activities. See, e.g., 40 CFR 60.632 (180 days from initial startup to comply with the requirements to detect and repair leaks at onshore oil and natural gas processing plants). Similar to existing work practice standards, the fugitive emissions requirements in the 2016 Rule specify a set of activities (e.g., developing an emission monitoring plan, conducting initial and subsequent surveys, repair or replacement, and resurvey of fugitive emissions components according to the plan) and time frames for performing the activities. 40 CFR 60.5397a. Specifically, the 2016 Rule specifies a period of time (i.e., until June 3, 2017, or 60 days after starting up production, whichever is later) for sources to establish the necessary infrastructure, develop a monitoring plan, secure the required personnel and equipment, and conduct the initial monitoring survey of fugitive emissions components at well sites and compressor stations. 81 FR 35858-9 and 35863.

    4 The 2016 Rule also includes standards for reducing methane emissions from the oil and natural gas sector, as well as revisions to the previously promulgated Oil and Natural Gas NSPS (40 CFR part 60, subpart OOOO).

    The 2016 Rule similarly did not establish an emission limit for well site pneumatic pumps, but instead requires that emissions from well site pneumatic pumps be routed to an available control or process onsite, unless a qualified professional engineer certifies that it is not technically feasible to do so. As with the fugitive emissions requirements, the 2016 Rule similarly provided a period of time (until November 30, 2016) for owners and operators to conduct the ground work required for routing well site pneumatic pumps to an available onsite control or process (or, if it is not technically feasible to do so, for obtaining a certification by a qualified engineer of the technical infeasibility). 81 FR 35859, June 3, 2016.

    The 2016 Rule also added a requirement that all closed vent systems routing emissions from storage vessels, compressors, and pneumatic pump affected facilities be certified by a qualified professional engineer. This certification requirement is not an emission standard under CAA section 111(a)(1) or a design, equipment, work practice, or operational standard under CAA section 111(h); it is a compliance measure that would provide additional assurance that sources are meeting the emission standards for storage vessels, compressors, and pneumatic pumps. Some of these emission standards, such as those for storage vessels and compressors, were promulgated in 2012 under section 111(b)(1)(B) of the CAA.

    Through the two June 16, 2017, actions, the EPA is proposing to amend the 2016 Rule to stay for 3 months and 2 years, respectively, the fugitive emissions requirements, the well site pneumatic pump requirements, and the certification requirement described above. Since then, the EPA has received suggestions that, instead of staying these requirements, the EPA extend the current phase-in periods for the fugitive emissions requirements and well site pneumatic pump requirements, as well as providing one for the requirement for certification of closed vent systems by a professional engineer. Agencies have inherent authority to reconsider past decisions and to revise, replace, or repeal a decision to the extent permitted by law and supported by a reasoned explanation. FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 556 U.S. 502, 515 (2009); Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass'n v. State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co., 463 U.S. 29, 42 (1983) (“State Farm”). This includes a decision regarding the appropriate length of the phase-in periods provided in the 2016 Rule for specific requirements, as well as whether to provide one for phasing in an additional compliance assurance measure, or whether to stay these three requirements at issue while they are being revised through rulemaking.

    Section 301(a) of the CAA provides the EPA with broad rulemaking authority to carry out the CAA. Notwithstanding the potential constraint that other parts of the CAA may have on the EPA's authority to stay a rule pursuant to section 301(a), See Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. Reilly, 976 F.2d 36, 41 (D.C. Cir. 1992), there is no such constraint here with respect to staying the fugitive emissions requirements, the well site pneumatic pump requirements, and the certification requirement in the 2016 Rule, the promulgation of which was discretionary and not compelled by CAA section 111(b)(1)(B). In a case analyzing a similar general rulemaking authority granted to the Federal Reserve Board by the Truth in Lending Act, the Supreme Court held quite broadly that, where “the empowering provision of a statute states simply that an agency may make such rules and regulations as necessary to carry out the provisions of an act, the validity of a regulation promulgated thereunder will be sustained so long as it is `reasonably related to the purposes of the enabling legislation.' ” Mourning v. Family Publications Service, Inc., 411 U.S. 356, 369 (1973) (quoting Thorpe v. Housing Authority of City of Durham, 393 U.S. 268, 280-81 (1969)). In a CAA section 301(a) case, the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals held that CAA section 301(a) authorizes the EPA to use rulemaking to issue the enhanced vehicle inspection and maintenance programs guidance under section 182 of the CAA. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc. v. EPA, 22 F.3d 1125 (D.C. Cir. 1994). Noting the absence of any provision in CAA section 182 preventing issuing such guidance through rulemaking, the Court deferred to the Agency's determination that the regulation was necessary as long as it provided a reasoned explanation. Id. at 1148.

    The EPA's proposed stay of the three requirements at issue, as well as the stakeholder-suggested extension or provision of “phase-in” periods for these requirements, is consistent with the purposes of the CAA and, therefore, authorized under section 301(a) of the CAA. The EPA promulgated these requirements for purposes of achieving meaningful emission reductions under the regulatory schemes established in the 2016 Rule to complement other emission reduction efforts and address certain challenges (e.g., technical infeasibility and time needed for building up for necessary equipment and trained personnel). For instance, the EPA promulgated both the fugitive emissions requirements and a process for applying and obtaining an alternative means of emissions limitations (AMEL) with the clear intent to achieve emission reductions from currently uncontrolled sources while still allowing sources subject to effective existing state fugitive emissions programs an avenue to continue implementing such programs, as well as to encourage the use of innovative technology. Therefore, in promulgating the fugitive emissions requirements, the EPA clearly intended and anticipated the implementation of alternatives in lieu of such requirements. However, stakeholders indicated that this purpose of the 2016 Rule was frustrated by the fact that the current AMEL provisions are not sufficiently clear to allow sources to take advantage of them. Stakeholders suggested that further revision or clarification would be required before sources can apply and obtain approval to use an innovative technology or implement their current state program in lieu of the 2016 Rule requirements. The EPA received input from stakeholders stating that without staying the fugitive emissions requirements pending the EPA's reconsideration, the regulated entities would incur significant and potentially unnecessary additional costs and compliance burden to implement the 2016 Rule, and, in some cases, at the expense of disrupting or complicating compliance with applicable state programs, just to later revert back to what they were doing in the first place. These were the consequences that the EPA sought to avoid by promulgating the AMEL in the 2016 Rule. While not all states have fugitive emissions programs, considering that many states with high oil and gas production do have such programs in place,5 it is not clear that the marginal additional emission reductions achieved during the EPA's reconsideration process outweigh the potential disruption to existing state programs and company-specific programs. In light of the discussion above, the EPA believes that the proposed stay of the fugitive emissions requirements pending its reconsideration process is reasonable and authorized under sections 111 and 301 of the CAA.

    5 Including California, Colorado, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming.

    With respect to the well site pneumatic pump requirements, the 2016 Rule acknowledges that routing the pneumatic pump emissions to an available onsite control or process may not always be technically feasible and, therefore, provides a technical infeasibility exemption for such routing except for pneumatic pumps located at a “greenfield site.” However, some sources could not tell based on the 2016 Rule definition of “greenfield site,” which was not proposed for notice and comment, whether they are “greenfield sites,” even though they are encountering technical infeasibility, and, therefore, risk being in noncompliance. Delaying these requirements until the EPA resolves this potential problem through its reconsideration process is consistent with the 2016 Rule to require emission reductions from well site pneumatic pumps only where it is technically feasible to do so.

    Lastly, as mentioned above, the closed vent certification by professional engineer requirement is a compliance measure included in the 2016 Rule to provide additional assurance that sources are meeting the emission standards for a wide range of equipment, some of which have been in place since 2012. The EPA granted reconsideration of this requirement because the EPA had not considered its cost and whether the additional assurance justifies such expenditure. The EPA's proposed stay while conducting this evaluation is clearly consistent with section 111 of the CAA, which expressly identifies cost as a factor for consideration when promulgating emission standards. See CAA section 111(a)(1).

    For the reasons stated above, both the proposed stay and the suggestion by stakeholders to extend (or provide) the phase-in periods are lawful exercises of the EPA's statutory authority and discretion under the CAA. The EPA solicits comment on the EPA's legal authorities for taking these actions. In addition, as mentioned above, the EPA solicits comment on stakeholder input 6 on the EPA's legal authorities to take these actions.

    6 See, for example, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505-10577 and Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0346-0329.

    III. Stakeholder Input on Sources' Ability To Implement Requirements

    In the June 16, 2017, proposal for the 3-month stay, the EPA referenced the proposed 2-year stay, in which the EPA explained that it is proposing to stay the requirements at issue pending reconsideration due to its concern that sources should not be compelled to comply with these requirements pending the EPA's reconsideration of issues associated with these requirements, as these issues impact the ability of a wide range of sources to achieve and show compliance with their applicable standards. 82 FR 27642; 82 FR 27646-8, June 16, 2017. As explained above, unlike the proposed 2-year stay, the 3-month stay was not intended to reflect the time for completing the reconsideration process or to resolve the implementation issues discussed in this NODA, but rather to help avoid a delay for the proposed longer stay to take effect; otherwise, the legal and factual bases for the stay in both proposed actions are the same. Therefore, as in the NODA for the 2-year stay, the EPA similarly solicits comments on the legal and factual bases for the proposed 3-month stay, as well as comments and information on the challenges raised in the feedback received since proposing the stay.

    Since proposing to stay the requirements pending reconsideration, the EPA received feedback from some stakeholders indicating that there are additional issues affecting sources' ability to implement the above mentioned requirements besides those for which the EPA has granted reconsideration.7 Some stakeholders suggested that the EPA should amend the 2016 Rule by extending the “phase-in” periods provided in the 2016 Rule for a build-up of the number of trained personnel (i.e., certified monitoring survey contractors, qualified professional engineers) and equipment (i.e., monitoring instruments) required to meet the demand imposed by the fugitive emissions requirements and the well site pneumatic pump requirements. The EPA had anticipated that during these periods, “sources will begin to phase in these requirements as additional devices and personnel become available.” 81 FR 35859 and 35863. As in the NODA for the proposed 2-year stay, we similarly solicit comment on whether more time (and how much more) is needed for “phasing in” these requirements. In addition, the EPA solicits comments in this NODA on whether an extension of these phase-in periods rather than the stay for 3 months would provide more certainty to the regulated community should there be a delay before the longer stay (or extension), if finalized, would take effect. Some stakeholders suggested that these concerns may also exist with respect to other provisions requiring professional engineer certifications.

    7 See, for example, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505-11108 and Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505-12337.

    As mentioned above, the EPA previously anticipated that some of these issues might be present for a more limited period and, therefore, provided in the 2016 Rule a “phase-in” period for both the fugitive emissions requirements and the pneumatic pump requirements. 81 FR 35851, 35858-9, 35863, June 3, 2016. Specifically, in regards to the fugitive emissions requirements, in light of the large number of sources, the EPA concluded that time was needed to allow an increase in production of the required equipment and scale-up of trained personnel, as well as for sources to establish the groundwork and secure the necessary monitoring equipment and personnel. The 2016 Rule, therefore, provided a “phase-in” period by allowing sources to conduct initial monitoring by June 3, 2017, or within 60 days after production starts, whichever is later. 81 FR 35858-9, 35863, June 3, 2016. Some stakeholders suggested that some sources continue to have difficulty securing the necessary equipment and/or personnel to conduct the required monitoring survey of fugitive emissions. For a similar reason, the 2016 Rule provided a phase-in period until November 30, 2016, to connect well site pneumatic pumps to an existing control or process onsite. 81 FR 35851, June 3, 2016.

    However, some stakeholders suggested that the time provided in the 2016 Rule may not have been adequate to accommodate the number of affected sources subject to these requirements. In addition, some stakeholders indicated that sources that must now comply with these requirements upon startup may be particularly affected by these challenges. Therefore, the EPA solicits comment and information on these challenges that sources are experiencing in carrying out these requirements. Further, the EPA is soliciting comment on whether, in light of the numerous ongoing compliance issues, the EPA should amend the above mentioned phase-in periods in the 2016 Rule instead of simply staying the requirements. The EPA additionally is soliciting comment on the appropriate length of a phase-in period to address the challenges sources are experiencing in carrying out the requirements in the 2016 Rule.

    Some stakeholders suggested that the challenges regarding acquiring necessary equipment and trained personnel may also exist with respect to the requirement of certification of closed vent systems by a professional engineer. We note that the 2016 Rule does not have a phase-in period associated with the closed vent system certification by professional engineer requirement, which must be met by a wide range of sources (i.e., storage vessels, compressors, and pneumatic pumps), even though the EPA acknowledged that securing such professional engineer certification may take time. 81 FR 35851, June 3, 2016. The EPA, therefore, solicits comment on whether time (and how much) should be provided to allow a further building up of the number of professional engineers experienced in these requirements to meet the demand posed by this certification requirement.

    A stay would mean that sources do not have to comply while the stay is in place. It would not, however, change any dates in the 2016 Rule. This could create some uncertainty for sources regarding their obligations upon expiration of the stay. A change to the phase-in periods (or the addition of such a period where the rule does not currently provide one) could provide greater certainty to sources. In light of this, the EPA solicits comment on whether it is more appropriate to extend the phase-in periods in lieu of issuing a 3-month stay. The EPA additionally solicits comment on whether a phase-in period will provide additional relief and certainty to the regulated community. As mentioned above, the EPA solicits comment on the appropriate length of time needed to address the challenges sources are experiencing in carrying out these requirements in the 2016 Rule and the suggestion to extend the “phase-in” periods established in the 2016 Rule for the fugitive emissions requirements and the well site pneumatic pump requirements, as well as the suggestion to provide a phase-in period for the requirement for certification of closed vent systems by a professional engineer.

    A. Fugitive Emissions Requirements

    The EPA proposed to stay the fugitive emissions requirements at well sites and compressor stations while it reconsiders the process and criteria for requesting and receiving approval for the use of an AMEL and the applicability of the fugitive emissions requirements to low production well sites. 82 FR 27642-3 and 27646, June 16, 2017. These issues determine the universe of sources that must implement the fugitive emissions requirements. 82 FR 27646. The EPA has received feedback from some stakeholders that securing certified monitoring survey contractors and monitoring instruments has been more difficult than predicted, and, therefore, the EPA is soliciting comment on the availability of contractors and monitoring instruments, and the impact on owners and operators complying with the requirements of the 2016 Rule. The EPA is soliciting comment on extending the phase-in period and the appropriate length of the phase-in period to allow for an adequate build-up of the personnel and equipment required for meeting the fugitive emissions requirements. Specifically, the EPA solicits comment on whether the impact of this requirement and any feasibility issues are relevant to few sources or a systemic issue related to many sources.

    The EPA also received feedback regarding the applicability of the fugitive emissions requirements to third-party equipment at well sites which is ancillary to production (e.g., equipment such as meters owned by midstream operators). The 2016 Rule requires that all fugitive emissions components at a well site be monitored and repaired, but there has been confusion as to the appropriate scope of components that are included in the definition of the well site for the fugitive emissions requirements. During the public comment period on the 2016 Rule, the EPA received feedback that ancillary midstream assets (e.g., meters) should be excluded from the fugitive emissions requirements because they are owned by legally distinct companies from the well site owner and operator and could have limited emissions.8 The EPA's response to this comment was to state in its Response to Comments that “the resolution for any leaking components identified during surveys can be managed by the operator through cooperative agreements with other potential owners at the site.” 9 The EPA has since received feedback that there are complicated site configurations and contractual arrangements that the EPA did not consider in the 2016 Rule that could prevent compliance, including situations where the third-party equipment could be made subject to the 2016 Rule based on actions made by another operator.10 The EPA is soliciting comment on this feedback, specifically, legal and logistical issues that could prevent midstream operators, or other operators of ancillary third-party equipment, from compliance with the 2016 Rule, and suggestions for addressing this issue. The EPA additionally solicits comment on the number of contracts that would need to be renegotiated and associated burden. The EPA is further soliciting comment on whether, in light of the above, the EPA should stay or otherwise extend the phase-in period as it applies to third-party equipment on well sites until after the EPA has addressed this compliance issue.

    8 See Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505-7237.

    9 See Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505-7632, p. 4-282.

    10 See Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505-12245 and Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0346-0328.

    The EPA additionally received feedback regarding technical, safety, and environmental issues associated with the delay of repair provisions in the 2016 Rule. The EPA proposed that if “repair or replacement [of a leaking fugitive emissions component] is technically infeasible or unsafe to repair during operation of the unit, the repair or replacement must be completed during the next scheduled shutdown or within 6 months, whichever is earlier.” 80 FR 56668, September 18, 2015. Stakeholders responded with concerns about “delays lasting longer than six months due to availability of supplies needed to complete repairs and information regarding the frequency of delayed repairs. Some commenters also indicated that in some cases, requiring prompt repairs could lead to more emissions than if repairs were able to be delayed, for example if a well shut-in or vent blow-down is required.” 81 FR 35858, June 3, 2016. In response to these comments, the EPA extended the time a component can be placed on delay of repair from 6 months to 2 years, and, in conjunction with this extension, added that “however, if an unscheduled or emergency vent blowdown, compressor station shutdown, well shutdown, or well shut-in occurs during the delay of repair period, the fugitive emissions components would need to be fixed at that time.” Id.

    Since publication of the 2016 Rule, the EPA has received feedback that requiring repair or replacement of fugitive emissions components during unscheduled or emergency vent blowdowns could result in natural gas supply disruptions, safety concerns, and increased emissions.11 In particular, stakeholder feedback suggests that compliance with this provision could result in prolonged shutdowns impacting natural gas supply if necessary parts and skilled labor is unavailable, and avoidable blowdowns resulting in greater emissions than the leaking component.12 This feedback additionally indicates that these events may not necessarily result in the blowdown of all equipment located onsite and, thus, the equipment needing repair may not been affected by the blowdown.13 14 The EPA is soliciting comment on this feedback, specifically, the shutdown, shut-in, or blowdown scenarios that result in the technical, safety, and environmental issues described, and suggestions for addressing these issues. The EPA is further soliciting comment on whether, in light of the above, the EPA should stay or otherwise extend the phase-in period as it applies to equipment requiring delay of repair at well sites and compressor stations until after the EPA has addressed this compliance issue.

    11 See Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0346-0328 and Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505-12245.

    12Id.

    13Id.

    14 Blowdown refers to the release of entrained gas from equipment that causes a reduction in system pressure or a complete depressurization. For example, a blowdown may occur to reduce line pressure and discharge gas to ensure safe working conditions during maintenance and repair activities.

    As the need for a proposed 3-month stay is contingent upon the EPA concluding that either a 2-year stay or an extension of the phase-in period is warranted, the comments that the EPA is soliciting are equally relevant to this rulemaking. In addition, the EPA solicits comment on whether the potential delay is better addressed through a short stay or extension of the current phase-in period.

    B. Well Site Pneumatic Pump Requirements

    The EPA proposed to stay the requirements for well site pneumatic pump standards while it reconsiders the technical infeasibility exemption and the definition of “greenfield site.” 82 FR 27647, June 16, 2017. The EPA acknowledges that the technical infeasibility exemption that the EPA finalized in the 2016 Rule adopted a different approach than previously applied to the oil and gas industry and created an unanticipated and unnoticed distinction between “greenfield” (new development) and “non-greenfield” sites. For a discussion on the technical infeasibility exemption provided in the 2016 Rule, please see 81 FR 35844-5, June 3, 2016. Some stakeholders have suggested that this distinction has caused confusion among owners and operators on what sites qualify for the technical infeasibility exemption. The EPA received stakeholder feedback that some owners and operators may have been unintentionally restricted in the design of new sites that, for technical reasons, could not employ controls or processes for certain pneumatic pump installations. The EPA is soliciting comment on technical constraints of new “greenfield” sites and specific site designs such as these which present challenges in implementing the well site pneumatic pump requirements in the 2016 Rule. The EPA is, therefore, soliciting comment on extending the phase-in period for 2 years, the time period the EPA estimates its reconsideration process and the issuance of the resulting rule would take, so that the EPA may provide the necessary clarification or revision in conjunction with its reconsideration process, thereby addressing all issues in one rulemaking. As the need for a proposed 3-month stay is contingent upon the EPA concluding that either a 2-year stay or an extension of the phase-in period is warranted, the comments that the EPA is soliciting are equally relevant to this rulemaking. In addition, the EPA solicits comment on whether the potential delay is better addressed through a short stay or extension of the current phase-in period. The EPA is also soliciting comment on extending the phase-in period and the appropriate length of the phase-in period for the well site pneumatic pump requirements as an alternative to the proposed stay of these requirements.

    C. Professional Engineering Certification Requirements

    The EPA proposed to stay the requirement for closed vent system certification by professional engineer while the EPA evaluates the benefits, as well as the cost and other compliance burden, associated with this requirement. 82 FR 27647, June 16, 2017. Such costs and associated burden are significant in light of the number of affected sources. Based on the EPA's estimates, approximately 16,000 affected sources (i.e., pneumatic pumps, compressors, and storage vessels) came online between the proposed rule and the final 2016 Rule, not counting those that have and will come online since. The EPA received feedback that owners and operators had to reanalyze and potentially redesign the closed vent systems in order to meet this certification requirement. Subsequent to the proposed stay, the EPA received feedback from some stakeholders that owners and operators have struggled to obtain professional engineers to complete these certifications primarily because of a shortage of professional engineers certified in each state of operation with experience in the design of these systems. In light of this, the EPA is soliciting comment on the availability of professional engineers qualified in each state of operation and experienced in the oil and gas field and the costs associated with completing the certification requirements in the 2016 Rule. The EPA additionally solicits comment on the costs of reanalyzing and redesigning sites in order to comply with the requirements of the 2016 Rule. Lastly, in light of the challenges described above, the EPA is soliciting comment on providing a period to phase in this certification period as an alternative to staying this requirement. As the need for a proposed 3-month stay is contingent upon the EPA concluding that either a 2-year stay or a provision of a phase-in period is warranted, the comments that the EPA is soliciting are equally relevant to this rulemaking. In addition, the EPA solicits comment on whether the potential delay is better addressed through a short stay or provision of a phase-in period. The EPA emphasizes that neither the proposed stay (or, in the alternative, provision of a phase-in period) for this certification requirement would affect sources' obligation to meet the underlying applicable emission standards during that time frame. As explained above, this certification requirement is not an emission standard, but a compliance measure to provide additional assurance that the emission standards are being met.

    Dated: November 1, 2017. E. Scott Pruitt, Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24341 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    82 215 Wednesday, November 8, 2017 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Food and Nutrition Service Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request—User Access Request Form FNS-674 AGENCY:

    Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice invites the general public and other public agencies to comment on the proposed information collection. This is an extension of a currently approved collection. The purpose of this information collection request is to continue the use of the electronic form FNS-674, titled “User Access Request Form.” This form will continue to allow user access to current FNS systems, as well as allow modified access or remove user access.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be received on or before January 8, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments may be sent to: Joseph Binns, Food and Nutrition Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 3101 Park Center Drive, Room 317, Alexandria, VA 22302. Comments may also be submitted via email to [email protected] Comments will also be accepted through the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to http://www.regulations.gov, and follow the online instructions for submitting comments electronically.

    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.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information or copies of this information collection should be directed to Joseph Binns at 703-605-1181.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    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, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions that were used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Title: User Access Request Form.

    Form Number: FNS-674.

    OMB Number: 0584-0532.

    Expiration Date: 3/31/2018.

    Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    Abstract: Form FNS-674 is designed to collect user information required to gain access to FNS Information Systems.

    Affected Public: Contractors, State Agencies.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 2,700.

    The respondents are State agencies, who are located in the 50 states and Trust Territories, staff contractors and Federal employees. Respondents who require access to the FNS systems are estimated at 3,600 annually (includes Federal, State and private) however, only 2,700 will account for the total public burden, excluding Federal employees. FNS estimates that it will receive an average of 300 requests per month (15 per day). Of the 300, 70 percent (or 210) of the responses are State Agency users, 5 percent (or 15) are staff contractors and 25 percent (or 75) are Federal employees which is not included in the total number of responses. Annually, that results in 2,700 respondents (210 State Agency users per month + 15 staff contractors per month × 12 months).

    Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 1.9.

    Estimated Total Annual Responses: 5,220.

    Estimated Time per Response: 0.167 of an hour. Each respondent takes approximately 0.167 of an hour, or 10 minutes, to complete the required information on the online form.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 870 hours. See the table below for estimated total annual burden for each type of respondent.

    Reporting Burden Affected public Form number Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses
  • annually per
  • respondent
  • Total annual responses Estimate of burden hours per response Total annual burden hours
    Contractors FNS-674 180 1 180 0.16667 (10 minutes) 30 State Agency Users FNS-674 2,520 2 5,040 0.16667 (10 minutes) 840 Annualized Totals 2,700 1.9 5,220 10 minutes 870
    Dated: October 23, 2017. Brandon Lipps, Administrator, Food and Nutrition Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24348 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-30-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE National Institute of Food and Agriculture Notice of Availability of Draft Scientific Assessment for Public Comment AGENCY:

    National Institute of Food and Agriculture, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability of draft scientific assessment for public comment.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) is publishing this notice on behalf of the Carbon Cycle Interagency Working Group (CCIWG)/U.S. Carbon Cycle Science Program and the United States Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) to announce the availability of a draft assessment, the 2nd State of the Carbon Cycle Science Report (SOCCR-2), for a 60-day public review. Collected comments will be carefully reviewed by the relevant chapter author teams. Following revision and further review, a revised draft will undergo final Federal interagency clearance.

    DATES:

    Written comments on this notice must be received by 11:59 p.m. on January 8, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Once released, the draft USGCRP 2nd State of the Carbon Cycle Report can be accessed via the USGCRP Open Notices page (http://www.globalchange.gov/notices) or directly at the USGCRP Review and Comment System (https://review.globalchange.gov/). Registration details can be found on the review site home page, and review instructions can be found on a dedicated special report page where comments from the public will be accepted electronically. Comments may be submitted only via this online mechanism.

    All comments received through this process will be considered by the relevant chapter authors without knowledge of the commenters' identities. When the final assessment is issued, the comments and the commenters' names, along with the authors' responses, will become part of the public record and made available on http://www.globalchange.gov. Information submitted by a commenter as part of the registration process (such as an email address) will not be disclosed publicly.

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    U.S. Carbon Cycle Science Program/CCIWG/USGCRP Contact: Dr. Gyami Shrestha; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Context: The U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) is mandated under the Global Change Research Act (GCRA) of 1990 to conduct a quadrennial National Climate Assessment (NCA). Under its current decadal strategic plan (http://go.usa.gov/3qGU4), USGCRP is building sustained assessment capacity. The sustained assessment supports the Nation's ability to understand, anticipate, and respond to risks and potential impacts brought about by global environmental change. As part of the ongoing NCA process, the 2nd State of the Carbon Cycle Report (SOCCR-2) is being developed to inform the assessment. The last (3rd) NCA (2014) (NCA3: http://nca2014.globalchange.gov) and the process to develop it provided a foundation for subsequent activities and reports. The SOCCR-2 assessment provides an update to the carbon cycle science information presented in the 2014 NCA and the 2007 State of the Carbon Cycle Report, a Scientific Assessment Product (SAP 2.2) that directly informed the 2nd NCA. The SOCCR-2 assessment provides updated carbon cycle science findings and projections, and is an important input to the authors of the next quadrennial NCA, expected in 2018.

    The 2nd State of the Carbon Cycle Report (SOCCR-2) is a product of the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP), and is organized and led by an interagency team, the Carbon Cycle Interagency Working Group. The draft assessment was written by Federal and non-Federal authors identified via an Open Call for nominations (www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/02/12/2016-02927/request-for-public-engagement-in-the-interagency-special-report-2nd-state-of-the-carbon-cycle-report). An interagency Federal Steering Committee selected authors based on their demonstrated subject matter expertise, relevant publications, and knowledge of specific topics designated in an outline included in the SOCCR-2 prospectus that can be found through a link on the SOCCR-2 (https://www.carboncyclescience.us/state-carbon-cycle-report-soccr. This assessment responds to the 1990 Congressional mandate to periodically produce National Climate Assessments and to assist the nation in understanding, assessing, predicting, and responding to global change. The report adheres to the Information Quality Act requirements (http://www.cio.noaa.gov/services_programs/info_quality.html) for quality, transparency, and accessibility as appropriate for a Highly Influential Scientific Assessment (HISA).

    Done at Washington, DC, on November 3, 2017. Sonny Ramaswamy, Director, National Institute of Food and Agriculture.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24347 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Rural Housing Service Rural Business-Cooperative Service Notice of Request for Extension of a Currently Approved Information Collection AGENCY:

    Rural Housing Service (RHS) and Rural Business-Cooperative Service (RBS), USDA.

    ACTION:

    Proposed collection; comments requested.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the intention of the above-named Agencies to request an extension for the currently approved information collection in support of the servicing of Community and Direct Business Programs Loans and Grants.

    DATES:

    Comments on this notice must be received by January 8, 2018 to be assured of consideration.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For inquiries on the Information Collection Package, contact Anita Outen, Community Programs, RHS, USDA, 1400 Independence Ave. SW., Mail Stop 0787, Washington, DC 20250-0787, Telephone (202) 690-5273.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: 7 CFR 1951-E, Servicing of Community and Direct Business Programs Loans and Grants.

    OMB Number: 0575-0066.

    Expiration Date of Approval: March 31, 2018.

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

    Abstract: The Community Facilities program is authorized to make loans and grants to public entities, nonprofit corporations, and Indian tribes for the development of essential community facilities primarily serving rural residents. The Direct Business and Industry program, under Rural Business-Cooperative Service, is authorized to make loans to improve, develop, or finance business, industry, and employment, and improve the economic and environmental climate in rural communities.

    The purpose of this collection is to establish security servicing policies, assist recipients in meeting the objectives of the loans and grants, repay loans on schedule, comply with agreements, and protect the Government's financial interest. Routine servicing responsibilities include collection of payments, compliance reviews, security inspections, review of financial reports, determining applicant/borrower eligibility and project feasibility for various servicing actions, monitoring delinquent accounts, and supervision activities.

    Supervision by the Agencies include, but is not limited to: Review of budgets, management reports, audits and financial statements; performing security inspections; providing, arranging, or recommending technical assistance; evaluating environmental impacts of proposed actions by the borrower; performing civil rights compliance reviews; and assisting in the development of workout agreements.

    Information will be collected by the field offices from applicants, borrowers, consultants, lenders, and attorneys.

    Failure to collect information could result in improper servicing of these loans.

    Estimate of Burden: Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response.

    Respondents: State, local or tribal Governments, Not-for-profit institutions, businesses, and individuals.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 112.

    Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 1.

    Estimated Number of Responses: 1,446.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 1,327.

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

    Comments

    Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agencies, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Agencies' estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments may be sent to Jeanne Jacobs, Regulations and Paperwork Management Branch, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Rural Development, 1400 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20024. All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record.

    Bryan Hooper, Acting Administrator, Rural Housing Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24244 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-XV-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Rural Housing Service Notice of Request for Extension of a Currently Approved Information Collection AGENCY:

    Rural Housing Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Proposed collection; comments requested.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the Rural Housing Service's (RHS or Agency) intention to request an extension for a currently approved information collection in support of the programs under Direct Single Family Housing Loans and Grants.

    DATES:

    Comments on this notice must be received by January 8, 2018 to be assured consideration.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brooke Baumann, Branch Chief, Single Family Housing Direct Loan Division, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Stop 0783, Washington, DC 20250-0783, Telephone: (202) 690-4250, Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Direct Single Family Housing Loans and Grants.

    OMB Number: 0575-0172.

    Expiration Date of Approval: March 31, 2018.

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

    Abstract: Through its direct single family housing loan and grant programs (specifically the Sections 502 and 504 programs), RHS provides eligible applicants with financial assistance to own adequate but modest homes in rural areas. The financing and servicing is provided directly by RHS. The Section 502 direct loan program provides 100 percent loan financing to assist low- and very low-income applicants purchase modest homes in eligible rural areas by providing payment assistance to increase an applicant's repayment ability. The Section 504 loan program provides one percent interest rate loans to very low-income homeowners in eligible rural areas to repair, improve, or modernize their home or to remove health and safety hazards. The Section 504 grant program provides grants to elderly very low-income homeowners in eligible rural areas to remove health and safety hazards, or accessibility barriers from their home, often in conjunction with a Section 504 loan.

    Applicants must provide the Agency with a uniform residential loan application and supporting documentation (e.g. verification of income, assets, liabilities, etc.) when applying for assistance. The information requested regarding the applicant and the property is vital in order for the Agency to make sound eligibility and underwriting decisions that comply with the laws and regulations that govern the programs. The information requested is comparable to that required by any public or private mortgage lender.

    When servicing loans, RHS offers servicing options that are standard to the industry. In addition, RHS offers unique servicing options (e.g. payment subsidies and payment moratoriums) and is required to take unique servicing actions (e.g., review borrowers for their ability to refinance with private credit). Borrowers must provide the Agency with pertinent information when a servicing option/action is requested/required in order for the Agency to make sound servicing decisions that comply with the laws and regulations that govern the programs.

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

    Respondents: Approximately 28,000 applicants seeking direct single family housing loans and grants from the Agency and approximately 276,800 existing borrowers who have active loans and grants under the Section 502 and 504 programs.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 673,560.

    Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 1.

    Estimated Total Number of Responses: 673,560.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents (hours): 327,622.

    Copies of this information collection can be obtained from Jeanne Jacobs, Regulations and Paperwork Management Branch at (202) 692-0226.

    Comments: Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments may be sent to: Jeanne Jacobs, Regulations and Paperwork Management Branch, Support Services Division, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Rural Development, STOP 0742, 1400 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20250-0742. All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record.

    Dated: October 25, 2017. Bryan Hooper, Acting Administrator, Rural Housing Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24245 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-XV-P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meeting of the Texas Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) that a meeting of the Texas Advisory Committee (Committee) to the Commission will be held at 2:00 p.m. (Central Time) Friday, November 17, 2017. The purpose of the meeting is for the Committee to vote on final proposal on voting rights in Texas.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Friday, November 17, 2017, at 2:00 p.m. CT.

    ADDRESSES:

    Public call information:

    Dial: 866-290-0883.

    Conference ID: 4658844.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This meeting is available to the public through the following toll-free call-in number: 866-290-0883, conference ID number: 4658844. Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-977-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.

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

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

    Agenda I. Welcome II. Discuss Voting Rights Proposal III. Public Comment IV. Next Steps V. Adjournment Dated: November 2, 2017. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24236 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meeting of the Wisconsin Advisory Committee for a Meeting To Discuss Civil Rights Concerns in the State AGENCY:

    U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act that the Wisconsin Advisory Committee (Committee) will hold a meeting on Thursday, November 30, 2017, at 3:00 p.m. CST for the purpose of discussing civil rights concerns in the state.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Thursday November 30, 2017, at 3:00 p.m. CST.

    ADDRESSES:

    Public call information: Dial: 888-427-9419, Conference ID: 6390062.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Melissa Wojnaroski, DFO, at [email protected] or 312-353-8311.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Members of the public can listen to the discussion. This meeting is available to the public through the following toll-free call-in number: 888-427-9419, conference ID: 6390062. Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. An open comment period will be provided to allow members of the public to make a statement as time allows. The conference call operator will ask callers to identify themselves, the organization they are affiliated with (if any), and an email address prior to placing callers into the conference room. Callers can expect to incur regular charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, according to their wireless plan. The Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-977-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.

    Members of the public are also entitled to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be mailed to the Midwestern Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 55 W. Monroe St., Suite 410, Chicago, IL 60615. They may also be faxed to the Commission at (312) 353-8324, or emailed to Carolyn Allen at [email protected] Persons who desire additional information may contact the Midwestern Regional Office at (312) 353-8311.

    Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Midwestern Regional Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Records of the meeting will be available via www.facadatabase.gov under the Commission on Civil Rights, Wisconsin Advisory Committee link (http://www.facadatabase.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=282). Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's Web site, http://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Midwestern Regional Office at the above email or street address.

    Agenda Welcome and Roll Call Announcements and Business Updates Discussion of civil rights report publication: Hate Crime in Wisconsin Future Plans and Actions: Civil Rights in Wisconsin Public Comment Adjournment Dated: November 2, 2017. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24247 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Sunshine Act Meeting Notice AGENCY:

    United States Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Commission Briefing and Business Meeting.

    DATES:

    Monday, November 13, 2017, at 1:00 p.m. EST.

    ADDRESSES:

    National Place Building, 1331 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Suite 1150, Washington, DC 20245 (Entrance on F Street NW.).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brian Walch; (202) 376-8371; TTY: (202) 376-8116; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This business meeting is open to the public. There will also be a call-in line for individuals who desire to listen to the presentations: (888) 339-3513; Conference ID 360-3740.

    Persons with disabilities who need accommodation should contact Pamela Dunston at (202) 376-8105, or [email protected] at least three business days before the date of the meeting.

    Meeting Agenda I. Approval of Agenda II. Business Meeting A. State Advisory Committees a. Discussion and Vote on Nomination of Shaakirrah Sanders as Chair of the Idaho Advisory Committee b. Discussion and Vote on Nomination of Curtiss Reed, Jr. as Chair of the Vermont Advisory Committee c. Discussion and Vote on Nomination of Alexes Harris as Chair of the Washington Advisory Committee B. Management and Operations • Staff Director's Report III. Adjourn Meeting Dated: November 6, 2017. Brian Walch, Director, Communications and Public Engagement.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24391 Filed 11-6-17; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of the Census [Docket Number 170824806-7806-01] Proposed Content for the Prototype 2020 Census Redistricting Data File AGENCY:

    Bureau of the Census, Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    The 2020 Census Redistricting Data Program provides states the opportunity to specify the small geographic areas for which they wish to receive 2020 decennial population totals for the purpose of reapportionment and redistricting. This notice pertains to Phase 3, the Data Delivery phase of the program, as the U.S. Census Bureau is providing notification and requesting comment on the content of the prototype 2020 Census Redistricting Data File that will be produced from the 2018 End-to-End Census Test. The Census Bureau anticipates publishing the content for the prototype 2020 Census Redistricting Data File from the 2018 End-to-End Census Test in the second quarter of fiscal year 2018 in a final notice. In that final notice, the Census Bureau also will respond to the comments received on this notice.

    DATES:

    Comments on this notice must be received by January 8, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Please address all written comments to James Whitehorne, Chief of the Census Redistricting and Voting Rights Data Office, U.S. Census Bureau, 4600 Silver Hill Road, Room 4H057, Washington, DC 20233.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    James Whitehorne, Chief of the Census Redistricting and Voting Rights Data Office, U.S. Census Bureau, 4600 Silver Hill Road, Room 4H057, Washington, DC 20233, Telephone (301) 763-4039, or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the provisions of Public Law 94-171, as amended (Title 13, United States Code (U.S.C.), Section 141(c)), the Director of the Census Bureau is required to provide the “officers or public bodies with initial responsibility for legislative apportionment or districting of each state. . .” with the opportunity to specify small geographic areas (e.g., census blocks, voting districts, wards, and election precincts) for which they wish to receive decennial census population totals for the purpose of reapportionment and redistricting.

    By April 1 of the year following the census, the Secretary of Commerce is required to furnish those state officials or their designees with population counts for counties, cities, census blocks, and state-specified congressional districts, legislative districts, and voting districts.

    In accordance with the provisions of Title 13, U.S.C. 141(c), and on behalf of the Secretary of Commerce, the U.S. Census Bureau Director requests comment on the proposed content of the required population counts being produced as part of Phase 3 of the 2020 Census Redistricting Data Program.

    The 2020 Census Redistricting Data Program was initially announced on July 15, 2014, in the Federal Register (79 FR 41258). This notice described the program that the Census Bureau proposed to adopt for the 2020 Census. As seen in the 1990, 2000, and 2010 censuses, the 2020 Census Redistricting Data Program is partitioned into several phases. Phase 1, the Block Boundary Suggestion Project, was announced in a Federal Register notice on June 26, 2015 (80 FR 36765). This notice described the procedures for the states to provide the Census Bureau with their suggestions for the 2020 Census tabulation block inventory. Phase 2, the Voting District Project, was announced in a Federal Register notice on June 28, 2017 (82 FR 29276). This second phase specifically provides states the opportunity to provide the Census Bureau with their voting district boundaries (election precincts, wards, etc.). Phase 3 of the 2020 Redistricting Data Program is data delivery.

    The Census Bureau will produce, in preparation for Phase 3, a prototype 2020 Census Public Law 94-171 Redistricting Data File from the 2018 End-to-End Census Test. This prototype product will be delivered to official recipients and the public in early 2019. The content of this prototype product, which includes population counts by race and ethnicity, is meant to simulate the official product that will be produced as the 2020 Census Public Law 94-171 Redistricting Data File, delivered in early 2021. This prototype should not be interpreted, however, as signifying that a design decision for collecting race and ethnicity data has been made for the 2020 Census.

    The U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is currently reviewing proposed revisions to the Standards for Maintaining, Collecting, and Presenting Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity. OMB will announce their decision on making any changes to the standards in the Federal Register later this year. These standards will inform how the Census Bureau collects and publishes race/ethnicity data for the 2020 Census. More information on OMB's review is available on https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/briefing-room/presidential-actions/related-omb-material/r_e_iwg_faqs_and_talking_points_032917.pdf.

    One of the potential changes being decided by OMB is question format, specifically the use of two separate questions or a combined question for race/ethnicity data. In the 2010 Census, race/ethnicity data were collected using a two separate questions approach. Consequently, the Census Bureau has experience and is prepared to produce statistics on race/ethnicity in that format. Should the use of a combined race/ethnicity question be allowed under the as yet to be released guidance from OMB, the Census Bureau must be prepared to produce race/ethnicity statistics with the combined question format. Therefore, the current design for the prototype 2020 Census Public Law 94-171 Redistricting Data File reflects the combined question format, and alters the design of that produced as the official 2010 Census Public Law 94-171 Redistricting Data File. If only a separate questions format is permitted under the as yet to be released guidance from OMB, then the 2020 Census Public Law 94-171 Redistricting Data File will mirror that of the 2010 Census Public Law 94-171 Redistricting Data File, with the addition of the group quarters table described below. If a combined question format is permitted under the revised OMB standards, then the design for the 2020 Census Public Law 94-171 Redistricting Data File will mirror that of the prototype 2020 Census Public Law 94-171 Redistricting Data File.

    Regardless of whether a separate or combined question format is used in the 2020 Census, to assist those states that reallocate populations prior to conducting redistricting, a group quarters table is added. This table will include the group quarters categories of: Institutionalized populations (correctional facilities for adults, juvenile facilities, nursing facilities/skilled nursing facilities, and other institutional facilities) and noninstitutionalized populations (college/university student housing, military quarters, and other non-institutionalized facilities). The group quarters table will include state, county, county sub-division, voting district, tract, and block geographic levels for the total population in the group quarters count. A schematic of the tables planned for the prototype 2020 Census Public Law 94-171 Redistricting File is available at the Census Bureau's FTP site: https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/decennial/rdo/about/2020-census-program/Phase3/Phase3_prototype_schematic.pdf.

    This notice requests comment on these changes and the continued suitability of these data in redistricting. Other potential changes to the OMB guidance on the collection and tabulation of Race and Ethnicity announced in the Federal Register later this year may necessitate changes to the prototype product beyond those proposed here. The Census Bureau will announce any respective revisions in a forthcoming, final Federal Register notice in the second quarter of fiscal year 2018.

    The Census Bureau will continue to communicate with each state to ensure all are well informed of the benefits of working with the Census Bureau towards a successful 2020 Census. In addition, the Census Redistricting and Voting Rights Data Office will continue to work with each state to ensure that all are prepared to participate in every phase of the Redistricting Data Program. As required by Public Law 94-171, every state, regardless of its participation in Phase 1 or Phase 2, will receive the official redistricting data in Phase 3.

    Dated: November 2, 2017. Ron S. Jarmin, Associate Director for Economic Programs, Performing the Non-Exclusive Functions and Duties of the Director, Bureau of the Census.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24242 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-07-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-122-857] Certain Softwood Lumber Products From Canada: Final Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Affirmative Final Determination of Critical Circumstances AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (the Department) determines that certain softwood lumber products (softwood lumber) from Canada is being, or is likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV). The period of investigation (POI) is October 1, 2015, through September 30, 2016.

    DATES:

    Applicable: November 8, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Stephen Bailey, Robert Galantucci, Thomas Martin, or Jeff Pedersen, AD/CVD Operations, Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-0193, (202) 482-2923, (202) 482-3936, or (202) 482-2769, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    On June 30, 2017, the Department published the Preliminary Determination of this antidumping duty (AD) investigation, as provided by section 733 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), in which the Department preliminarily determined that softwood lumber from Canada was being sold at LTFV.1 On September 1, 2017, the Department published a postponement fully extending the due date of the final AD determination until November 13, 2017.2

    1See Certain Softwood Lumber Products from Canada: Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 82 FR 29833 (June 30, 2017), and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum (collectively, Preliminary Determination).

    2See Certain Softwood Lumber Products from Canada: Postponement of Final Determination of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation and Extension of Provisional Measures, 82 FR 41609 (September 1, 2017).

    A summary of the events that occurred since the Department published the Preliminary Determination, as well as a full discussion of the issues raised by interested parties for this final determination, may be found in the Issues and Decision Memorandum.3 The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov, and it is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, Room B-8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/.

    3See Memorandum, “Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Affirmative Determination in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Softwood Lumber Products from Canada,” dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum).

    Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is softwood lumber from Canada. For a complete description of the scope of this investigation, see Appendix I.

    Scope Comments

    In accordance with the Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum, the Department provided parties an opportunity to provide comments on all issues discussed in the Preliminary Determination, including issues regarding product coverage (i.e., scope).4 Certain interested parties commented on the scope of the investigation as it appeared in the Initiation Notice. Therefore, the scope of this investigation has been modified for this final determination. For a summary of the product coverage comments and rebuttal responses submitted to the record for this final determination, and accompanying discussion and analysis of all comments timely received, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

    4See Preliminary Determination, 82 FR, at 29835.

    Particular Market Situation (PMS) Allegation

    On May 15, 2017, the petitioner first alleged that a particular market situation exists with respect to the production of softwood lumber in Canada, such that the cost of materials and fabrication or other processing of any kind does not accurately reflect the cost of production in the ordinary course of trade.5 According to the petitioner, the Department should, accordingly, “use another calculation methodology under this subtitle or any other calculation methodology,” pursuant to its discretionary authority under section 773(e)(3) of the Act.

    5See section 504 of the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015 (TPEA), amending section 773(e) of the Act.

    The Department accepted the petitioner's PMS allegation submission on June 23, 2017, and articulated its intent to further investigate the merits of the allegation.6 On June 30, 2017, the Department issued a supplemental questionnaire to the mandatory respondents and the Government of Canada (GOC) to obtain more information regarding GOC initiatives related to bioenergy, electricity, and stumpage. On July 21, 2017, the mandatory respondents, additional interested parties and the GOC (collectively, the Canadian parties) responded to our supplemental questionnaire. In its case brief dated August 8, 2017, the petitioner provided additional arguments regarding its PMS allegation.

    6See Memorandum “Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation of Certain Softwood Lumber Products from Canada: Particular Market Situation,” dated June 23, 2017.

    The petitioner alleges that the GOC's subsidization of bioenergy programs that consume lumber byproducts, subsidization and involvement in Canada's electricity market, and subsidization of stumpage has, collectively, distorted the market for lumber byproducts (e.g., wood chips, shavings, sawdust, etc.) in Canada, such that sales of lumber byproducts in Canada are outside the ordinary course of trade and should not be accounted for in the Department's normal value calculations. Specifically, the petitioner argues that the Department should decline to grant offsets for the sale of byproducts to each of the mandatory respondents.

    The Department determines that the record evidence pertaining to GOC initiatives concerning bioenergy programs does not support the petitioner's allegation that a PMS exists in Canada with respect to the sale of lumber byproducts. Specifically, the record evidence does not demonstrate that sales of lumber byproducts in Canada have been impacted by the GOC initiatives referred to by the petitioner, such that they are outside the ordinary course of trade. That is, the record evidence does not demonstrate a connection between the bioenergy programs referred to by the petitioner and a change in demand and prices for lumber byproducts in Canada.

    Additionally, given the Department's aforementioned determination regarding PMS and bioenergy programs, the Department also finds that the allegations regarding electricity and stumpage are moot.7 Thus, the Department determines that the record evidence does not support the petitioner's allegation that a PMS exists in Canada with respect to the sale of lumber byproducts. Accordingly, the Department will continue to grant the mandatory respondents in this investigation company-specific offsets for sales of lumber byproducts according to our normal practice. For further discussion of this matter, see Comment 16 of the Department's Issues and Decision Memorandum.

    7 The Department has previously found that AD and CVD laws provide separate remedies for distinct unfair trade practices. See Certain Seamless Carbon and Alloy Steel Standard, Line and Pressure Pipe from the People's Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Critical Circumstances, In Part, 75 FR 57449 (September 21, 2010), at Comment 2.

    Final Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances, in Part

    On April 13, 2017, the Department preliminarily determined that critical circumstances exist for all-others but did not exist for Canfor Corporation (Canfor), Resolute FP Canada Inc. (Resolute), Tolko Marketing and Sales Ltd. (Tolko) and West Fraser Mills Ltd. (West Fraser). For this final determination, the Department has determined that critical circumstances exist for Resolute, Tolko, West Fraser, and all-others but did not exist for Canfor. For a full description of the methodology and results of the Department's critical circumstances analysis, see Final Determination Critical Circumstances Analysis Memo 8 and Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 18.

    8See Memorandum, “Calculations for Final Determination of Critical Circumstances in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Softwood Lumber Products from Canada,” dated concurrently with this memorandum (Final Determination Critical Circumstances Analysis Memo).

    Analysis of Comments Received

    The issues raised in the case briefs and rebuttals by interested parties to this investigation, including Canfor, West Fraser, Tolko, Resolute and the petitioner,9 are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of these issues is attached to this notice as Appendix II. Based on our analysis of the comments received, and our findings at verification, we made changes to the sales and costs reported by Canfor, Resolute, Tolko, and West Fraser prior to the preliminary determination. We also made changes to the margin calculations for these manadatory respondents; these changes resulted in a change to the all-others rate.

    9 The petitioner is the Committee Overseeing Action for Lumber International Trade Investigations or Negotiations (COALITION). The petitioner is an ad hoc association whose members are: U.S. Lumber Coalition, Inc.; Collum's Lumber Products, L.L.C.; Hankins, Inc.; Potlatch Corporation; Rex Lumber Company; Seneca Sawmill Company; Sierra Pacific Industries; Stimson Lumber Company; Swanson Group; Weyerhaeuser Company; Carpenters Industrial Council; Giustina Land and Timber Company; and Sullivan Forestry Consultants, Inc.

    All-Others Rate

    Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act provides that, in the final determination, the Department shall determine an estimated all-others rate for all exporters and producers not individually examined. This rate shall be an amount equal to the weighted-average of the estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding any zero and de minimis margins, and any margins determined entirely under section 776 of the Act.

    For the final determination, the Department calculated individual estimated weighted-average dumping margins for Canfor, Resolute, Tolko, and West Fraser, none of which are zero, de minimis, or based entirely on facts otherwise available. The Department calculated the all-others rate using a weighted-average of the estimated weighted-average dumping margins calculated for the examined respondents using each company's business proprietary data for the merchandise under consideration.10

    10 For a complete analysis of the data, please see the All-Others Calculation Memorandum dated concurrently with this notice.

    Final Determination

    The Department determines that the following estimated weighted-average dumping margins exist:

    11 In the preliminary determination, the Department determined that Canfor, Canadian Forest Products Ltd., and Canfor Wood Products Marketing Ltd. are a single entity. See Memorandum, “Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Softwood Lumber from Canada: Tolko Industries Ltd. and Tolko Marketing and Sales Ltd. Preliminary Affiliation and Collapsing Memorandum,” dated June 23, 2017. This decision is unchanged for this final determination.

    12 In the preliminary determination, the Department determined that Resolute, Resolute Growth Canada Inc. (Resolute Growth), Abitibi-LP Engineered Wood Inc. (Abitibi-LP), Abitibi-LP Engineered Wood II Inc. (Abitibi-LP II), Forest Products Mauricie LP (Mauricie), Produits Forestiers Petit-Paris Inc. (Petit-Paris), and Société en commandite Scierie Opitciwan (Opitciwan) are a single entity. See Memorandum, “Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Softwood Lumber from Canada: Resolute FP Canada Inc. Preliminary Affiliation and Collapsing Memorandum,” dated June 23, 2017. This decision is unchanged for this final determination.

    13 In the preliminary determination, the Department determined that Tolko, and Tolko Industries Ltd., and Gilbert Smith Forest Products Ltd. are a single entity. See Memorandum, “Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Softwood Lumber from Canada: Tolko Industries Ltd. and Tolko Marketing and Sales Ltd. Preliminary Affiliation and Collapsing Memorandum,” dated June 23, 2017. This decision is unchanged for this final determination.

    14 In the preliminary determination, the Department determined that West Fraser, Blue Ridge Lumber Inc. (Blue Ridge), Manning Forest Products Ltd. (Manning), and Sundre Forest Products Inc. (Sundre) are a single entity. See Memorandum, “Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Softwood Lumber from Canada: West Fraser Mills Ltd. Preliminary Affiliation and Collapsing Memorandum,” dated June 23, 2017. This decision is unchanged for this final determination.

    Exporter/producer Estimated
  • weighted-
  • average dumping
  • margins
  • (percent)
  • Canfor Corporation 11 8.89 Resolute FP Canada Inc 12 3.20 Tolko Marketing and Sales Ltd 13 7.22 West Fraser Mills Ltd 14 5.57 All-Others 6.58
    Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation

    As noted above, the Department found that critical circumstances exist with respect to imports of merchandise under consideration from Resolute, Tolko, West Fraser, and all-others but did not exist for Canfor. In accordance with section 733(e)(2)(A) of the Act, the suspension of liquidation shall apply to unliquidated entries of shipments of softwood lumber from Canada as described in Appendix I of this notice, from Resolute, Tolko, West Fraser, and companies subject to the all-others rate that were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date which is 90 days before the publication of the preliminary determination. Because we did not find that critical circumstances exist with regard to Canfor, in accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, the Department will instruct CBP to continue to suspend liquidation of all Canfor entries of softwood lumber from Canada as described in Appendix I of this notice, which were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after June 30, 2017, the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination of this investigation in the Federal Register. Further, pursuant to section 735(c)(1)(B)(ii) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(d), the Department will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit equal to the estimated weighted-average dumping margin or the estimated all-others rate, as follows: (1) The cash deposit rate for the respondents listed above will be equal to the respondent-specific estimated weighted-average dumping margin determined in this final determination; (2) if the exporter is not a respondent identified above, but the producer is, then the cash deposit rate will be equal to the respondent-specific estimated weighted-average dumping margin established for that producer of the subject merchandise; and (3) the cash deposit rate for all other producers and exporters will be equal to the all-others estimated weighted-average dumping margin.

    Exclusion of Certain Softwood Lumber Products Certified by the Atlantic Lumber Board (ALB)

    As noted in the scope of the investigation (Appendix I), the Department has excluded from the scope of the investigation softwood lumber products certified by the ALB as being first produced in the Provinces of Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, or Prince Edward Island from logs harvested in Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, or Prince Edward Island. We will instruct CBP to require that the ALB certificate be included with each entry and require that the ALB certificate of origin number be identified on each CBP Form 7501 for such entries to be excluded from the scope of the investigation. We will instruct CBP to refund cash deposits on any suspended entries after April 1, 2017 that are accompanied by the ALB certificate.

    Disclosure

    The Department intends to disclose to interested parties its calculations and analysis performed in this final determination within five days of any public announcement in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    International Trade Commission Notification

    In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, the Department will notify the International Trade Commission (ITC) of its final determination. Because the final determination in this proceeding is affirmative, in accordance with section 735(b)(2)(B) of the Act, the ITC will make its final determination as to whether the domestic industry in the United States is materially injured, or threatened with material injury, by reason of imports of softwood lumber from Canada no later than 45 days after the Department's final determination. If the ITC determines that material injury or threat of material injury does not exist, the proceeding will be terminated and all securities posted will be refunded or canceled. If the ITC determines that such injury does exist, the Department will issue an antidumping duty order directing CBP to assess, upon further instruction by the Department, antidumping duties on appropriate imports of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the effective date of the suspension of liquidation.

    Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders

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

    This determination and this notice are issued and published pursuant to sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(c).

    Dated: November 1, 2017. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I Scope of the Investigation

    The merchandise covered by this investigation is softwood lumber, siding, flooring and certain other coniferous wood (softwood lumber products). The scope includes:

    • Coniferous wood, sawn, or chipped lengthwise, sliced or peeled, whether or not planed, whether or not sanded, or whether or not finger-jointed, of an actual thickness exceeding six millimeters.

    • Coniferous wood siding, flooring, and other coniferous wood (other than moldings and dowel rods), including strips and friezes for parquet flooring, that is continuously shaped (including, but not limited to, tongued, grooved, rebated, chamfered, V-jointed, beaded, molded, rounded) along any of its edges, ends, or faces, whether or not planed, whether or not sanded, or whether or not end-jointed.

    • Coniferous drilled and notched lumber and angle cut lumber.

    • Coniferous lumber stacked on edge and fastened together with nails, whether or not with plywood sheathing.

    • Components or parts of semi-finished or unassembled finished products made from subject merchandise that would otherwise meet the definition of the scope above.

    Finished products are not covered by the scope of this investigation. For the purposes of this scope, finished products contain, or are comprised of, subject merchandise and have undergone sufficient processing such that they can no longer be considered intermediate products, and such products can be readily differentiated from merchandise subject to this investigation at the time of importation. Such differentiation may, for example, be shown through marks of special adaptation as a particular product. The following products are illustrative of the type of merchandise that is considered “finished,” for the purpose of this scope: I-joists; assembled pallets; cutting boards; assembled picture frames; garage doors.

    The following items are excluded from the scope of this investigation:

    • Softwood lumber products certified by the Atlantic Lumber Board as being first produced in the Provinces of Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, or Prince Edward Island from logs harvested in Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, or Prince Edward Island.

    • U.S.-origin lumber shipped to Canada for processing and imported into the United States if the processing occurring in Canada is limited to one or more of the following: (1) Kiln drying; (2) planing to create smooth-to-size board; or (3) sanding.

    • Box-spring frame kits if they contain the following wooden pieces—two side rails, two end (or top) rails and varying numbers of slats. The side rails and the end rails must be radius-cut at both ends. The kits must be individually packaged and must contain the exact number of wooden components needed to make a particular box-spring frame, with no further processing required. None of the components exceeds 1” in actual thickness or 83” in length.

    • Radius-cut box-spring-frame components, not exceeding 1” in actual thickness or 83” in length, ready for assembly without further processing. The radius cuts must be present on both ends of the boards and must be substantially cut so as to completely round one corner.

    Softwood lumber product imports are generally entered under Chapter 44 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). This chapter of the HTSUS covers “Wood and articles of wood.” Softwood lumber products that are subject to this investigation are currently classifiable under the following ten-digit HTSUS subheadings in Chapter 44:

    4407.10.01.01; 4407.10.01.02; 4407.10.01.15; 4407.10.01.16; 4407.10.01.17; 4407.10.01.18; 4407.10.01.19; 4407.10.01.20; 4407.10.01.42; 4407.10.01.43; 4407.10.01.44; 4407.10.01.45; 4407.10.01.46; 4407.10.01.47; 4407.10.01.48; 4407.10.01.49; 4407.10.01.52; 4407.10.01.53; 4407.10.01.54; 4407.10.01.55; 4407.10.01.56; 4407.10.01.57; 4407.10.01.58; 4407.10.01.59; 4407.10.01.64; 4407.10.01.65; 4407.10.01.66; 4407.10.01.67; 4407.10.01.68; 4407.10.01.69; 4407.10.01.74; 4407.10.01.75; 4407.10.01.76; 4407.10.01.77; 4407.10.01.82; 4407.10.01.83; 4407.10.01.92; 4407.10.01.93; 4409.10.05.00; 4409.10.10.20; 4409.10.10.40; 4409.10.10.60; 4409.10.10.80; 4409.10.20.00; 4409.10.90.20; 4409.10.90.40; and 4418.99.10.00.

    Subject merchandise as described above might be identified on entry documentation as stringers, square cut box-spring-frame components, fence pickets, truss components, pallet components, flooring, and door and window frame parts. Items so identified might be entered under the following ten-digit HTSUS subheadings in Chapter 44:

    4415.20.40.00; 4415.20.80.00; 4418.99.90.05; 4418.99.90.20; 4418.99.90.40; 4418.99.90.95; 4421.99.70.40; and 4421.99.97.80.

    Although these HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive.

    Appendix II List of Topics in the Issues and Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Scope of the Investigation IV. Scope Comments V. Discussion of the Issues: Scope Issues Comment 1: Definition and Examples of Finished Products in Scope Language Comment 2: Exclusions Requested for Certain Types of Lumber Harvested From Western Red Cedar, Douglas Fir, and Hemlock Trees Comment 3: Previous Scope Determinations Comment 4: Whether Certain Products Are Finished Products Comment 5: Craft Kits Comment 6: Whether Certain Scope Language Should Be Removed Comment 7: Wood Shims Comment 8: Pre-Painted Wood Products Comment 9: I-Joists Comment 10: Miscellaneous Products Discussed by the Government of British Columbia (GBC) and the BC Lumber Trade Council (BCLTC) Comment 11: Bed-Frame Components/Crating Ladder Components Comment 12: U.S.-Origin Lumber Sent to Canada for Further Processing Comment 13: Softwood Lumber Produced in Canada From U.S.-Origin Logs Comment 14: Remanufactured Goods Comment 15: Eastern White Pine Comment 16: Additional Scope Issues Comment 16A: Whether the Department Should Conduct a Pass-Through Analysis for Independent Remanufacturers That Purchase Softwood Lumber at Arm's Length Comment 16B: Whether Countervailing Duties Should Only Be Applicable on a First Mill Basis Comment 16C: Whether the Department Should Exclude Softwood Lumber Products From New Brunswick Comment 16D: Whether the Department Should Finalize the Exclusion of Softwood Lumber Products From the Atlantic Provinces General Issues Comment 17: Particular Market Situation Comment 18: Differential Pricing Analysis Comment 19: Whether Critical Circumstances Exist With Respect to Shipments of Certain Softwood Lumber Imports From Canada Comment 20: Whether the Department Should Deduct SLA Export Tax From U.S. Price Comment 21: Deduction of Indirect Selling Expenses and Inventory Carrying Costs Incurred in Canada From U.S. CEP Comment 22: Currency Conversions in the Home Market Program Comment 23: Matching Criteria When Applying Arm's Length Test to Canfor's and Resolute's Home Market Sales Company-Specific Issues Comment 24: Basis for Canfor's Gross Unit Price Comment 25: Variable Representing Canfor's Total Cost of Manufacturing Comment 26: Canfor's Reported Export Taxes Comment 27: Canfor's Electricity Costs Comment 28: Canfor's Reported Packing Costs Comment 29: Canfor's By-Product Offsets Comment 30: Canfor's Reconciling Items Comment 31: Canfor's Cost Related to Canal Flats Comment 32: Canfor's Gains and Losses for Derivatives Comment 33: Resolute's Credit Expenses Comment 34: Corrections to Resolute's Sales Databases as Noted in the Sales Verification Report Comment 35: Resolute's Corporate Level Costs Comment 36: Allocation of Resolute Canada's Corporate Charges Comment 37: Resolute Growth's G&A Expense Comment 38: Resolute Growth's Miscellaneous Income Comment 39: Resolute's Wood Segment Corporate Income and Expense Items Comment 40: Resolute's Long-Term Interest Income Comment 41: Resolute's Timber Transport Costs Comment 42: Resolute's Minor Cost Corrections Comment 43: Resolute's Byproduct Offsets Comment 44: Resolute's Offset for Further Processed Byproducts Comment 45: Resolute's Startup Adjustments Comment 46: Whether the Department Should Adjust Tolko's U.S. Prices to Reflect Losses on Futures Contracts Comment 47: Cost of Discontinued Operations in Tolko's G&A Expenses Comment 48: Depreciation on Tolko's Idle Assets Comment 49: Exclusion of Long-Term Interest Income From Tolko's Financial Expenses Comment 50: Byproduct Offset Adjustments for Tolko Comment 51: Offset for the Revenue Earned by Tolko on Sales of Self-Generated Electricity Comment 52: Yield Loss in Tolko's Cost of Manufacturing Comment 53: U.S. Price Adjustment Comment 54: Billing Adjustments Comment 55: West Fraser Reported Millcode Comment 56: Financial Expenses Comment 57: Byproduct Offset for Sales of Byproducts to Affiliated Companies Comment 58: Purchases of Seeds Comment 59: West Fraser's Cost Reconciliation/Non-Operating Expenses VI. Recommendation
    [FR Doc. 2017-24203 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-201-842] Large Residential Washers From Mexico: Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2016-2017 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on large residential washers from Mexico. The period of review (POR) is February 1, 2016, through January 31, 2017. The review covers one producer/exporter of the subject merchandise, Electrolux Home Products Corp. N.V. and Electrolux Home Products de Mexico, S.A. de C.V. (collectively, Electrolux). We preliminarily determine that sales of subject merchandise by Electrolux have been made at prices below normal value (NV). We invite interested parties to comment on these preliminary results.

    DATES:

    Applicable: November 8, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ross Belliveau or Rebecca Janz, AD/CVD Operations, Office II, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4952 or (202) 482-2972, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Scope of the Order

    The products covered by the order are all large residential washers and certain subassemblies thereof from Mexico. The products are currently classifiable under subheadings 8450.20.0040 and 8450.20.0080 of the Harmonized Tariff System of the United States (HTSUS). Products subject to this order may also enter under HTSUS subheadings 8450.11.0040, 8450.11.0080, 8450.90.2000, and 8450.90.6000. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise subject to this scope is dispositive.1

    1 For a full description of the scope of the order, see Memorandum, “Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Results of the 2016-2017 Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Large Residential Washers from Mexico,” dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice (Preliminary Decision Memorandum).

    Methodology

    The Department is conducting this review in accordance with sections 751(a)(1)(B) and (2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Pursuant to section 776(a) and (b) of the Act, the Department has preliminarily relied upon facts otherwise available with adverse inferences (AFA) for Electrolux because this respondent did not timely respond to the Department's antidumping duty questionnaire. For a complete explanation of the methodology and analysis underlying the preliminary application of AFA, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov, and to all parties in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be found at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Preliminary Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content. A list of the topics discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is attached as the Appendix to this notice.

    Preliminary Results of the Review

    As a result of this review, the Department preliminarily determines that a dumping margin of 72.41 percent exists for Electrolux for the period February 1, 2016, through January 31, 2017.

    Disclosure

    Normally, the Department discloses to interested parties the calculations performed in connection with the preliminary results within five days of the date of publication of the notice of preliminary results in the Federal Register, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). However, there are no calculations to disclose because, in accordance with section 776 of the Act, the Department preliminarily applied AFA to Electrolux, the only company that is subject to this review, and the applied AFA rate is based solely on a dumping margin applied in a prior segment of this proceeding.

    Public Comment

    Case briefs or other written comments may be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance no later than 30 days after the date of publication of the preliminary results, unless the Secretary alters the time limit. Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in case briefs, may be submitted no later than five days after the deadline date for case briefs.2 Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2), parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this administrative review 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.

    2See 19 CFR 351.309; see also 19 CFR 351.303 (for general filing requirements).

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. Requests should contain the party's name, address, and telephone number; the number of participants; and a list of the issues to be discussed. If a request for a hearing is made, the Department intends to hold the hearing at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, at a time and date to be determined.3 Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and location of the hearing two days before the scheduled date.

    3Id.

    All submissions, with limited exceptions, must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by 5 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on the due date. Documents excepted from the electronic submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form) with the APO/Dockets Unit in Room 18022 and stamped with the date and time of receipt by 5 p.m. ET on the due date.

    The Department intends to issue the final results of this administrative review, including the results of its analysis of issues raised in any written briefs, not later than 120 days after the date of publication of this notice, unless the deadline is extended.4

    4See section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h).

    Assessment Rates

    Upon issuance of the final results, the Department shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review.5 The final results of this review shall be the basis for the assessment of antidumping duties on entries of merchandise covered by the final results of this review and for future deposits of estimated duties, where applicable.6

    5See 19 CFR 351.212(b).

    6See section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act.

    We intend to issue instructions to CBP 41 days after the publication date of the final results of this review.

    Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for Electrolux will be the rate established in the final results of this review; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated companies not participating in this review, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 36.52 percent, the all-others rate established in the LTFV investigation.7 These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

    7See Large Residential Washers from Mexico and the Republic of Korea: Antidumping Duty Orders, 78 FR 11148 (February 15, 2013).

    Notification to Importers

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

    We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4).

    Dated: October 31, 2017. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Scope of the Order IV. Application of Facts Available and Adverse Inferences A. Use of Facts Available B. Application of Facts Available With an Adverse Inference C. Selection and Corroboration of Adverse Facts Available Rate V. Duty Absorption VI. Conclusion
    [FR Doc. 2017-24198 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-533-843, A-570-901] Certain Lined Paper Products From India and the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Expedited Second Sunset Reviews of Antidumping Duty Orders AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    As a result of this sunset review, the Department of Commerce (the Department) finds that revocation of the antidumping duty (AD) orders on certain lined paper products (CLPP) from India and the People's Republic of China (PRC) would be likely lead to the continuation or recurrence of dumping at the rates identified in the “Final Results of Review” section of this notice.

    DATES:

    Applicable: November 8, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Cindy Robinson, AD/CVD Operations, Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-3797.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On September 28, 2006, the Department published in the Federal Register the AD Orders on CLPP from India and the PRC.1 On July 3, 2017, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department initiated the second sunset reviews of the AD Orders on CLPP from India and the PRC.2 On July 18, 2017, the Department received a notice of intent to participate in these reviews from the Association of American School Paper Suppliers (AASPS) and its individual members 3 (collectively, petitioner), within the deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i).4 The petitioner comprises manufacturers of a domestic like product in the United States and, accordingly, are domestic interested parties pursuant to section 771(9)(C) of the Act.5

    1See Notice of Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Lined Paper Products from the People's Republic of China; Notice of Antidumping Duty Orders: Certain Lined Paper Products from India, Indonesia and the People's Republic of China; and Notice of Countervailing Duty Orders: Certain Lined Paper Products from India and Indonesia, 71 FR 56949 (September 28, 2006) (Orders).

    2See Initiation of Five-Year (Sunset) Reviews, 82 FR 30844 (July 3, 2017) (CLPP Sunset 2017).

    3See AASPS' letter re: Certain Lined Paper Products from India: Notification of Membership Change, dated May 1, 2012, indicates that its individual members include: Mead Products LLC (which is a direct, wholly-owned subsidiary of ACCO Brands Corporation.), Norcom, Inc., and Top Flight, Inc. (collectively, the petitioners).

    4See the petitioners' letter re: Certain Lined Paper Products from India: Notice of Intent to Participate in Sunset Review, dated July 18, 2017. See also the petitioners' letter re: Certain Lined Paper Products from the People's Republic of China: Notice of Intent to Participate in Sunset Review, dated July 18, 2017.

    5Id. The petitioner claimed interested party status for this sunset review under section 771(9)(C) of the Act.

    On August 2, 2017, the Department received an adequate substantive response to the notice of initiation from the petitioner within the 30-day deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i).6 However, the Department did not receive any timely filed responses from the respondent interested parties, i.e., CLPP producers and exporters from India and the PRC. On the basis of the notices of intent to participate and the adequate substantive responses filed by the petitioner, and the inadequate response from any respondent interested party, the Department has conducted expedited (120-day) reviews of the AD Orders with respect to India and the PRC, pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2).

    6See the petitioner's letter re: Certain Lined Paper Products from India: Substantive Response to Notice of Initiation of Sunset Review, dated July 18, 2017. See also the petitioners' letter re: Certain Lined Paper Products from the People's Republic of China: Substantive Response to Notice of Initiation of Sunset Review, dated July 18, 2017.

    Scope of the Orders

    The merchandise covered by the Orders7 is certain lined paper products from India and the PRC. The merchandise subject to the orders is currently classified under the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings: 4811.90.9035, 4811.90.9080, 4820.30.0040, 4810.22.5044, 4811.90.9050, 4811.90.9090, 4820.10.2010, 4820.10.2020, 4820.10.2030, 4820.10.2040, 4820.10.2050, 4820.10.2060, and 4820.10.4000. Although the HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written product description remains dispositive.8

    7See Orders.

    8 For a complete description of the Scope of the Orders, see Memorandum, “Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of the Expedited Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty Orders on Certain Lined Paper Products from India and the People's Republic of China” dated concurrently with and hereby adopted by this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum).

    Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in these reviews are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, including the following: (1) The likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping and the magnitude of dumping and (2) the magnitude of the margins likely to prevail if the AD Orders were revoked.9 Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this review and the corresponding recommendation in the Issues and Decision Memorandum which is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov and is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the internet at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn. The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    9Id.

    Final Results of Sunset Review

    Pursuant to sections 751(c)(1) and 752(c)(1) and (3) of the Act, the Department determines that revocation of the AD Orders on CLPP from India and the PRC would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping. We determine that the weighted-average percentage dumping margins likely to prevail are up to the following percentages:

    Country Weighted-
  • average
  • dumping
  • margin
  • (percent)
  • India 23.17 The People's Republic of China 258.21
    Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Order

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

    The Department is issuing and publishing these final results and notice in accordance with sections 751(c), 752(c), and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218.

    Dated: October 31, 2017. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Scope of the Order IV. History of the Order V. Legal Framework VI. Discussion of the Issues 1. Likelihood of Continuation or Recurrence of Dumping 2. Magnitude of the Margins Likely To Prevail VII. Final Results of Sunset Review VIII. Recommendation
    [FR Doc. 2017-24188 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-580-868] Large Residential Washers From the Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2016-2017 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on large residential washers from the Republic of Korea (Korea). The period of review (POR) is February 1, 2016, through January 31, 2017. The review covers one producer/exporter of the subject merchandise, LG Electronics, Inc. (LGE). We preliminarily determine that sales of subject merchandise by LGE were made at prices below normal value (NV). We invite interested parties to comment on these preliminary results.

    DATES:

    Applicable: November 8, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David Goldberger, AD/CVD Operations, Office II, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4136.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Scope of the Order

    The products covered by the order are all large residential washers and certain subassemblies thereof from Korea. The products are currently classifiable under subheadings 8450.20.0040 and 8450.20.0080 of the Harmonized Tariff System of the United States (HTSUS). Products subject to this order may also enter under HTSUS subheadings 8450.11.0040, 8450.11.0080, 8450.90.2000, and 8450.90.6000. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise subject to this scope is dispositive.1

    1 For a full descripition of the scope of the order, see Memorandum entitled “Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Results of the 2016-2017 Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Large Residential Washers from Korea,” dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice (Preliminary Decision Memorandum).

    Methodology

    The Department is conducting this review in accordance with sections 751(a)(1)(B) and (2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Export price and constructed export price are calculated in accordance with section 772 of the Act. NV is calculated in accordance with section 773 of the Act. For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at http://access.trade.gov and to all parties in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Preliminary Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content. A list of the topics discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is attached as an Appendix to this notice.

    Preliminary Results of the Review

    As a result of this review, the Department preliminarily determines that a weighted-average margin of 0.64 percent exists for LGE for the period February 1, 2016, through January 31, 2017.

    Disclosure and Public Comment

    We will disclose the calculations performed to parties in this segment of the proceeding within five days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    Case briefs or other written comments may be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance no later than 30 days after the date of publication of the preliminary results, unless the Secretary alters the time limit.2 Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed not later than five days after the deadline for case briefs.3 Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2), 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.

    2See 19 CFR 351.309(c).

    3See 19 CFR 351.309(d).

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. Requests should contain the party's name, address, and telephone number; the number of participants; and a list of the issues to be discussed. If a request for a hearing is made, the Department intends to hold the hearing at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, at a time and date to be determined.4 Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and location of the hearing two days before the scheduled date.

    4See 19 CFR 351.310(d).

    All submissions, with limited exceptions, must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by 5 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on the due date. Documents excepted from the electronic submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form) with the APO/Dockets Unit in Room 18022 and stamped with the date and time of receipt by 5 p.m. ET on the due date.

    The Department intends to issue the final results of this administrative review, including the results of its analysis of issues raised in any written briefs, not later than 120 days after the date of publication of this notice, unless the deadline is extended.5

    5See section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h).

    Assessment Rates

    Upon issuance of the final results, the Department shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review.6

    6See 19 CFR 351.212(b).

    We will calculate importer-specific ad valorem duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales to the total entered value of the examined sales to that importer. Where either the respondent's weighted-average dumping margin is zero or de minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c), or an importer-specific assessment rate is zero or de minimis, we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties.7 The final results of this review shall be the basis for the assessment of antidumping duties on entries of merchandise covered by the final results of this review and for future deposits of estimated duties, where applicable.8

    7See Antidumping Proceedings: Calculation of the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Duty Proceedings; Final Modification, 77 FR 8101, 8103 (February 14, 2012).

    8See section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act.

    We intend to issue instructions to CBP 15 days after the publication date of the final results of this review.

    Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for LGE will be the rate established in the final results of this review, except if the rate is less than 0.50 percent and, therefore, de minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), in which case the cash deposit rate will be zero; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated companies not participating in this review, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 11.80 percent, the all-others rate established in the LTFV investigation.9 These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

    9See Large Residential Washers from Mexico and the Republic of Korea: Antidumping Duty Orders, 78 FR 11148 (February 15, 2013).

    Notification to Importers

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

    We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4).

    Dated: October 31, 2017. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Scope of the Order IV. Discussion of the Methodology A. Comparisons to Normal Value 1. Determination of Comparison Method 2. Results of the Differential Pricing Analysis B. Product Comparisons C. Export Price and Constructed Export Price D. Normal Value 1. Home Market Viability and Selection of Comparison Market 2. Affiliated Party Transactions and Arm's-Length Test 3. Level of Trade E. Cost of Production Analysis 1. Calculation of COP 2. Test of Comparison Market Sales Prices 3. Results of the COP Test F. Calculation of NV Based on Comparison Market Prices G. Calculation of NV Based on CV H. Currency Conversion V. Recommendation
    [FR Doc. 2017-24200 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C-122-858] Certain Softwood Lumber Products From Canada: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, and Final Negative Determination of Critical Circumstances AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (the Department) determines that countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters of certain softwood lumber products (softwood lumber) from Canada. The period of investigation is January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015.

    DATES:

    Applicable: November 8, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Lana Nigro (Tolko), Toby Vandall (Canfor), Justin Neuman (JDIL), Patricia Tran (West Fraser), and Kristen Johnson (Resolute), AD/CVD Operations, Offices I and III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-1779, (202) 482-1664, (202) 482-0486, (202) 482-1503, and (202) 482-4793, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On April 26, 2017, the Department published the Preliminary Determination of Critical Circumstances. 1 On April 28, 2017, the Department published the Preliminary Determination in this countervailing duty (CVD) investigation, in which the Department preliminarily found that countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters of softwood lumber from Canada.2 A summary of the events that have occurred since the Department published the Preliminary Determination, as well as a full discussion of the issues raised by parties for this final determination, may be found in the Issues and Decision Memorandum.3 The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at http://access.trade.gov, and to all parties in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/.

    1See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations of Certain Softwood Lumber Products from Canada: Preliminary Determinations of Critical Circumstances, 82 FR 19219 (April 26, 2017) (Preliminary Determination of Critical Circumstances).

    2See Certain Softwood Lumber Products from Canada: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, and Alignment of Final Determination With Final Antidumping Duty Determination, 82 FR 19657 (April 28, 2017) and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum (Preliminary Decision Memorandum) (collectively, Preliminary Determination).

    3See Memorandum, “Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Determination in the Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Softwood Lumber Products from Canada,” dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum).

    Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is softwood lumber from Canada. For a complete description of the scope of this investigation, see Appendix I.

    Scope Comments

    In accordance with the Preliminary Determination, Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum, and ALB Decision Memorandum,4 the Department set aside a period of time for parties to raise issues regarding product coverage (i.e., proposed exclusions from the scope). Certain interested parties commented on the scope of the investigation as it appeared in the Preliminary Determination, Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum, and ALB Decision Memorandum. Therefore, the scope of this investigation has been modified for this final determination. For a summary of the product coverage comments and rebuttal responses submitted to the record for this final determination, and accompanying discussion and analysis of all comments timely received, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum and Final Scope Decision Memorandum.5

    4See Memorandum, “Certain Softwood Lumber Products from Canada: Scope Decision,” dated June 23, 2017 (Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum). In the Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum, the Department preliminarily adopted certain exclusions from the scope of the antidumping duty (AD) and CVD investigations and stated its intention to consider expanded exclusionary language covering bed-frame components, and exclusionary language for crating ladder components, if submitted by interested parties. See also Memorandum, “Decision Memorandum for Exclusion of Certain Softwood Lumber Products Certified By the Atlantic Lumber Board in the Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty Investigations of Certain Softwood Lumber Products from Canada,” dated June 23, 2017 (ALB Decision Memorandum), where the Department preliminarily excluded from the scope softwood lumber products certified by the Atlantic Lumber Board (ALB) as being first produced in the Provinces of Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, or Prince Edward Island from logs harvested in these three provinces.

    5See Issues and Decision Memorandum; see also Memorandum, “Certain Softwood Lumber Products from Canada: Scope Decision,” dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice (Final Scope Decision Memorandum).

    Verification

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (the Act), during June 2017, the Department conducted verification of the information submitted by the Government of British Columbia, Government of Alberta, Government of Ontario, Government of Quebec, Government of New Brunswick, Government of Nova Scotia, the respondent companies Canfor Corporation (Canfor), Resolute FP Canada Inc. (Resolute), Tolko Marketing and Sales Ltd. and Tolko Industries Ltd. (Tolko), and West Fraser Timber Co. Ltd. (West Fraser), and voluntary respondent J.D. Irving, Limited (JDIL) for use in the Department's final determination.6 The Department used standard verification procedures, including an examination of original source documents provided by the respondents.

    6See Memorandum to All Interested Parties titled “Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Softwood Lumber Products from Canada: Verification Schedule,” dated May 12, 2017.

    Analysis of Subsidy Programs and Comments Received

    The subsidy programs under investigation and all issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs that were submitted by parties in this investigation are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of these issues is attached to this notice as Appendix II.

    Changes Since the Preliminary Determination

    Based on the Department's analysis of the comments received and consideration of the verification reports, the Department made certain changes to the subsidy rate calculations for each of the respondents. For a discussion of the Department's changes, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. As a result of these changes, the Department has also revised the “All-Others” rate calculated for the non-individually examined companies as discussed below.

    All-Others Rate

    In accordance with section 705(c)(1)(B)(i)(I) of the Act, the Department must determine an estimated all-others rate for all exporters and producers not individually examined. Pursuant to section 705(c)(5)(A) of the Act, this rate is normally an amount equal to the weighted average of the estimated subsidy rates established for those exporters and producers individually examined, excluding any zero and de minimis countervailable subsidy rates, and any rates based entirely under section 776 of the Act.

    In this investigation, the Department calculated individual estimated countervailable subsidy rates for Canfor, JDIL,7 Resolute, Tolko, and West Fraser, that are not zero, de minimis, or based entirely on facts otherwise available. Therefore, pursuant to section 705(c)(5)(A) of the Act, the Department calculated the all-others rate using a weighted-average of the individual estimated subsidy rates calculated for the examined respondents using each company's business proprietary data for the merchandise under consideration.8

    7See MacLean-Fogg Co. v. United States, 753 F.3d 1237 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (holding that voluntary respondents are considered “individually investigated” for purposes of calculating the all-others rate). The Department accepted JDIL as a voluntary respondent in this investigation.

    8See Memorandum to the File, “Calculation of the “All-Others” Rate in the Final Determination of the Countervailing Duty Investigation of Softwood Lumber Products from Canada” dated concurrently with this notice.

    Final Determination

    The Department determines that the following estimated countervailable subsidy rates exist:

    Company Subsidy
  • rate
  • (%)
  • Canfor Corporation and its cross-owned affiliates 9 13.24 J.D. Irving, Limited and its cross-owned affiliates 10 3.34 Resolute FP Canada Inc. and its cross-owned affiliates 11 14.70 Tolko Marketing and Sales Ltd. and its cross-owned affiliates 12 14.85 West Fraser Mills Ltd. and its cross-owned affiliates 13 18.19 All-Others 14.25
    Final Negative Determination of Critical Circumstances

    9 The Department has found the following companies to be cross-owned with Canfor Corporation: Canadian Forest Products, Ltd., and Canfor Wood Products Marketing, Ltd.

    10 The Department has found the following companies to be cross-owned with JDIL: Miramichi Timber Holdings Limited, The New Brunswick Railway Company, Rothesay Paper Holdings Ltd., St. George Pulp & Paper Limited, and Irving Paper Limited.

    11 The Department has found the following companies to be cross-owned with Resolute: Resolute Growth Canada Inc., Resolute Sales Inc., Abitibi-Bowater Canada Inc., Bowater Canadian Ltd., Resolute Forest Products Inc., Produits Forestiers Maurice S.E.C., and 9192-8515 Quebec Inc.

    12 The Department has found the following companies to be cross-owned with Tolko: Tolko Industries Ltd., and Meadow Lake OSB Limited Partnership.

    13 The Department has found the following companies to be cross-owned with West Fraser: West Fraser Timber Co. Ltd., West Fraser Alberta Holdings, Ltd., Blue Ridge Lumber Inc., Manning Forest Products, Ltd., Sunpine Inc., and Sundre Forest Products Inc.

    In accordance with section 703(e) of the Act, the Department preliminarily found that critical circumstances existed with respect to JDIL and the non-individually examined companies receiving the “All-Others” rate in this investigation and did not exist with respect to the respondents Canfor, Resolute, Tolko, and West Fraser. The Department received comments concerning the preliminary affirmative determination of critical circumstances. For the final determination, the Department finds that, in accordance with 705(a)(2) of the Act, critical circumstances do not exist for all individually-examined respondents and the non-individually examined companies receiving the “All-Others” rate in this investigation. A discussion of the determination can be found in the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

    Suspension of Liquidation

    As a result of our Preliminary Determination, and pursuant to sections 703(d)(1)(B) and (2) of the Act, we instructed U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation of all entries of merchandise under consideration from Canada that were entered or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption, on or after April 28, 2017, the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination in the Federal Register.

    We preliminarily determined that critical circumstances existed with respect to entries of softwood lumber from Canada made by JDIL and the non-individually examined companies receiving the “All-Others” rate in this investigation. As a result, we instructed CBP to suspend liquidation of entries that were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after January 28, 2017, which is 90 days before the date of the publication of the Preliminary Determination in the Federal Register. At that time, we instructed CBP to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties for such entries at the rates determined in the Preliminary Determination.

    In accordance with section 703(d) of the Act, we later issued instructions to CBP to discontinue the suspension of liquidation for CVD purposes for subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, on or after August 26, 2017, but to continue the suspension of liquidation of all entries between January 28, 2017 (for JDIL and all-others) or April 28, 2017 (for the other individually examined respondents), and August 25, 2017, as appropriate.

    Because we find critical circumstances do not exist for JDIL and the non-individually examined companies receiving the “All-Others” rate in this investigation, we will direct CBP to terminate the retroactive suspension of liquidation ordered at the Preliminary Determination and release any cash deposits that were required prior to April 28, 2017, consistent with section 705(c)(3) of the Act.

    If the International Trade Commission (ITC) makes a final determination that material injury or threat of material injury does not exist, the proceeding will be terminated and all securities posted will be refunded or canceled. If the ITC issues a final affirmative injury determination, we will issue a CVD order, reinstate the suspension of liquidation under section 706(a) of the Act, and require a cash deposit of estimated CVDs for such entries of subject merchandise in the amounts indicated above.

    Exclusion of Certain Softwood Lumber Products Certified by the Atlantic Lumber Board (ALB)

    As noted in the scope of the investigation (Appendix I), the Department has excluded from the scope of the investigation softwood lumber products certified by the ALB as being first produced in the Provinces of Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, or Prince Edward Island from logs harvested in Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, or Prince Edward Island. We will instruct CBP to require that the ALB certificate be included with each entry and require that the ALB certificate of origin number be identified on each CBP Form 7501, for such entries to be excluded from the scope of the order, if issued. Further, if an order is issued, we will instruct CBP to refund cash deposits collected on any suspended entries between April 28, 2017 (for the other individually examined respondents), and August 25, 2017, as appropriate, that are accompanied by the ALB certificate.

    Disclosure

    The Department intends to disclose to interested parties its calculations and analysis performed in this final determination within five days of any public announcement in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    ITC Notification

    In accordance with section 705(d) of the Act, we will notify the ITC of our determination. In addition, we are making available to the ITC all non-privileged and non-proprietary information related to this investigation. We will allow the ITC access to all privileged and business proprietary information in our files, provided the ITC confirms that it will not disclose such information, either publicly or under an administrative protective order (APO), without the written consent of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

    Notification to Interested Parties

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

    This determination and notice are issued and published pursuant to sections 705(d) and 777(i) of the Act.

    Dated: November 1, 2017. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I Scope of the Investigation

    The merchandise covered by this investigation is softwood lumber, siding, flooring and certain other coniferous wood (softwood lumber products). The scope includes:

    • Coniferous wood, sawn, or chipped lengthwise, sliced or peeled, whether or not planed, whether or not sanded, or whether or not finger-jointed, of an actual thickness exceeding six millimeters.

    • Coniferous wood siding, flooring, and other coniferous wood (other than moldings and dowel rods), including strips and friezes for parquet flooring, that is continuously shaped (including, but not limited to, tongued, grooved, rebated, chamfered, V-jointed, beaded, molded, rounded) along any of its edges, ends, or faces, whether or not planed, whether or not sanded, or whether or not end-jointed.

    • Coniferous drilled and notched lumber and angle cut lumber.

    • Coniferous lumber stacked on edge and fastened together with nails, whether or not with plywood sheathing.

    • Components or parts of semi-finished or unassembled finished products made from subject merchandise that would otherwise meet the definition of the scope above.

    Finished products are not covered by the scope of this investigation. For the purposes of this scope, finished products contain, or are comprised of, subject merchandise and have undergone sufficient processing such that they can no longer be considered intermediate products, and such products can be readily differentiated from merchandise subject to this investigation at the time of importation. Such differentiation may, for example, be shown through marks of special adaptation as a particular product. The following products are illustrative of the type of merchandise that is considered “finished,” for the purpose of this scope: I-joists; assembled pallets; cutting boards; assembled picture frames; garage doors.

    The following items are excluded from the scope of this investigation:

    • Softwood lumber products certified by the Atlantic Lumber Board as being first produced in the Provinces of Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, or Prince Edward Island from logs harvested in Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, or Prince Edward Island.

    • U.S.-origin lumber shipped to Canada for processing and imported into the United States if the processing occurring in Canada is limited to one or more of the following: (1) Kiln drying; (2) planing to create smooth-to-size board; or (3) sanding.

    • Box-spring frame kits if they contain the following wooden pieces—two side rails, two end (or top) rails and varying numbers of slats. The side rails and the end rails must be radius-cut at both ends. The kits must be individually packaged and must contain the exact number of wooden components needed to make a particular box-spring frame, with no further processing required. None of the components exceeds 1″ in actual thickness or 83″ in length.

    • Radius-cut box-spring-frame components, not exceeding 1″ in actual thickness or 83″ in length, ready for assembly without further processing. The radius cuts must be present on both ends of the boards and must be substantially cut so as to completely round one corner.

    Softwood lumber product imports are generally entered under Chapter 44 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). This chapter of the HTSUS covers “Wood and articles of wood.” Softwood lumber products that are subject to this investigation are currently classifiable under the following ten-digit HTSUS subheadings in Chapter 44:

    4407.10.01.01; 4407.10.01.02; 4407.10.01.15; 4407.10.01.16; 4407.10.01.17; 4407.10.01.18; 4407.10.01.19; 4407.10.01.20; 4407.10.01.42; 4407.10.01.43; 4407.10.01.44; 4407.10.01.45; 4407.10.01.46; 4407.10.01.47; 4407.10.01.48; 4407.10.01.49; 4407.10.01.52; 4407.10.01.53; 4407.10.01.54; 4407.10.01.55; 4407.10.01.56; 4407.10.01.57; 4407.10.01.58; 4407.10.01.59; 4407.10.01.64; 4407.10.01.65; 4407.10.01.66; 4407.10.01.67; 4407.10.01.68; 4407.10.01.69; 4407.10.01.74; 4407.10.01.75; 4407.10.01.76; 4407.10.01.77; 4407.10.01.82; 4407.10.01.83; 4407.10.01.92; 4407.10.01.93; 4409.10.05.00; 4409.10.10.20; 4409.10.10.40; 4409.10.10.60; 4409.10.10.80; 4409.10.20.00; 4409.10.90.20; 4409.10.90.40; and 4418.99.10.00.

    Subject merchandise as described above might be identified on entry documentation as stringers, square cut box-spring-frame components, fence pickets, truss components, pallet components, flooring, and door and window frame parts. Items so identified might be entered under the following ten-digit HTSUS subheadings in Chapter 44:

    4415.20.40.00; 4415.20.80.00; 4418.99.90.05; 4418.99.90.20; 4418.99.90.40; 4418.99.90.95; 4421.99.70.40; and 4421.99.97.80.

    Although these HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive.

    Appendix II List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum Summary Background Case History Period of Investigation Scope of the Investigation I. Scope Comments Subsidies Valuation Information A. Allocation Period B. Attribution of Subsidies C. Denominators D. Loan Interest Rate Benchmarks and Discount Rates Analysis of Programs A. Programs Determined To Be Countervailable B. Programs Determined To Be Tied to Non-Subject Merchandise C. Programs Determined Not To Provide Countervailable Benefits During the POI D. Programs Determined Not To Be Used During the POI E. Program Determined To Be Not Countervailable F. Programs Deferred Until a Subsequent Administrative Review G. New Subsidy Allegations Analysis of Comments General Issues Comment 1: Whether Critical Circumstances Exist Comment 2: Whether the Department Should Consider Company-Specific Exclusion Requests Comment 3: Whether the Department Has the Authority To Countervail Future Assistance Comment 4: Whether the Department Should Countervail and Apply AFA to Certain Untimely Reported Programs by JDIL and Resolute Comment 5: Whether the Department Properly Requested Respondent Interested Parties To Report “Other Assistance” Comment 6: Whether the Department Should Defer Examination of Certain Programs Comment 7: Whether the Department Should Make a Finding on the NSAs Comment 8: Whether the Department Correctly Determined if Certain Programs are Specific Comment 9: Whether the Department Erroneously Applied its Attribution Regulations Comment 10: Whether the Department Should Rely on Expert Reports General Stumpage Issues Comment 11: Whether the Provision of Stumpage Rights Is a Financial Contribution Comment 12: Whether Evidence Establishes No Market Distortion and Tier-One Benchmarks Should Be Applied Comment 13: Whether the Department Must Compare Average Benchmark Prices to Average Transaction Prices Comment 14: Whether the Department Must Conduct a Pass-Through Analysis Comment 15: Whether the Net Benefit Calculation for Stumpage for LTAR Is Correct Alberta Stumpage Issues Comment 16: Benchmarking Alberta Comment 17: Whether the Department Should Use a U.S. Log Benchmark To Compare Respondents' Alberta Stumpage Purchases British Columbia Stumpage Issues Comment 18: Whether Crown Auctions in British Columbia Generate Valid Market Prices Comment 19: Whether the Department Should Use Conversion Factors From the BC Dual Scale Study Comment 20: Whether the Department Should Rely on Log Prices From Forest2Market Instead of WDNR Prices as a Benchmark To Compare Respondents' BC Stumpage Purchases Comment 21: Whether U.S. PNW Log Prices Should Not Be Used as a Benchmark Because They Do Not Reflect Prevailing Market Conditions in British Columbia Comment 22: Whether the Department Should Use a Timbermark-Specific Annual Average Stumpage Price Comment 23: Whether the Department Should Consider BC Stumpage Prices on a “Stand as a Whole” Basis Comment 24: Whether the Department Should Grant Cost Adjustments in British Columbia Comment 25: Whether the Department Should Account for Differences in Grading Systems in British Columbia and the United States Comment 26: Whether the Department Should Adjust for a Non-Contract Profit Rate Comment 27: Whether the Department Should Adjust the U.S. Benchmark Price To Account for Tenure Security New Brunswick Stumpage Issues Comment 28: Whether Private Stumpage Prices in New Brunswick Should Be Used as Tier-One Benchmarks Comment 29: Whether the Department Should Use the New Brunswick Survey as a Benchmark for Stumpage for LTAR Ontario Stumpage Issues Comment 30: Whether Stumpage for Ontario Crown Timber Was Subsidized During the Period of Investigation Comment 31: Whether Ontario's Private Market Is Distorted and Whether Ontario's Private Prices Are an Appropriate Benchmark Comment 32: Whether the Ontario Log Benchmark Relied on by the Department in Lumber IV Would Demonstrate That Ontario Crown Timber Is Not Subsidized Comment 33: Whether Stumpage Charges Distort Ontario's Domestic Log Market and Whether a Log Price Benchmark Shows No Subsidy Comment 34: Whether To Estimate Ontario's Crown Timber Prices With Québec's Transposition Equation Québec Stumpage Issues Comment 35: Whether the Québec Stumpage Market Is Distorted Comment 36: Whether the Department Made a Clerical Error in Its Calculation of the Québec Stumpage Benefit That It Should Correct in Its Final Determination Comment 37: Whether Resolute Pays Competitive Prices for Its Purchases of Non-TSG or Non-Tenured Timber Comment 38: Whether the Department Should Account for the Premiums Resolute Pays Over Auction Prices in Québec Nova Scotia Benchmark Issues Comment 39: Whether NS Private Stumpage Prices Can Serve as a Tier-One Benchmark Comment 40: Whether the Nova Scotia Benchmark Is Comparable to the Provinces at Issue Comment 41: Whether Nova Scotia's Private Stumpage Survey Data Are Flawed Comment 42: Whether the Department Should Make Adjustments to the Nova Scotia Benchmark Comment 43: Whether the Department Should Make Adjustments to Stumpage Rates in Alberta, Ontario, Québec, and New Brunswick Log Export Restraint Issues Comment 44: Whether the Log Export Restraint in British Columbia Restrains Log Exports Comment 45: Whether Log Export Restraints Impact the British Columbia Interior Comment 46: Whether the Log Export Process in British Columbia Is a Financial Contribution Comment 47: Whether the Constructed Benchmark for Log Export Restraints in the Preliminary Determination Was Correct Purchase of Goods for MTAR Issues Comment 48: Whether Electricity Is a Service and Therefore Whether the Purchase of Electricity by BC Hydro Is a Financial Contribution Comment 49: Whether BC Hydro's Purchase of Electricity Is Tied to Electricity Comment 50: Whether BC Hydro's EPA Program Is Specific Comment 51: Which Benchmark Should the Department Use for the Purchase of Electricity for MTAR by BC Hydro Comment 52: Whether the GOQ's Purchase of Electricity Is Specific Comment 53: Whether Resolute's Electricity Sales Are Tied to Non-Subject Merchandise Comment 54: Whether the Department Should Use the Industrial L Rate as the Benchmark for the GOQ's Purchase of Electricity Under PAE 2011-01 Comment 55: Whether the Industrial L Rate Benchmark Was Improperly Calculated Grant Program Issues Comment 56: Whether the Canada-New Brunswick Job Grant Program Is Regionally Specific Comment 57: Whether the Alberta Bioenergy Producer Credit Program Is Countervailable Comment 58: Whether the Department Incorrectly Analyzed the BC Hydro Power Smart: Load Curtailment Program Comment 59: Whether the Department Correctly Found That the Three BC Hydro Power Smart Programs Countervailed in the Preliminary Determination Are De Jure Specific Comment 60: Whether Benefits Under the Load Displacement Component of the BC Hydro Power Smart Incentives Subprogram Were Tied to Non-Subject Merchandise Comment 61: Whether the GNB's Reimbursement of Silviculture and License Management Expenses Is Countervailable Comment 62: Whether the New Brunswick Workforce Expansion Program and the New Brunswick Youth Employment Fund Are De Facto Specific Comment 63: Whether the PCIP Is Countervailable Tax Program Issues Comment 64: Whether the Federal and Provincial SR&ED Tax Credits Are Specific Comment 65: Whether the Department Should Countervail the Federal and Provincial SR&ED Tax Credits That Are Purportedly Tied to Non-Subject Merchandise Comment 66: Whether the Department Is Using the Correct Applicable Tax Rate for ACCA for Class 29 Assets Comment 67: Whether the Department Should Use an Alternative Methodology for Calculating the Benefit of the ACCA for Class 29 Assets Comment 68: Whether the ACCA for Class 29 Assets Program Is Specific Comment 69: Whether the ACCA for Class 29 Assets Is a Tax Deferral Comment 70: Whether the AJCTC Is Specific Comment 71: Whether the Department Must Account for Gains and Losses in Tax Savings in the AITC Program Comment 72: Whether the Benefit for the Atlantic Investment Tax Credit Should Be Adjusted Comment 73: Whether the Alberta TEFU Marked Fuel Program Provides a Countervailable Subsidy Comment 74: Whether the Coloured Fuel Program Evaluated in the Preliminary Determination Provides Countervailable Subsidies Comment 75: Whether the GNB's Gasoline and Fuel Tax Exemptions and Refund Program Provides a Financial Contribution and Is Specific Comment 76: Whether LIREPP Constitutes a Financial Contribution and Confers a Benefit on Irving Companies Comment 77: Whether LIREPP Is Tied to Non-Subject Merchandise Comment 78: Whether Credits for Road Construction Are a Countervailable Subsidy Comment 79: Whether the Benefit of the Québec Private Forest Tax Incentive Was Overstated Comment 80: Whether the M&P ITC and MITC Are De Jure Specific Company-Specific Issues Comment 81: Whether To Include Kent Building Supplies Division's Sales in JDIL's Denominator Comment 82: Whether the Department Intended To Address the AIF Program Rather Than the Business Development Program in Its Preliminary Determination Comment 83: Whether To Include Sales of Downstream Products by JDIL's Cross-Owned Companies Comment 84: Whether To Continue To Find Programs Not Used or Not Measurable for Resolute Comment 85: Whether the Department Was Correct To Not Countervail Certain Ontario Programs Comment 86: Whether Discrepancies Identified at Resolute's Verification Should Be Corrected Comment 87: Whether the Department Was Correct To Not Countervail Certain Québec Programs Comment 88: Whether the Department Should Use Tolko's Final Stumpage Prices and Updated Supplemental Data for the Final Determination Scope Issues Comment 89: Definition and Examples of Finished Products in Scope Language Comment 90: Exclusions Requested for Certain Types of Lumber Harvested From Western Red Cedar, Douglas Fir, and Hemlock Trees Comment 91: Previous Scope Determinations Comment 92: Whether Certain Products Are Finished Products Comment 93: Craft Kits Comment 94: Whether Certain Scope Language Should Be Removed Comment 95: Wood Shims Comment 96: Pre-Painted Wood Products Comment 97: I-Joists Comment 98: Miscellaneous Products Discussed by the Government of British Columbia (GBC) and the BC Lumber Trade Council (BCLTC) Comment 99: Bed-Frame Components/Crating Ladder Components Comment 100: U.S.-Origin Lumber Sent to Canada for Further Processing Comment 101: Softwood Lumber Produced in Canada From U.S.-Origin Logs Comment 102: Remanufactured Goods Comment 103: Eastern White Pine Comment 104: Whether the Department Should Conduct a Pass-Through Analysis for Independent Remanufacturers That Purchase Softwood Lumber at Arm's Length Comment 105: Whether Countervailing Duties Should Only Be Applicable on a First Mill Basis Comment 106: Whether the Department Should Exclude Softwood Lumber Products From New Brunswick Comment 107: Whether the Department Should Finalize the Exclusion of Softwood Lumber Products From the Atlantic Provinces Conclusion
    [FR Doc. 2017-24204 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-201-830] Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod From Mexico: Preliminary Results and Preliminary Determination of No Shipments; 2015-2016 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (Department) is conducting an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod (wire rod) from Mexico. The period of review (POR) is October 1, 2015, through September 30, 2016. This review covers two producers/exporters of the subject merchandise: Deacero S.A.P.I. de C.V. (Deacero) and ArcelorMittal Las Truchas, S.A. de C.V. (AMLT). We preliminarily determine that Deacero made sales of subject merchandise at less than normal value (NV) during the POR. We also preliminarily determine that AMLT made no shipments of subject merchandise during the POR. We invite interested parties to comment on these preliminary results.

    DATES:

    Applicable: November 8, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Keith Haynes, AD/CVD Operations, Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-5139.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    On December 16, 2016, the Department initiated an administrative review of the antidumping duty order of wire rod from Mexico for three producer/exporters.1 On February 27, 2017, based on a timely withdrawal request, the Department rescinded the review for one producer/exporter for which the review was initiated.2 On June 30, 2017, the Department extended the time limit for the preliminary results by 60 days 3 and on August 9, 2017, the Department extended the time limit for the preliminary results by an additional 60 days, pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), to October 31, 2017.4 For a complete description of the events that followed the initiation of this review, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.5 A list of topics included in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is included as an Appendix to this notice.

    1See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 81 FR 91122 (December 16, 2016) (Initiation Notice).

    2See letter from the petitioners, “Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Mexico: Withdrawal of Request for Administrative Review,” dated February 3, 2017 (Petitioners' Withdrawal Request); see also Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Mexico: Notice of Partial Rescission of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015-2016, 82 FR 11904 (February 27, 2017).

    3See Memorandum, “Extension of Deadline for Preliminary Results of the 2015-2016 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,” dated June 30, 2017.

    4See Memorandum, “Extension of Deadline for Preliminary Results of the 2015-2016 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,” dated August 9, 2017.

    5See Memorandum, “Decision Memorandum for Preliminary Results of 2015-2016 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Mexico” (Preliminary Decision Memorandum), dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice.

    Scope of the Order 6

    6 For the full text of the scope of the order, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    The product covered by the order is wire rod, in coils, of approximately round cross section, 5.00 mm or more, but less than 19.00 mm, in solid cross-sectional diameter.7 The subject merchandise is currently classifiable under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings: 7213.91.3000, 7213.91.3010, 7213.91.3011, 7213.91.3015, 7213.91.3020, 7213.91.3090, 7213.91.3091, 7213.91.3092, 7213.91.3093, 7213.91.4500, 7213.91.4510, 7213.91.4590, 7213.91.6000, 7213.91.6010, 7213.91.6090, 7213.99.0030, 7213.99.0031, 7213.99.0038, 7213.99.0090, 7227.20.0000, 7227.20.0010, 7227.20.0020, 7227.20.0030, 7227.20.0080, 7227.20.0090, 7227.20.0095, 7227.90.6010, 7227.90.6020, 7227.90.6030, 7227.90.6035, 7227.90.6050, 7227.90.6051, 7227.90.6053, 7227.90.6058, 7227.90.6059, 7227.90.6080, and 7227.90.6085. The HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes only; the written product description remains dispositive.

    7 The Department determined that Deacero's shipments to the United States of narrow gauge wire rod (4.75 mm to 5.00 mm) constitute merchandise altered in form or appearance in such minor respects that it is subject merchandise. See Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod From Mexico: Affirmative Final Determination of Circumvention of the Antidumping Order, 77 FR 59892 (October 1, 2012) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum. This determination was upheld by the Federal Circuit; see Deacero S.A. de C.V. v. United States, No. 15-1362 (Federal Circuit) (April 5, 2016) at 12. Because there were no changes to the facts which supported that decision since that determination, we continue to find Deacero's narrow gauge wire rod (4.75 mm to 5.00 mm) subject merchandise.

    Preliminary Determination of No Shipments

    On January 3, 2017, we received a timely-filed submission from AMLT reporting to the Department that it made no exports, sales, or entries of subject merchandise to the United States during the POR.8 To confirm AMLT's no shipment claim, the Department issued a no-shipment inquiry to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) requesting that it review AMLT's no-shipment claim.9 CBP did not report that it had any information to contradict AMLT's claim of no shipments during the POR. Based on record evidence, we preliminarily determine that AMLT had made no shipments during the POR. Consistent with the Department's practice, we will not rescind the review with respect to AMLT but, rather, will complete the review and issue instructions to CBP based on the final results.10 For additional information on our preliminary determination of no reviewable entries, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    8See letter from AMLT, “Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Mexico: AMLT No-Shipment Certification,” dated January 3, 2017 (AMLT No-Shipment Certification).

    9 No Shipments Inquiry for Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Mexico Produced and/or Exported by AMLT (A-201-830), message number 7009302 (January 9, 2017).

    10See, e.g., Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Thailand; Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, Partial Rescission of Review, Preliminary Determination of No Shipments; 2012-2013, 79 FR 15951, 15952 (March 24, 2014), unchanged in Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Thailand: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, Final Determination of No Shipments, and Partial Rescission of Review; 2012-2013, 79 FR 51306, 51306-07 (August 28, 2014).

    Methodology

    The Department is conducting this review in accordance with section 751(a)(1) and (2) of the Act. Export and constructed export price were calculated in accordance with section 772 of the Act. Normal value is calculated in accordance with section 773 of the Act.

    For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov and is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. The signed Preliminary Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    Preliminary Results of the Review

    The Department preliminarily determines the following weighted-average dumping margin exists for the POR:

    Exporter/producer Weighted-
  • average
  • dumping margins
  • (percent)
  • Deacero S.A.P.I. de C.V 6.22
    Assessment Rates

    Upon issuance of the final results, the Department shall determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review. If the weighted-average dumping margin for Deacero is not zero or de minimis (i.e., less than 0.5 percent), we will calculate importer-specific ad valorem antidumping duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for the importers examined sales to the total entered value of those same sales in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).11 We will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review when the importer-specific assessment rate calculated in the final results of this review is above de minimis (i.e., 0.5 percent). Where either the respondent's weighted-average dumping margin is zero or de minimis, or an importer-specific assessment rate is zero or de minimis, we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties. The final results of this review shall be the basis for the assessment of antidumping duties on entries of merchandise covered by the final results of this review where applicable.

    11 In this preliminary results, the Department applied the assessment rate calculation method adopted in Antidumping Proceedings: Calculation of the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Proceedings: Final Modification, 77 FR 8101 (February 14, 2012).

    In accordance with the Department's “automatic assessment” practice, for entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by each respondent for which they did not know that their merchandise was destined for the United States, we will instruct CBP to liquidate entries not reviewed at the all-others rate of 20.11 percent 12 if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction. We intend to issue instructions to CBP 15 days after publication of the final results of this review.

    12See Notice of Antidumping Duty Orders: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Brazil, Indonesia, Mexico, Moldova, Trinidad and Tobago, and Ukraine, 67 FR 65945 (October 29, 2002).

    Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the notice of final results of administrative review for all shipments of wire rod from Mexico entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication provided by section 751(a)(2) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for Deacero will be equal to the dumping margins established in the final results of this review except if the ultimate rates are de minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), in which case the cash deposit rates will be zero; (2) for merchandise exported by producers or exporters not covered in this administrative review but covered in a prior segment of the proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding in which the producer or exporter participated; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the original less-than-fair-value investigation but the producer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recently completed segment of the proceeding for the producer of the merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other producers or exporters will continue to be 20.11 percent, the all-others rate established in the antidumping investigation.13 These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

    13Id.

    Disclosure and Public Comment

    The Department will disclose to parties to this proceeding the calculations performed in reaching the preliminary results within five days of the date of publication of these preliminary results.14 Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii), interested parties may submit case briefs not later than 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed not later than five days after the date for filing case briefs.15 Parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are requested to submit with the argument: (1) A statement of the issue, (2) a summary of the argument, and (3) a table of authorities.16 All briefs must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the Department's electronic records system, ACCESS.

    14See 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    15See 19 CFR 351.309(d).

    16See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2).

    Interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, using Enforcement and Compliance's ACCESS system within 30 days of publication of this notice.17 Requests should contain the party's name, address, and telephone number, the number of participants, and a list of the issues to be discussed. If a request for a hearing is made, we will inform parties of the scheduled date for the hearing which will be held at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, at a time and location to be determined.18 Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and location of the hearing.

    17See 19 CFR 351.310(c).

    18See 19 CFR 351.310.

    Unless the deadline is extended pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(2), the Department will issue the final results of this administrative review, including the results of our analysis of the issues raised by the parties in their case briefs, within 120 days after issuance of these preliminary results.

    Notification to Importers

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

    This preliminary results of review is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h).

    Dated: October 31, 2017. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Preliminary Determination of No Shipments IV. Scope of the Order V. Discussion of the Methodology A. Universe of Sales B. Comparisons to Normal Value C. Product Comparisons D. Date of Sale E. Constructed Export Price F. Normal Value G. Cost of Production Analysis H. Calculation of Normal Value Based on Comparison Market Prices I. Currency Conversion VI. Recommendation
    [FR Doc. 2017-24186 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XF717 Fisheries of the Gulf of Mexico; Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review (SEDAR); Public Meeting AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of SEDAR 52 in-person workshop for Gulf of Mexico Red Snapper.

    SUMMARY:

    The SEDAR 52 assessment of the Gulf of Mexico Red Snapper will consist of one in-person workshop and a series of webinars. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

    DATES:

    The SEDAR 52 in-person workshop will be held from 1 p.m. on November 29, 2017 until 12 p.m. December 1, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Meeting address: The SEDAR 45 Workshop will be held at the Sonesta Coconut Grove, 2889 McFarlane Road, Miami, FL 33133 phone: (305) 529-2828 or 1-800-766-3782.

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

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

    1. An assessment data set and associated documentation will be developed during the workshop.

    2. Participants will evaluate proposed data and select appropriate sources for providing information on life history characteristics, catch statistics, discard estimates, length and age composition, and fishery dependent and fishery independent measures of stock abundance.

    3. Using datasets selected, participants will develop population models to evaluate stock status, estimate population benchmarks and management criteria, and project future conditions.

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

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

    Special Accommodations

    These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to the Council office (see ADDRESSES) at least 10 business days prior to each workshop.

    Note:

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

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: November 2, 2017. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24241 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XF592 Marine Mammals; File No. 21158 AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; receipt of application for permit amendment.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that Robert Garrott, Ph.D., Montana State University, 310 Lewis Hall, Bozeman, MT 59717, has applied in due form for an amendment to Scientific Research Permit No. 21158 for research on Weddell seals (Leptoncychotes weddellii).

    DATES:

    Written, telefaxed, or email comments must be received on or before December 8, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    The application and related documents are available for review by selecting “Records Open for Public Comment” from the “Features” box on the Applications and Permits for Protected Species home page, https://apps.nmfs.noaa.gov, and then selecting File No. 21158 from the list of available applications.

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

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

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Amy Sloan or Sara Young, (301) 427-8401.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The subject amendment to Permit No. 21158 is requested under the authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), the regulations governing the taking and importing of marine mammals (50 CFR part 216).

    Permit No. 21158, issued on September 25, 2017, (82 FR 48985), authorizes the permit holder to conduct long-term studies of the Erebus Bay, Antarctica, Weddell seal population to evaluate how temporal variation in the marine environment affects individual life histories and the population dynamics of long-lived mammal. The permit holder is requesting the permit be amended to increase the number of seal pups authorized to be flipper tagged from a total of 675 (take table lines 1 [n=515], 2 [n=10], and 3 [n=150]) to a total take of 800 pups, by increasing the number of takes in line 1 from 515 to 640. This field season the research team has observed an abnormally high number of pups and current take numbers are not be adequate to meet the stated scientific goals of tagging all pups produced in the Erebus Bay colonies each year.

    In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), an initial determination has been made that the activity proposed is categorically excluded from the requirement to prepare an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement.

    Concurrent with the publication of this notice in the Federal Register, NMFS is forwarding copies of this application to the Marine Mammal Commission and its Committee of Scientific Advisors.

    Dated: November 2, 2017. Julia Harrison, Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24248 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION [Docket No. CFPB-2017-0032] Agency Information Collection Activities: Comment Request AGENCY:

    Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Bureau) is requesting to renew the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval for an existing information collection, titled “Financial Coaching Program for Veterans and Low-income Consumers.”

    DATES:

    Written comments are encouraged and must be received on or before January 8, 2018 to be assured of consideration.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by the title of the information collection, OMB Control Number (see below), and docket number (see above), by any of the following methods:

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

    Mail: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (Attention: PRA Office), 1700 G Street NW., Washington, DC 20552.

    Hand Delivery/Courier: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (Attention: PRA Office), 1700 G Street NW., Washington, DC 20552.

    Please note that comments submitted after the comment period will not be accepted. In general, all comments received will become public records, including any personal information provided. Sensitive personal information, such as account numbers or Social Security numbers, should not be included.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Documentation prepared in support of this information collection request is available at www.regulations.gov. Requests for additional information should be directed to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, (Attention: PRA Office), 1700 G Street NW., Washington, DC 20552, (202) 435-9575, or email: [email protected] Please do not submit comments to this mailbox.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title of Collection: Financial Coaching Program for Veterans and Low-income Consumers.

    OMB Control Number: 3170-0051.

    Type of Review: Extension with change of a currently approved collection.

    Affected Public: Individuals.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 7,200.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 3,600.

    Abstract: In early 2015, the Bureau launched a Financial Coaching project to provide direct financial coaching services to transitioning veterans and economically vulnerable consumers nationwide. In order for the Bureau to understand whether the program is effective and for the financial coaches to be able to deliver efficient services and track clients over time, the Bureau will need to take steps to monitor program performance and to evaluate the program. This includes collecting administrative data about clients for programmatic purposes. The information will be collected from the coaches and include a combination of personal information (basic contact and demographic information), performance metrics (outputs), client-level outcomes (progress towards financial goals or other relevant outcomes) and programmatic and organizational outcomes.

    The initial information collection request for the administrative data collected by coaches from financial coaching clients for programmatic and performance monitoring purposes was approved in 2015 and expires on February 28, 2018. The Financial Coaching project has received funding and has now been extended through 2019. As a result, this is a request for an extension for administrative data collection. In addition, this information request includes a modification, adding five questions to the administrative data collection. The five questions are part of the Financial Well-being Survey, which received approval under OMB Control Number 3170-0063 in order to measure the level of financial well-being of American adults and key sub-populations. This will help us understand the progress clients are making and is also in line with the Bureau's overall efforts to be more consistent in the information we are collecting.

    Request for Comments: Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Bureau, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) The accuracy of the Bureau's estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methods and the 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. Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.

    Dated: November 2, 2017. Darrin A. King, Paperwork Reduction Act Officer, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24326 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810-AM-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #2

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2246-001.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: Compliance filing: 2017-11-02_Compliance filing-implementation of regional cost allocation for TMEP to be effective10/4/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/2/17.

    Accession Number: 20171102-5160.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/24/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2400-002.

    Applicants: SP Butler Solar, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: SP Butler Solar MBR Tariff Amendment Filing to be effective 9/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/2/17.

    Accession Number: 20171102-5204.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/24/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2401-002.

    Applicants: SP Decatur Parkway Solar, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: SP Decatur Parkway Solar MBR Tariff Amendment Filing to be effective 9/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/2/17.

    Accession Number: 20171102-5205.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/24/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2403-002.

    Applicants: SP Pawpaw Solar, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: SP Pawpaw Solar MBR Tariff Amendment Filing to be effective 9/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/2/17.

    Accession Number: 20171102-5206.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/24/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2404-002.

    Applicants: SP Sandhills Solar, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: SP Sandhills Solar MBR Tariff Amendment Filing to be effective 9/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/2/17.

    Accession Number: 20171102-5207.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/24/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-230-000.

    Applicants: Gilroy Energy Center, LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Gilroy RMR Agreement Filing to be effective 1/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 11/2/17.

    Accession Number: 20171102-5142.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/24/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-231-000.

    Applicants: American Transmission Systems, Incorporated, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: ATSI submits Engineering and Construction Services Agreement SA No. 4714 to be effective 1/2/2018.

    Filed Date: 11/2/17.

    Accession Number: 20171102-5146.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/24/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-232-000.

    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Tariff Clean-Up Filing to Remove Rejected Tariff Language to be effective 7/15/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/2/17.

    Accession Number: 20171102-5162.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/24/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-233-000.

    Applicants: AEP Texas Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: AEP TX-LCRA Interconnection Agreement Second Amend & Restated to be effective 10/3/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/2/17.

    Accession Number: 20171102-5210.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/24/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-234-000.

    Applicants: GSP Newington LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Newington MBR Filing to be effective 12/28/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/2/17.

    Accession Number: 20171102-5234.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/24/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-235-000.

    Applicants: AEP Texas Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: AEP TX-Bruenning's Breeze Wind Interconnection Agreement Second Amend & Restated to be effective10/12/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/2/17.

    Accession Number: 20171102-5236.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/24/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-236-000.

    Applicants: GSP Merrimack LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Merrimack MBR Filing to be effective 12/28/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/2/17.

    Accession Number: 20171102-5237.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/24/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-237-000.

    Applicants: GSP White Lake LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: White Lake MBR Filing to be effective 12/28/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/2/17.

    Accession Number: 20171102-5240.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/24/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-238-000.

    Applicants: GSP Schiller LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Schiller MBR Filing to be effective12/28/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/2/17.

    Accession Number: 20171102-5241.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/24/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-239-000.

    Applicants: GSP Lost Nation LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Lost Nation MBR Filing to be effective 12/28/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/2/17.

    Accession Number: 20171102-5243.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/24/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-240-000.

    Applicants: Metcalf Energy Center, LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Metcalf RMR Agreement Filing to be effective 1/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 11/2/17.

    Accession Number: 20171102-5246.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/24/17.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: November 2, 2017. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24269 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 2808-017] Notice of Application Ready for Environmental Analysis and Soliciting Comments, Recommendations, Terms and Conditions, and Prescriptions; KEI (Maine) Power Management (III) LLC

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.

    a. Type of Application: Subsequent Minor License.

    b. Project No.: 2808-017.

    c. Date filed: January 30, 2017.

    d. Applicant: KEI (Maine) Power Management (III) LLC.

    e. Name of Project: Barker's Mill Hydroelectric Project.

    f. Location: On the Little Androscoggin River, in the City of Auburn, Androscoggin County, Maine. The project does not occupy lands of the United States.

    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).

    h. Applicant Contact: Lewis Loon, General Manager/Operations and Maintenance, KEI (Maine) Power Management (III) LLC, 423 Brunswick Avenue, Gardiner, ME 04345; (207) 203-3027; email: [email protected].

    i. FERC Contact: Karen Sughrue at (202) 502-8556; or email at [email protected].

    j. Deadline for filing comments, recommendations, terms and conditions, and prescriptions: 60 days from the issuance date of this notice; reply comments are due 105 days from the issuance date of this notice.

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file comments, recommendations, terms and conditions, and prescriptions using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected], (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include docket number P-2808-017.

    The Commission's Rules of Practice require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person on the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency.

    k. This application has been accepted, and is ready for environmental analysis at this time.

    l. The Barker's Mill Project consists of the following existing facilities: (1) A 232-foot-long, 30-foot-high concrete dam with a 125-foot-long spillway section with flashboards, a 46-foot-long non-overflow section with two waste gates along the left buttress, and a 61-foot-long non-overflow section with seven stop-logs adjacent to the intake canal; (2) a 16.5-acre reservoir with a storage capacity of 150-acre-feet; (3) a 60-foot-long, 20-foot-wide, 9 foot, 7 inch-deep intake canal on the right bank with seven stop-logs near the intake to the power canal, which serves as the downstream fish passage; (4) a 35-foot-long, 20-foot-wide gatehouse containing a single gate and fitted with trash racks; (5) a buried 650-foot-long, 10 foot, 2 inch-wide, 7 foot, 2 inch-high concrete penstock; (6) a 50-foot-long, 25-foot-wide concrete partially buried powerhouse containing a single semi-Kaplan-type turbine/generating unit with a rated capacity of 1.5 MW; (7) a tailrace; (8) a 250-foot-long, 4.2 kilovolt underground power line; (9) a substation; and (10) appurtenant facilities. The average annual generation is estimated to be 5,087 megawatt-hours.

    m. A copy of the application is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above.

    All filings must (1) bear in all capital letters the title COMMENTS, REPLY COMMENTS, RECOMMENDATIONS, TERMS AND CONDITIONS, or PRESCRIPTIONS; (2) set forth in the heading the name of the applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the person submitting the filing; and (4) otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments, recommendations, terms and conditions or prescriptions must set forth their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant. Each filing must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed on the service list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.

    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    n. A license applicant must file no later than 60 days following the date of issuance of this notice: (1) A copy of the water quality certification; (2) a copy of the request for certification, including proof of the date on which the certifying agency received the request; or (3) evidence of waiver of water quality certification.

    o. Procedural schedule: The application will be processed according to the following schedule. Revisions to the schedule will be made as appropriate.

    Major milestone Target date Draft EA Issued June 2018. Comments on Draft EA due July 2018. Final EA Issued October 2018. Dated: November 2, 2017. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24273 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. OR18-5-000] Notice of Request for Temporary Waiver; Marathon Pipe Line LLC

    Take notice that on November 1, 2017, pursuant to Rule 204 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.204, Marathon Pipe Line LLC filed a petition for temporary waiver of the tariff filing and reporting requirements of sections 6 and 20 of the Interstate Commerce Act and parts 341 and 357 of the Commission's regulations with respect to four pipeline assets, 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 http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the eLibrary link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected], or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on November 17, 2017.

    Dated: November 2, 2017. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24272 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CD18-2-000] White River Electric Association, Inc.; Notice of Preliminary Determination of a Qualifying Conduit Hydropower Facility and Soliciting Comments and Motions To Intervene

    On October 31, 2017, White River Electric Association, Inc., filed a notice of intent to construct a qualifying conduit hydropower facility, pursuant to section 30 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), as amended by section 4 of the Hydropower Regulatory Efficiency Act of 2013 (HREA). The proposed Town of Meeker Hydro Project would have an installed capacity of up to 180 kilowatts (kW), and would be located along the existing Meeker Power Canal near the Town of Meeker, Rio Blanco County, Colorado.

    Applicant Contact: Trina Zagar-Brown, General Counsel, 233 6th Street, P.O. Box 958, Meeker, CO 81641, Phone No. (970) 878-5041.

    FERC Contact: Christopher Chaney, Phone No. (202) 502-6778, email: [email protected]

    Qualifying Conduit Hydropower Facility Description: The proposed project would consist of: (1) Up to two low head turbines with a total generating capacity not to exceed 180 kW; (2) two approximately 20-foot-long, 44-inch-diameter penstocks exiting an existing 25-foot by 50-foot forebay structure; (3) a small controls structure; and (4) appurtenant facilities. The proposed project would have an estimated annual generating capacity of up to 500,000 kilowatt-hours.

    A qualifying conduit hydropower facility is one that is determined or deemed to meet all of the criteria shown in the table below.

    Table 1—Criteria for Qualifying Conduit Hydropower Facility Statutory provision Description Satisfies
  • (Y/N)
  • FPA 30(a)(3)(A), as amended by HREA The conduit the facility uses is a tunnel, canal, pipeline, aqueduct, flume, ditch, or similar manmade water conveyance that is operated for the distribution of water for agricultural, municipal, or industrial consumption and not primarily for the generation of electricity Y FPA 30(a)(3)(C)(i), as amended by HREA The facility is constructed, operated, or maintained for the generation of electric power and uses for such generation only the hydroelectric potential of a non-federally owned conduit Y FPA 30(a)(3)(C)(ii), as amended by HREA The facility has an installed capacity that does not exceed 5 megawatts Y FPA 30(a)(3)(C)(iii), as amended by HREA On or before August 9, 2013, the facility is not licensed, or exempted from the licensing requirements of Part I of the FPA Y

    Preliminary Determination: The proposed addition of the hydroelectric project along the existing irrigation canal will not alter its primary purpose.1 Therefore, based upon the above information and criteria, Commission staff preliminarily determines that the proposal satisfies the requirements for a qualifying conduit hydropower facility, which is not required to be licensed or exempted from licensing.

    1 White River Electric Association, Inc. states in its Notice of Intent that the Meeker Power Canal was constructed in 1912 to supply water to a hydroelectric facility, which was decommissioned in the 1960's. Since then, the Meeker Power Canal has been continuously operated to provide water for irrigation and agricultural use, which is now its primary purpose.

    Comments and Motions To Intervene: Deadline for filing comments contesting whether the facility meets the qualifying criteria is 45 days from the issuance date of this notice.

    Deadline for filing motions to intervene is 30 days from the issuance date of this notice.

    Anyone may submit comments or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210 and 385.214. Any motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified deadline date for the particular proceeding.

    Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: All filings must (1) bear in all capital letters the COMMENTS CONTESTING QUALIFICATION FOR A CONDUIT HYDROPOWER FACILITY or MOTION TO INTERVENE, as applicable; (2) state in the heading the name of the applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing responds; (3) state the name, address, and telephone number of the person filing; and (4) otherwise comply with the requirements of sections 385.2001 through 385.2005 of the Commission's regulations.2 All comments contesting Commission staff's preliminary determination that the facility meets the qualifying criteria must set forth their evidentiary basis.

    2 18 CFR 385.2001-2005 (2017).

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file motions to intervene and comments using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected], (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. A copy of all other filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.

    Locations of Notice of Intent: Copies of the notice of intent can be obtained directly from the applicant or such copies can be viewed and reproduced at the Commission in its Public Reference Room, Room 2A, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. The filing may also be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number (i.e., CD18-2) in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or email [email protected] For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: November 2, 2017. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24276 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER18-206-000] Southern Partners, INC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of Southern Partners, INC's application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant.

    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability, is November 22, 2017.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected] or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: November 2, 2017. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24270 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. OR18-4-000] Marathon Pipe Line LLC; Notice of Petition for Declaratory Order

    Take notice that on November 1, 2017, pursuant to Rule 207(a)(2) of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.207(a)(2) (2016), Marathon Pipe Line LLC (MPL), filed a petition for a declaratory order seeking approval of the overall rate structure and terms of service for a redesign and expansion project for two interstate crude oil pipelines that MPL operates, namely the Woodpat and Roxpat pipelines, which will be combined and expanded to create a single pipeline system that can ship Cushing, Rockies, and Canadian crude oil to multiple Patoka, Illinois destinations, 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, 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 http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the eLibrary link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected], or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on November 30, 2017.

    Dated: November 2, 2017. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24271 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1833-002.

    Applicants: Sempra Gas & Power Marketing, LLC.

    Description: Compliance filing: Sempra Gas & Power Marketing, LLC Market-Based Rate Tariff Compliance Filing to be effective 11/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/1/17.

    Accession Number: 20171101-5194.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-400-003.

    Applicants: Kelly Creek Wind, LLC.

    Description: Report Filing: Kelly Creek Wind Refund Report to be effective N/A.

    Filed Date: 11/1/17.

    Accession Number: 20171101-5295.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-400-004.

    Applicants: Kelly Creek Wind, LLC.

    Description: Compliance filing: Kelly Creek Wind Revised Rate Schedule Filing Effective February 1 2017 to be effective 2/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/1/17.

    Accession Number: 20171101-5296.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2104-000.

    Applicants: Southern Partners, INC.

    Description: Second Amendment to July 18, 2017 Southern Partners, INC tariff filing (Asset Appendix).

    Filed Date: 11/1/17.

    Accession Number: 20171101-5297.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-210-000.

    Applicants: Emera Maine.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Attachment J Revision to be effective 1/1/2018. Also Emera Maine submits tariff filing (Supporting Workpapers).

    Filed Date: 11/1/17.

    Accession Number: 20171101-5158; 20171101-5276.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-212-000.

    Applicants: Tampa Electric Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Update of O&M Charges Under Interconnection Agreements to be effective 1/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 11/1/17.

    Accession Number: 20171101-5166.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-220-000.

    Applicants: Wisconsin Public Service Corporation.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Meter Service Agreement between WPSC and GLU to be effective 1/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 11/1/17.

    Accession Number: 20171101-5245.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-221-000.

    Applicants: Wisconsin Public Service Corporation.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Filing of a Wholesale Distribution Agreement w/Washington Island to be effective 1/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 11/1/17.

    Accession Number: 20171101-5264.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-222-000.

    Applicants: Wisconsin Public Service Corporation.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Meter Service Agreement between WPSC and OEC to be effective 1/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 11/1/17.

    Accession Number: 20171101-5267.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-223-000.

    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 1266R8 Kansas Municipal Energy Agency NITSA and NOA to be effective 1/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 11/1/17.

    Accession Number: 20171101-5268.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-224-000.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2017-11-01_Certain MISO TOs revisions to Attachment Os for ADIT to be effective 1/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 11/1/17.

    Accession Number: 20171101-5271.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-225-000.

    Applicants: Wisconsin Public Service Corporation.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Filing of a Wholesale Distribution Agreement w/MG&E to be effective 1/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 11/1/17.

    Accession Number: 20171101-5273.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-226-000.

    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.

    Description: Notice of Cancellation of Rate Schedule No. 113 of Arizona Public Service Company.

    Filed Date: 11/1/17.

    Accession Number: 20171101-5277.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-228-000.

    Applicants: Southwestern Public Service Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: SPS Depreciation Filing to be effective 1/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 11/1/17.

    Accession Number: 20171101-5294.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-229-000.

    Applicants: Virginia Electric and Power Company.

    Description: Notice of Cancellation of a Generator Interconnection and Operating Agreement of Virginia Electric and Power Company.

    Filed Date: 11/1/17.

    Accession Number: 20171101-5299.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/17.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: November 2, 2017. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24277 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP17-441-001] Northwest Pipeline LLC; Notice of Amendment to Application for Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity

    Take notice that on October 23, 2017, Northwest Pipeline, LLC (Northwest), 295 Chipeta Way, Salt Lake City, Utah-84108, has filed an amendment to its application filed on May 11, 2017, pursuant to sections 7(b) and 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) regulations, requesting abandonment approvals, and a certificate of public convenience seeking authorization to construct and operate its North Seattle Lateral Upgrade Project (Project) located in Snohomish County, Washington, all as more fully described in the application which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. The filing may also be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at [email protected] or call toll-free, (866) 208-3676 or TTY, (202) 502-8659.

    Specifically, the Project consists of: (1) Abandoning by removal the existing 8-inch-diameter pipeline between mileposts (MP) 1.9 and 7.8 on Northwest's North Seattle Delivery Lateral line and installing new 20-inch-diameter pipeline from MP 1.9 to 7.8; (2) re-alignment of existing 16-inch-diameter pipeline to be installed parallel to the proposed 20-inch-diameter pipeline (3) rebuild the existing North Seattle/Everett meter station; and (4) installing miscellaneous appurtenances; all located in Snohomish County, Washington.

    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to Xan Kotter, Northwest Pipeline LLC, PO Box 58900, Salt Lake City, UT 84158-0900, or call (801) 584-6496, or by email: [email protected]

    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9, within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either: Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of the 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.

    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or before the comment date stated below file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit 7 copies of filings made in the proceeding with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding.

    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the protest.

    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order.

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the eFiling link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    Comment Date: November 24, 2017.

    Dated: November 2, 2017. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24274 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 2684-010] Flambeau Hydro, LLC; Notice Soliciting Scoping Comments

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric license application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.

    a. Type of Application: Subsequent Minor License.

    b. Project No.: P-2684-010.

    c. Date filed: April 26, 2017.

    d. Applicant: Flambeau Hydro, LLC (Flambeau Hydro).

    e. Name of Project: Arpin Dam Project.

    f. Location: On the Chippewa River, near the Village of Radisson, in Sawyer County, Wisconsin. There are no federal or tribal lands within the project boundary.

    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).

    h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Jason Kreuscher, Renewable World Energies, LLC, 100 State Street, P.O. Box 264, Neshkoro, WI 54960; (855) 994-9376, ext. 102.

    i. FERC Contact: Amy Chang, (202) 502-8250, or [email protected].

    j. Deadline for filing scoping comments: December 4, 2017.

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file scoping comments using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected], (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include docket number P-2684-010.

    The Commission's Rules of Practice require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person on the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency.

    k. This application is not ready for environmental analysis at this time.

    l. The existing Arpin Dam Project consists of: (1) An approximately 742.5-foot-long, 19-foot-high stone masonry dam (west dam section) that includes two timber stoplog spillway bays and an approximately 318.9-foot-long overflow section; (2) an approximately 452.2-foot-long, 18-foot-high masonry dam (middle dam section) that includes two steel vertical lift gates and an approximately 237.9-foot-long overflow section; (3) an approximately 319.8-foot-long, 16-foot-high masonry dam (east dam section) that includes two tainter gates and an 108-foot-long overflow section; (4) an approximately 294-acre impoundment at a normal full pond water surface elevation of 1,227.22 feet North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88); (5) a 37-foot-long, 11.5-foot-wide, 14-foot-high concrete, canal headworks structure on the eastern side of the impoundment; (6) an approximately 3,200-foot-long, 56-foot-wide, 6-foot-deep power canal; (7) a 13.5-foot-long, 48-foot-wide, 14.4-foot-high concrete intake structure that includes two 9-foot-wide, 11-foot-high steel stop gates and a 44-foot-wide, 14.4-foot-high trashrack with 1.5- to 1.75-inch clear bar spacing; (8) three 79-foot-long, 8-foot-diameter steel penstocks; (9) a 52-foot-long, 24-foot-wide, 25-foot-high cement block powerhouse containing two 600-kW, and one 250-kW vertical Francis turbine-generator units, for a total capacity of 1,450 kW; (10) a 15-foot-long, 2.4-kilovolt (kV) underground generator lead line that connects the turbine-generator units to a substation containing three step-up transformers; (11) a 3,645-foot-long, 22.9-kV above-ground transmission line; (12) a tailrace; (13) recreation facilities; and (14) appurtenant facilities.

    Flambeau Hydro manually operates the project in a run-of-river mode, with an average annual generation of 7,336 megawatt-hours. Flambeau Hydro is not proposing any changes in project operation. Flambeau Hydro proposes to continue to release a year-round minimum flow of 40 cfs to the bypassed reach to protect aquatic resources and to continue to operate and maintain existing recreation facilities. Flambeau Hydro also proposes to develop an Historic Properties Management Plan to protect historic resources.

    m. A copy of the application is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to address the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support. A copy is available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item (h) above.

    n. You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    o. Scoping Process.

    The Commission staff intends to prepare a single Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Arpin Dam Project in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act. The EA will consider both site-specific and cumulative environmental impacts and reasonable alternatives to the proposed action.

    Commission staff does not propose to conduct any on-site scoping meetings at this time. Instead, we are soliciting comments, recommendations, and information on Scoping Document 1 (SD1), issued November 2, 2017.

    Copies of SD1 outlining the subject areas to be addressed in the EA were distributed to the parties on the Commission's mailing list and the applicant's distribution list. Copies of SD1 may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or for TTY, (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: November 2, 2017. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24275 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0885: FRL-9970-59-OAR] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Implementation of the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone; State Implementation Plan Requirements, EPA ICR No. 2347.03, OMB Control No. 2060-0695 AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice; reopening of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    On October 2, 2017, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that EPA is planning to submit a request to renew an existing approved Information Collection Request (ICR) 2347.02, “Implementation of the 2008 National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone,” to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This existing ICR is scheduled to expire on January 31, 2018. Before submitting the ICR renewal request to OMB for review and approval, the EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collection as described below. The EPA is reopening the comment period on the proposed ICR that closed on November 1, 2017.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before December 8, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0885, at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from http://www.regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Butch Stackhouse, Air Quality Policy Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Mail Code C539-01, Environmental Protection Agency, T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-5208; fax number: (919) 541-0824; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    How can I access the docket and/or submit comments?

    The EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0885, which is available for online viewing at https://www.regulations.gov, or for in-person viewing at the Air Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is (202) 566-1742.

    Use https://www.regulations.gov to obtain a copy of the draft collection of information, submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, select “search,” then key in the docket ID number identified in this document.

    What information is the EPA particularly interested in?

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), the EPA specifically solicits comments and information to enable it to:

    (i) 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;

    (ii) 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;

    (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and,

    (iv) minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., allowing for electronic submission of responses (in this case, revisions to State Implementation Plans (SIPs) to meet planning requirements for nonattainment areas for the 2008 ozone NAAQS).

    What should I consider when I prepare my comments for the EPA?

    You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your comments:

    1. Explain your views as clearly as possible and provide specific examples.

    2. Describe any assumptions that you used.

    3. Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you used that support your views.

    4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you arrived at the estimate that you provide.

    5. Offer alternative ways to improve the collection activity.

    6. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline identified under DATES.

    7. To ensure proper receipt by the EPA, be sure to identify the docket ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal Register citation.

    What information collection activity or ICR does this apply to?

    Affected entities: Entities affected by this action are state and local air agencies subject to attainment planning requirements for areas designated nonattainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Such planning requirements may include attainment demonstrations, Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) plans, and Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) and Reasonably Available Control Measure (RACM) SIP submissions. Local, state, and federal agencies are part of the North American Industrial Classification System Code number 924110. There are other entities that may be indirectly affected, due to the fact that they may comment on the draft submissions before air agencies submit them to EPA. These include potentially regulated entities, representatives of stakeholder groups, and members of the general public.

    Title: Implementation of the 2008 National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone: State Implementation Plan Requirements; Information Collection Request Renewal.

    ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 2347.03, OMB Control No. 2060-0695.

    ICR status: This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on January 31, 2018. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for the EPA's regulations in title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), after appearing in the Federal Register when approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9. They are displayed either by publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.

    Abstract: The PRA requires the information found in this ICR (No. 2347.03) to assess the burden (in hours and dollars) of meeting the requirements of the Implementation of the 2008 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for Ozone: State Implementation Plan Requirements; Final Rule. The rule was proposed on June 6, 2013 (78 FR 34178), and promulgated on March 15, 2015 (80 FR 12264). The rule includes requirements that involve collecting information from states with areas designated nonattainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. These information collection milestones include but are not limited to state submissions of attainment demonstrations, RFP plans, and RACT determinations. The burden estimate in the original ICR assumed 26 state air agency respondents (state and local air agencies), including the District of Columbia, responsible for meeting attainment planning obligations for 46 designated nonattainment areas for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The revised burden estimate in this proposed ICR renewal incorporates changes to the original estimate that affect 17 respondents with jurisdiction over 30 nonattainment areas that are in various stages of planning for attainment or maintenance of the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The time period covered by this ICR is February 1, 2018, through January 31, 2021.

    Burden Statement: The estimated public reporting and recordkeeping burden for the original ICR was 120,000 labor hours for the 3-year period, for an estimated average burden of 4,615 hours per respondent (the number of respondents was assumed to be 26). The incremental public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this proposed collection of information is estimated to total 62,000 hours, for an average of 3,647 hours per affected respondent (the number of respondents is assumed to be 17) over the 3-year period covered by this ICR renewal. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; to develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; to adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; to train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; to search data sources; to complete and review the collection of information; and, to transmit or otherwise disclose the information.

    The ICR provides a detailed explanation of the agency's estimate, which is only briefly summarized here:

    Respondents/Affected Entities: State and local governments.

    Estimated total number of affected respondents: 17.

    Frequency of response: Annual.

    Estimated total additional annual burden hours: 20,667 hours.

    Estimated total additional annual cost: $1,404,757. This includes an estimated burden cost of $0 for capital investment or maintenance and operational costs.

    Are there changes in the estimates from the last approval?

    The total estimated respondent burden during the 3-year period of this ICR renewal is 62,000 hours, compared with a total estimated respondent burden of 120,000 hours identified for the 3-year period covered by the original ICR approved by OMB.

    What is the next step in the process for this ICR?

    The EPA will consider the comments received on this proposal and will amend the ICR as appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. At that time, the EPA will issue another Federal Register notice pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Dated: November 1, 2017. Mary Henigin, Acting Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24339 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Notice of Termination of the Receivership of 10510, First National Bank of Crestview, Crestview, Florida

    The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC or Receiver), as Receiver for 10510, First National Bank of Crestview, Crestview, Florida, has been authorized to take all actions necessary to terminate the receivership estate of First National Bank of Crestview (Receivership Estate); the Receiver has made all dividend distributions required by law. The Receiver has further irrevocably authorized and appointed FDIC-Corporate as its attorney-in-fact to execute and file any and all documents that may be required to be executed by the Receiver which FDIC-Corporate, in its sole discretion, deems necessary; including but not limited to releases, discharges, satisfactions, endorsements, assignments, and deeds. Effective November 1, 2017, the Receivership Estate has been terminated, the Receiver discharged, and the Receivership Estate has ceased to exist as a legal entity.

    Dated: November 3, 2017. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24288 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Notice of Termination of the Receivership of 10335, The First State Bank, Camargo, Oklahoma

    The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC or Receiver), as Receiver for 10335, The First State Bank, Camargo, Oklahoma, has been authorized to take all actions necessary to terminate the receivership estate of The First State Bank (Receivership Estate); the Receiver has made all dividend distributions required by law. The Receiver has further irrevocably authorized and appointed FDIC-Corporate as its attorney-in-fact to execute and file any and all documents that may be required to be executed by the Receiver which FDIC-Corporate, in its sole discretion, deems necessary; including but not limited to releases, discharges, satisfactions, endorsements, assignments and deeds. Effective November 1, 2017, the Receivership Estate has been terminated, the Receiver discharged, and the Receivership Estate has ceased to exist as a legal entity.

    Dated: November 3, 2017. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24283 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Notice to All Interested Parties of Intent To Terminate the Receivership of 10359, Community Central Bank, Mount Clemens, Michigan

    Notice is hereby given that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC or Receiver) as Receiver for Community Central Bank, Mount Clemens, Michigan, intends to terminate its receivership for said institution. The FDIC was appointed Receiver of Community Central Bank on April 29, 2011. The liquidation of the receivership assets has been completed. To the extent permitted by available funds and in accordance with law, the Receiver will be making a final dividend payment to proven creditors.

    Based upon the foregoing, the Receiver has determined that the continued existence of the receivership will serve no useful purpose. Consequently, notice is given that the receivership shall be terminated, to be effective no sooner than thirty days after the date of this Notice. If any person wishes to comment concerning the termination of the receivership, such comment must be made in writing and sent within thirty days of the date of this notice to: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Division of Resolutions and Receiverships, Attention: Receivership Oversight Department 34.6, 1601 Bryan Street, Dallas, TX 75201.

    No comments concerning the termination of this receivership will be considered which are not sent within this time frame.

    Dated: November 3, 2017. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24285 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Notice to All Interested Parties of Intent To Terminate the Receivership of 10247, First National Bank, Rosedale, Mississippi

    Notice is hereby given that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC or Receiver) as Receiver for First National Bank, Rosedale, Mississippi, intends to terminate its receivership for said institution. The FDIC was appointed Receiver of First National Bank on June 4, 2010. The liquidation of the receivership assets has been completed. To the extent permitted by available funds and in accordance with law, the Receiver will be making a final dividend payment to proven creditors.

    Based upon the foregoing, the Receiver has determined that the continued existence of the receivership will serve no useful purpose. Consequently, notice is given that the receivership shall be terminated, to be effective no sooner than thirty days after the date of this Notice. If any person wishes to comment concerning the termination of the receivership, such comment must be made in writing and sent within thirty days of the date of this notice to: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Division of Resolutions and Receiverships, Attention: Receivership Oversight Department 34.6, 1601 Bryan Street, Dallas, TX 75201.

    No comments concerning the termination of this receivership will be considered which are not sent within this time frame.

    Dated: November 3, 2017. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24281 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Notice of Termination of the Receivership of 10327, Oglethorpe Bank, Brunswick, Georgia

    The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC or Receiver), as Receiver for 10327, Oglethorpe Bank, Brunswick, Georgia, has been authorized to take all actions necessary to terminate the receivership estate of Oglethorpe Bank (Receivership Estate); the Receiver has made all dividend distributions required by law. The Receiver has further irrevocably authorized and appointed FDIC-Corporate as its attorney-in-fact to execute and file any and all documents that may be required to be executed by the Receiver which FDIC-Corporate, in its sole discretion, deems necessary; including but not limited to releases, discharges, satisfactions, endorsements, assignments, and deeds. Effective November 1, 2017, the Receivership Estate has been terminated, the Receiver discharged, and the Receivership Estate has ceased to exist as a legal entity.

    Dated: November 3, 2017. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24282 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Notice of Termination of the Receivership of 10471, Frontier Bank, LaGrange, Georgia

    The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC or Receiver), as Receiver for 10471, Frontier Bank, LaGrange, Georgia, has been authorized to take all actions necessary to terminate the receivership estate of Frontier Bank (Receivership Estate); the Receiver has made all dividend distributions required by law. The Receiver has further irrevocably authorized and appointed FDIC-Corporate as its attorney-in-fact to execute and file any and all documents that may be required to be executed by the Receiver which FDIC-Corporate, in its sole discretion, deems necessary; including but not limited to releases, discharges, satisfactions, endorsements, assignments, and deeds. Effective November 1, 2017, the Receivership Estate has been terminated, the Receiver discharged, and the Receivership Estate has ceased to exist as a legal entity.

    Dated: November 3, 2017. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24287 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Notice of Termination of the Receivership of 10355, New Horizons Bank, East Ellijay, Georgia

    The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC or Receiver), as Receiver for 10355, New Horizons Bank, East Ellijay, Georgia, has been authorized to take all actions necessary to terminate the receivership estate of New Horizons Bank (Receivership Estate); the Receiver has made all dividend distributions required by law. The Receiver has further irrevocably authorized and appointed FDIC-Corporate as its attorney-in-fact to execute and file any and all documents that may be required to be executed by the Receiver which FDIC-Corporate, in its sole discretion, deems necessary; including but not limited to releases, discharges, satisfactions, endorsements, assignments, and deeds. Effective November 1, 2017, the Receivership Estate has been terminated, the Receiver discharged, and the Receivership Estate has ceased to exist as a legal entity.

    Dated: November 3, 2017. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24284 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Notice to All Interested Parties of Intent To Terminate the Receivership of 10065, Cooperative Bank, Wilmington, North Carolina

    Notice is hereby given that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC or Receiver) as Receiver for Cooperative Bank, Wilmington, North Carolina, intends to terminate its receivership for said institution. The FDIC was appointed Receiver of Cooperative Bank on June 19, 2009. The liquidation of the receivership assets has been completed. To the extent permitted by available funds and in accordance with law, the Receiver will be making a final dividend payment to proven creditors.

    Based upon the foregoing, the Receiver has determined that the continued existence of the receivership will serve no useful purpose. Consequently, notice is given that the receivership shall be terminated, to be effective no sooner than thirty days after the date of this notice. If any person wishes to comment concerning the termination of the receivership, such comment must be made in writing and sent within thirty days of the date of this notice to: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Division of Resolutions and Receiverships, Attention: Receivership Oversight Department 34.6, 601 Bryan Street, Dallas, TX 75201.

    No comments concerning the termination of this receivership will be considered which are not sent within this time frame.

    Dated: November 3, 2017. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24279 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Notice of Termination of the Receivership of 10422, Patriot Bank Minnesota, Forest Lake, Minnesota

    The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC or Receiver), as Receiver for 10422, Patriot Bank Minnesota, Forest Lake, Minnesota, has been authorized to take all actions necessary to terminate the receivership estate of Patriot Bank Minnesota (Receivership Estate); the Receiver has made all dividend distributions required by law. The Receiver has further irrevocably authorized and appointed FDIC-Corporate as its attorney-in-fact to execute and file any and all documents that may be required to be executed by the Receiver which FDIC-Corporate, in its sole discretion, deems necessary; including but not limited to releases, discharges, satisfactions, endorsements, assignments, and deeds. Effective November 1, 2017, the Receivership Estate has been terminated, the Receiver discharged, and the Receivership Estate has ceased to exist as a legal entity.

    Dated: November 3, 2017. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24286 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Notice of Termination of the Receivership of 10124, Jennings State Bank, Spring Grove, Minnesota

    The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC or Receiver), as Receiver for 10124, Jennings State Bank, Spring Grove, Minnesota, has been authorized to take all actions necessary to terminate the receivership estate of Jennings State Bank (Receivership Estate); the Receiver has made all dividend distributions required by law. The Receiver has further irrevocably authorized and appointed FDIC-Corporate as its attorney-in-fact to execute and file any and all documents that may be required to be executed by the Receiver which FDIC-Corporate, in its sole discretion, deems necessary; including but not limited to releases, discharges, satisfactions, endorsements, assignments, and deeds. Effective November 1, 2017, the Receivership Estate has been terminated, the Receiver discharged, and the Receivership Estate has ceased to exist as a legal entity.

    Dated: November 3, 2017. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24280 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION Sunshine Act Meeting Notice TIME AND DATE:

    10:00 a.m., Thursday, November 30, 2017.

    PLACE:

    The Richard V. Backley Hearing Room, Room 511N, 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004 (enter from F Street entrance).

    STATUS:

    Open.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    The Commission will consider and act upon the following in open session: Secretary of Labor v. The American Coal Company, Docket No. LAKE 2011-701 (Issues include whether on remand the Judge erred by not adequately explaining the basis for the assessed penalty amounts.)

    Any person attending this meeting who requires special accessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign language interpreters, must inform the Commission in advance of those needs. Subject to 29 CFR 2706.150(a)(3) and § 2706.160(d).

    CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFO:

    Emogene Johnson (202) 434-9935/(202) 708-9300 for TDD Relay/1-800-877-8339 for toll free.

    PHONE NUMBER FOR LISTENING TO MEETING:

    1 (866) 867-4769, Passcode: 678-100.

    Dated: November 6, 2017. Sarah L. Stewart, Deputy General Counsel.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24406 Filed 11-6-17; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 6735-01-P
    FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION Sunshine Act Meeting Notice TIME AND DATE:

    10:00 a.m., Wednesday, November 29, 2017.

    PLACE:

    The Richard V. Backley Hearing Room, Room 511N, 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004 (enter from F Street entrance).

    STATUS:

    Open.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    The Commission will hear oral argument in the matter Secretary of Labor v. The American Coal Company, Docket No. LAKE 2011-701 (Issues include whether on remand the Judge erred by not adequately explaining the basis for the assessed penalty amounts.)

    Any person attending this oral argument who requires special accessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign language interpreters, must inform the Commission in advance of those needs. Subject to 29 CFR 2706.150(a)(3) and § 2706.160(d).

    CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFO:

    Emogene Johnson (202) 434-9935/(202) 708-9300 for TDD Relay/1-800-877-8339 for toll free.

    PHONE NUMBER FOR LISTENING TO ARGUMENT:

    1-(866) 867-4769, Passcode: 678-100.

    Dated: November 6, 2017. Sarah L. Stewart, Deputy General Counsel.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24405 Filed 11-6-17; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 6735-01-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, including the companies listed below.

    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications will also be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States.

    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than December 5, 2017.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland (Nadine Wallman, Vice President) 1455 East Sixth Street, Cleveland, Ohio 44101-2566. Comments can also be sent electronically to [email protected]:

    1. Somerville Bancorp, Somerville, Ohio; to become a bank holding company by acquiring voting shares of Somerville National Bank, Somerville, Ohio.

    B. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (Colette A. Fried, Assistant Vice President) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414:

    1. Treynor Bancshares, Inc. and TS Contrarian Bancshares, Inc., both of Treynor, Iowa; to acquire 100 percent of the voting shares of City Bank and Trust Company, Guymon, Oklahoma.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, November 3, 2017. Yao-Chin Chao, Assistant Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24337 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”).

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, the FTC is seeking public comments on its request to OMB for a three-year extension of the current PRA clearance for information collection requirements contained in Use of Prenotification Negative Option Plans (“Negative Option Rule” or “Rule”). That clearance expires on November 30, 2017.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received December 8, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested parties may file a comment online or on paper by following the instructions in the Request for Comments part of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below. Write “Negative Option Rule: FTC File No. P064202” on your comment, and file your comment online at https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/NegOptionPRA2 by following the instructions on the web-based form. If you prefer to file your comment on paper, mail your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Suite CC-5610 (Annex J), Washington, DC 20580, or deliver your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW., 5th Floor, Suite 5610 (Annex J), Washington, DC 20024.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information or copies of the proposed information requirements should be addressed to John Andrew Singer, Attorney, Division of Enforcement, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., CC-9528, Washington, DC 20580, (202) 326-3234.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Use of Prenotification Negative Option Plans (Negative Option Rule or Rule), 16 CFR 425.

    OMB Control Number: 3084-0104.

    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    Abstract: The Negative Option Rule governs the operation of prenotification subscription plans. Under these types of plans, a seller provides a consumer with automatic shipments of merchandise such as when a consumer joins as a member in a seller's book of the month club, food of the month club, or clothing items of the month club unless the consumer affirmatively notifies the seller they do not want the shipment. The Rule requires that a seller notify a member that they will automatically ship merchandise to the member and bill the member for the merchandise if the subscriber fails to expressly reject the merchandise beforehand within a prescribed time. The Rule protects consumers by: (a) Requiring that promotional materials disclose the terms of membership clearly and conspicuously; and (b) establishing procedures for the administration of such “negative option” plans.

    On August 16, 2017, the Commission sought comment on the Rule's information collection requirements. 82 FR 38907. No germane comments were received.1 As required by OMB regulations, 5 CFR 1320, the FTC is providing this second opportunity for public comment.

    1 The Commission received twelve non-germane comments.

    Likely Respondents: Sellers of prenotification subscription plans.

    Estimated Annual Hours Burden: 9,725 hours.

    Estimated Annual Cost Burden: $473,750 (solely related to labor costs).

    Estimated Capital or Other Non-Labor Cost: $0 or de minimis.

    Request for Comment: You can file a comment online or on paper. For the FTC to consider your comment, we must receive it on or before December 8, 2017. Write “Negative Option Rule: FTC File No. P064202” on your comment. Your comment—including your name and your state—will be placed on the public record of this proceeding, including, to the extent practicable, on the public Commission Web site, at http://www.ftc.gov/os/publiccomments.shtm. As a matter of discretion, the Commission tries to remove individuals' home contact information from comments before placing them on the Commission Web site.

    Postal mail addressed to the Commission is subject to delay due to heightened security screening. As a result, we encourage you to submit your comments online, or to send them to the Commission by courier or overnight service. To make sure that the Commission considers your online comment, you must file it at https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/NegOptionPRA2 by following the instructions on the web-based form. When this Notice appears at http://www.regulations.gov, you also may file a comment through that Web site.

    If you file your comment on paper, write “Negative Option Rule: FTC File No. P064202” on your comment and on the envelope, and mail it to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Suite CC-5610 (Annex J), Washington, DC 20580, or deliver your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW., 5th Floor, Suite 5610, Washington, DC 20024. If possible, submit your paper comment to the Commission by courier or overnight service. Comments on the information collection requirements subject to review under the PRA should additionally be submitted to OMB. If sent by U.S. mail, they should be addressed to Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal Trade Commission, New Executive Office Building, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503. Comments sent to OMB by U.S. postal mail are subject to delays due to heightened security precautions. Thus, comments can also be sent via email to [email protected]

    Because your comment will be placed on the publicly accessible FTC Web site at https://www.ftc.gov, you are solely responsible for making sure that your comment does not include any sensitive or confidential information. In particular, your comment should not include any sensitive personal information, such as your or anyone else's Social Security number; date of birth; driver's license number or other state identification number, or foreign country equivalent; passport number; financial account number; or credit or debit card number. You are also solely responsible for making sure that your comment does not include any sensitive health information, such as medical records or other individually identifiable health information. In addition, your comment should not include any “trade secret or any commercial or financial information which . . . is privileged or confidential”—as provided by Section 6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 4.10(a)(2)—including in particular competitively sensitive information such as costs, sales statistics, inventories, formulas, patterns, devices, manufacturing processes, or customer names.

    Comments containing material for which confidential treatment is requested must be filed in paper form, must be clearly labeled “Confidential,” and must comply with FTC Rule 4.9(c). In particular, the written request for confidential treatment that accompanies the comment must include the factual and legal basis for the request, and must identify the specific portions of the comment to be withheld from the public record. See FTC Rule 4.9(c). Your comment will be kept confidential only if the General Counsel grants your request in accordance with the law and the public interest. Once your comment has been posted on the public FTC Web site—as legally required by FTC Rule 4.9(b)—we cannot redact or remove your comment from the FTC Web site, unless you submit a confidentiality request that meets the requirements for such treatment under FTC Rule 4.9(c), and the General Counsel grants that request.

    The FTC Act and other laws that the Commission administers permit the collection of public comments to consider and use in this proceeding as appropriate. The Commission will consider all timely and responsive public comments that it receives on or before December 8, 2017. For information on the Commission's privacy policy, including routine uses permitted by the Privacy Act, see https://www.ftc.gov/site-information/privacy-policy.

    Christian S. White, Acting General Counsel.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24243 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6750-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [60Day-18-18AF; Docket No. CDC-2018-0093] Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and Recommendations AGENCY:

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

    ACTION:

    Notice with comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as part of its continuing effort to reduce public burden and maximize the utility of government information, invites the general public and other Federal agencies the opportunity to comment on a proposed and/or continuing information collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This notice invites comment on a proposed generic information collection project titled “Assessments to Inform Program Refinement for HIV, other STD, and Pregnancy Prevention among Middle and High-School Aged Youth.” CDC seeks to collect qualitative and quantitative data from adolescents (ages 11-19) and their parents/caregivers to assess program needs and services.

    DATES:

    CDC must receive written comments on or before January 8, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CDC-2018-0093 by any of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    Mail: Leroy A. Richardson, Information Collection Review Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE., MS-D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket Number. CDC will post, without change, all relevant comments to Regulations.gov.

    Please note: Submit all comments through the Federal eRulemaking portal (regulations.gov) or by U.S. mail to the address listed above.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request more information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the information collection plan and instruments, contact Leroy A. Richardson, Information Collection Review Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE., MS-D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329; phone: 404-639-7570; Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. In addition, the PRA also requires Federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each new proposed collection, each proposed extension of existing collection of information, and each reinstatement of previously approved information collection before submitting the collection to the OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, we are publishing this notice of a proposed data collection as described below.

    The OMB is particularly interested in comments that will help:

    1. Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    2. Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

    3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    4. Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submissions of responses.

    5. Assess information collection costs.

    Proposed Project

    Assessments to Inform Program Refinement for HIV, other STD, and Pregnancy Prevention among Middle and High-School Aged Youth—New—Division of Adolescent and School Health (DASH), National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    Background and Brief Description

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) seeks to request OMB approval of a one-year generic information collection plan. CDC seeks to collect qualitative and quantitative data from adolescents (ages 11-19) and their parents/caregivers to assess program needs and services.

    NCHHSTP conducts behavioral and health service assessments and research projects as part of its response to the domestic HIV/AIDS epidemic, STD prevention, TB elimination and viral hepatitis control with national, state, and local partners. Adolescents make up the population of interest for DASH and several other NCHHSTP divisions, as Adolescents have specific developmental, health social, and resource needs. DASH addresses adolescent health risk factors and access to health care as the organization's primary mission. The assessment and research conducted by NCHHSTP is one pillar upon which NCHHSTP revises and updates its recommendations and guidelines. Recommendations and guidelines for adolescent sexual risk reduction require a foundation of scientific evidence.

    Assessment of programmatic practices for adolescents helps to assure effective and evidence-based sexual risk reduction practices and efficient use of resources. Such assessments also help to improve programs through better identification of strategies relevant to adolescents as a population as well as specific sub-groups of adolescents at highest risk for HIV and other STDs so that programs can be better tailored for them.

    The information collection requests under this generic plan intend to allow for data collection with two types of respondents:

    • Adolescents (11-19 years old) of middle and high school age; and

    • Parents and/or caregivers of adolescents of middle and high school age. For the purposes of this generic package, parents/caregivers include the adult primary caregiver(s) for a child's basic needs (e.g., food, shelter, and safety). This includes biological parents; other biological relatives such as grandparents, aunts, uncles, or siblings; and non-biological parents such as adoptive, foster, or stepparents.

    The types of information collection activities included in this generic plan include:

    (1) Quantitative data collection through electronic, telephone, or paper questionnaires to gather information about programmatic and service activities related to the prevention of HIV and other STDs among adolescents of middle- and high-school age.

    (2) Qualitative data collection through electronic, telephone, or paper means to gather information about programmatic and service activities related to the prevention of HIV and other STDs among adolescents of middle- and high-school age. Qualitative data collection may involve focus groups and in-depth interviewing through group interviews, and cognitive interviewing.

    For adolescents, data collection instruments will include questions on demographic characteristics; experiences with programs and services to reduce the risk of HIV and other STD transmission; and knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and skills related to sexual risk and protective factors on the individual, interpersonal, and community levels.

    For parents and caregivers, data collection instruments will include questions on demographic characteristics as well as parents'/caregivers' (1) perceptions about programs and services provided to adolescents; (2) knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions about their adolescents' health risk and protective behaviors; and (3) parenting knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and skills.

    Any data collection request put forward under this generic clearance will identify the programs and/or services to be informed or refined with the information from the collection and will include a crosswalk of data elements to the aspects of the program the project team seeks to inform or refine. Because this request includes a wide range of possible data collection instruments, specific requests will include items of information to collect and copies of data collection instruments. CDC will pilot test all data collection instruments. CDC will ensure cultural, developmental, and age appropriateness of each instrument. Similarly, CDC will pilot test parent data collection instruments and the data collection instruments will reflect the culture, developmental stage, and age of the parents' adolescent children.

    All data collection procedures will receive review and approval by an Institutional Review Board for the protection of human subjects. CDC will also adhere to appropriate consent and assent procedures as outlined in the IRB-approved protocols and described in the generic information collection plan.

    Participation of respondents is voluntary. There is no cost to the participants other than their time.

    The table below provides the estimated annualized response burden for up to 15 individual data collections under this generic plan. CDC estimates 57,584 respondent burden hours for these information collections.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of
  • respondents
  • Form name Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden
  • per response
  • (in hours)
  • Total burden
  • (in hours)
  • Middle and High School Age Adolescents Youth questionnaire 20,000 1 50/60 16,667 Middle and High School Age Adolescents Pre/Post youth questionnaire 10,000 2 50/60 16,667 Middle and High School Age Adolescents Youth interview/focus group guide 3,000 2 1.5 9,000 Parents/caregivers of adolescents Parent/Caregiver questionnaire 7,500 2 25/60 6,250 Parents/caregivers of adolescents Parent/Caregiver interview/focus group guide 3,000 2 1.5 9,000 Total 57,584
    Leroy A. Richardson, Chief, Information Collection Review Office, Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the Associate Director for Science, Office of the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24317 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [60Day-17-17AZG; Docket No. CDC-2017-0076] Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and Recommendations AGENCY:

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

    ACTION:

    Notice with comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as part of its continuing effort to reduce public burden and maximize the utility of government information, 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. This notice invites comment on a proposed assessment of cancer prevention services at selected community mental health centers. CDC seeks to request an Office of Management and Budget (OMB) clearance for a three-year data collection project.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be received on or before January 8, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CDC-2017-0076 by any of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    Mail: Leroy A. Richardson, Information Collection Review Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE., MS-D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket Number. All relevant comments received will be posted without change to Regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to Regulations.gov.

    Please note:

    All public comment should be submitted through the Federal eRulemaking portal (regulations.gov) or by U.S. mail to the address listed above.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request more information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the information collection plan and instruments, contact Leroy A. Richardson, Information Collection Review Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE., MS-D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329; phone: 404-639-7570; Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. In addition, the PRA also requires Federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each new proposed collection, each proposed extension of existing collection of information, and each reinstatement of previously approved information collection before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, we are publishing this notice of a proposed data collection as described below.

    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; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (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; and (e) estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; to develop, acquire, install and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; to train personnel and to be able to respond to a collection of information, to search data sources, to complete and review the collection of information; and to transmit or otherwise disclose the information.

    Proposed Project

    Assessment of Cancer Prevention Services at Community Mental Health Centers—New—National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (NCCDPHP), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    Background and Brief Description

    Compared to people without mental illness (MI), people with MI have higher rates of cancer risk factors such as smoking and obesity.

    Many people with MI receive outpatient mental health care at community mental health centers (CMHC), and some of these facilities provide screening for cardiovascular disease and other chronic conditions. The extent to which cancer prevention services are provided at CMHCs is not understood.

    This project will use online instruments and telephone interviews with psychiatric clinicians and administrators at selected CMHCs across the United States to assess the capacities of these facilities to provide cancer prevention services (e.g., cancer risk factor education, cancer screening referrals, tobacco cessation counseling) to clients.

    With a goal to achieve a final analytic sample of at least 250 psychiatric clinicians and 250 administrators at CMHCs, researchers will interview a subset of 5%-10% of each group by telephone.

    The objectives of this study are to (1) describe the capacity of CMHCs to provide cancer prevention services; (2) describe any written policies and procedures at CMHCS for providing these services; (3) describe any collaboration of CMHCs with health care providers or community health workers/organizations to provide these services; and (4) describe any barriers to providing these services. Researchers will ask respondents that provide cancer prevention services about best practices and lessons learned.

    There will be no costs to the respondents other than their time. To calculate the total burden, we estimated 500 respondents for the surveys and 50 for the interviews. The average burden will vary from 15-20 minutes for the surveys and one hour for the interviews. The total estimated annual burden hours are 392.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of respondents Form name Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of responses per respondent Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • Total burden (in hours)
    Psychiatric clinicians Clinician Survey Instrument 500 1 15/60 125 Administrators Administrator Survey Instrument 500 1 20/60 167 Psychiatric clinicians Clinician Interview 50 1 1 50 Administrators Administrator Interview 50 1 1 50 Total 392
    Leroy A. Richardson, Chief, Information Collection Review Office, Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the Associate Director for Science, Office of the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24316 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [30Day-18-1039] Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act Review

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has submitted the information collection request titled Information Collection on Cause-Specific Absenteeism in Schools and Evaluation of Influenza Transmission within Student Households to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. CDC previously published a “Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and Recommendations” notice on April 27, 2017 to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. CDC received two comments related to the previous notice. This notice serves to allow an additional 30 days for public and affected agency comments.

    CDC will accept all comments for this proposed information collection project. The Office of Management and Budget is particularly interested in comments that:

    (a) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (b) Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

    (c) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;

    (d) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including, through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses; and

    (e) Assess information collection costs.

    To request additional information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the information collection plan and instruments, call (404) 639-7570 or send an email to [email protected] Direct written comments and/or suggestions regarding the items contained in this notice to the Attention: CDC Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503 or by fax to (202) 395-5806. Provide written comments within 30 days of notice publication.

    Proposed Project

    Information Collection on Cause-Specific Absenteeism in Schools and Evaluation of Influenza Transmission within Student Households—Revision—National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases (NCEZID), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    Background and Brief Description

    The CDC requests approval of a revised information collection to improve our understanding of the role of influenza-like illness (ILI)-specific absenteeism in schools in predicting community-wide influenza transmission and to detect within-household transmission of influenza in households from which a student has been absent from school due to ILI.

    This information collection request aligns DGMQ/CDC's mission to reduce morbidity and mortality in mobile populations, and to prevent the introduction, transmission, or spread of communicable diseases within the United States. Insights gained from this information collection will assist in pandemic preparedness planning and implementation of CDC Pre-Pandemic Guidance on the use of school related measures, including school closures, to slow transmission during an influenza pandemic.

    School closures were considered an important measure during the earliest stage of the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, because a pandemic vaccine was not available until October (six months later), and sufficient stocks to immunize all school-age children were not available until December. However, retrospective review of the U.S. government response to the pandemic identified a limited evidence-base regarding the effectiveness, acceptability, and feasibility of various school related measures during mild or moderately severe pandemics. Guidance updates will require an evidence-based rationale for determining the appropriate triggers, timing, and duration of school related measures, including school closures, during a pandemic.

    CDC staff proposes that the information collection for this project will target adult and child populations in a school district in Wisconsin. CDC will collect reports of individual student symptoms, vaccination status, recent travel, recent exposure to people with influenza symptoms, and duration of illness. In accordance with the revised proposal, CDC will also collect reports on household composition, and influenza vaccination status; symptoms and severity of illness; related healthcare visits; and missed work or school of the participating students' household members. This information accomplished through telephone and in-person interviews.

    CDC will use findings obtained from this information to inform and update CDC's Pre-pandemic Guidance on the implementation of school related measures to prevent the spread of influenza, especially school closures. Both state and local health departments in the United States use this guidance as an important planning and reference tool.

    CDC has enrolled in the study 651 students absent from school due to ILI since gaining OMB approval in December 2014, 651 students absent from school due to ILI. Of them, 58% were positive for at least one respiratory pathogen included in the PCR panel that tests for the presence of 17 common respiratory viruses, and 27% of the students were found to be positive for influenza. It was demonstrated that absenteeism due to ILI in school children was highly correlated with PCR-confirmed influenza in enrolled school children (r = 0.73; P < 0.001) and with medically-attended influenza in the surrounding community (r = 0.72; P < 0.001) suggesting that ILI-specific school absenteeism can be considered a useful tool for predicting influenza outbreaks in the surrounding community. However, researchers require more observations during influenza seasons caused by other influenza strains to make these findings more robust.

    This revision adds a household transmission component to the ongoing approved information collection. In addition to collecting data and biospecimens from students who were absent from school because of the ILI, information and biospecimens will also be collected from household members of these students. This revision aims to enhance current knowledge and understanding of introduction of influenza infection to households that have school-age children as well as within-household transmission.

    There are no costs to the respondents other than their time. The total estimated annual burden hours are 419.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of respondents Form name Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • Parents of children/adolescents or adult students (≥18 yo) attending schools Screening Form
  • Acute Respiratory Infection and Influenza Surveillance Form
  • 345
  • 300
  • 1
  • 1
  • 5/60
  • 15/60
  • Household Study Form 300 1 5/60 Student Biospecimen collection 300 2 5/60 Household members Household Study Form 720 2 10/60
    Leroy A. Richardson, Chief, Information Collection Review Office, Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the Associate Director for Science, Office of the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24315 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [30Day-18-17AZX] Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act Review

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has submitted the information collection request titled Zika Puerto Rico Study: Zika Virus RNA Persistence in Pregnant Women and Congenitally Exposed Infants in Puerto Rico to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. CDC previously published a “Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and Recommendations” notice on April 19, 2017 to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. CDC did not receive comments related to the previous notice. This notice serves to allow an additional 30 days for public and affected agency comments.

    CDC will accept all comments for this proposed information collection project. The Office of Management and Budget is particularly interested in comments that:

    (a) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (b) Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

    (c) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;

    (d) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including, through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses; and

    (e) Assess information collection costs.

    To request additional information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the information collection plan and instruments, call (404) 639-7570 or send an email to [email protected] Direct written comments and/or suggestions regarding the items contained in this notice to the Attention: CDC Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503 or by fax to (202) 395-5806. Provide written comments within 30 days of notice publication.

    Proposed Project

    Zika Puerto Rico Study: Zika Virus RNA Persistence in Pregnant Women and Congenitally Exposed Infants in Puerto Rico—New—National Center of Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    Background and Brief Description

    The Puerto Rico Department of Health (PRDH) reported the first case of autochthonous transmission of Zika virus (ZIKV) in December 2015. As of December 16, 2016, Puerto Rico reported 35,648 ZIKV cases, more than any other location in the U.S., and health officials expect the number of cases to continue to rise. Among the cases, 2,864 have been among pregnant women, and the PRDH announced the first case of microcephaly in a fetus with confirmed ZIKV infection on May 13, 2016. Currently, testing for ZIKV infection can be done by either using rRT-PCR to detect the presence of ZIKV RNA or by serologic testing to detect IgM and neutralizing antibodies. rRT-PCR testing is the preferred and suggested method for diagnosing ZIKV infection because it provides a definitive diagnosis and is not subject to the limitations (e.g., cross-reactivity) associated with serology testing. However because level of viremia is generally low and RNA concentrations decline over time, ZIKV rRT-PCR has generally only been considered for a short testing window (2 weeks).

    Currently, the CDC and the PRDH recommend ZIKV testing of all pregnant women living in areas with active ZIKV transmission, such as Puerto Rico. Symptomatic pregnant women should have serum and urine tested for the presence of ZIKV RNA by rRT-PCR within two weeks of symptom onset. Symptomatic pregnant women tested more than two weeks after symptom onset and symptomatic women with negative rRT-PCR test results should have serologic testing. CDC recommends serologic testing of asymptomatic pregnant women at the initiation of prenatal care and again during their second and third trimesters as a part of routine care; CDC recommends serum and urine rRT-PCR testing after a positive or equivocal serological test result to identify persistent RNA and to provide a definitive diagnosis. For infants, CDC currently recommends ZIKV testing within two days of life for infants born to women with laboratory evidence of possible ZIKV and for infants who have abnormal clinical or neuroimaging findings suggestive of congenital ZIKV syndrome, regardless of maternal ZIKV test results.

    Limited data suggest that ZIKV RNA might be detectable for a much longer period in whole blood than in serum or urine; however, researchers have primarily seen these results in non-pregnant adults. While ZIKV RNA typically only persists in serum for 3-7 days and is thought to clear by 10 days, animal data suggest that pregnancy may be associated with prolonged detection of ZIKV RNA. An ongoing study of pregnant Rhesus macaques found ZIKV RNA in plasma up to 36 and 71 days post first trimester infection, and up to 9 and 36 days after third trimester infection. Preliminary results from a first trimester-infected macaque with detectable virus for 71 days indicate that the fetus had no clinical signs of microcephaly but fetal necropsy showed ZIKV RNA in the axillary lymph nodes, bone marrow, and optic nerve (although not in brain tissue). By comparison, two non-pregnant female animals no longer had detectable RNA at 17 days post-infection.

    Limited data from human studies also suggest that pregnant women have persistent detection of ZIKV RNA in serum. Symptomatic women had detectable virus at 17, 23, 44, and 46 days post symptom onset and one asymptomatic woman was still rRT-PCR positive 53 days after returning from travel. In one symptomatic pregnant woman with prolonged detection of ZIKV RNA, the pregnancy ended as a fetal loss and researchers found ZIKV RNA in the fetus. Findings from these case reports and series led to the hypothesis that persistent detection of RNA in pregnant women may be a marker of fetal infection and thus, potentially a marker of adverse fetal outcomes including microcephaly and brain abnormalities. However, researchers need more data including whether the detection of IgM influences the risk of adverse infant outcomes.

    Researchers know even less about persistent detection of ZIKV RNA and IgM in infants. One case study reported persistent ZIKV RNA detection in a male child born in Brazil at 40 weeks gestation with brain abnormalities. Fifty-four days after birth, the infant's serum, saliva, and urine all tested positive for ZIKV RNA; the detection of ZIKV RNA continued in the infant's serum on day 67 and had cleared by day 216. The infant exhibited no obvious illness or evidence of being immunocompromised when examined on day 54. However, he demonstrated neuropsychomotor developmental delay, with global hypertonia and spastic hemiplegia, by 6 months of age. The duration of IgM detection in infants is also important to determine the window of diagnostic utility of this test for infants not tested at birth.

    Due to the short window of time during which ZIKV RNA is typically detectable in serum, expanding rRT-PCR testing to asymptomatic women and women outside of the two-week window may provide more information than serologic testing alone. This is because positive serology does not allow for definitive diagnosis of infection as false positives and cross-reactivity with other flaviviruses complicates diagnosis. The rRT-PCR, per standard, requires a blood sample obtained by venipuncture for ZIKV RNA detection. However, recent unpublished data from the Institute Pasteur have demonstrated that in 57% of patients there was a significantly longer ZIKV RNA detection in capillary blood samples collected from Zika positive pregnant women tested with rRT-PCR than in venous samples. Similar findings from a study conducted during the Ebola outbreak showed that capillary blood samples can be used as an alternative to venous blood samples, and may be a more accurate method for monitoring viral load.

    If prolonged ZIKV RNA persistence is, in fact, a marker of fetal infection and adverse outcomes, determining the prevalence of prolonged detection of ZIKV RNA is essential for clinical management of pregnant women with ZIKV infection and public health planning for the outbreak. Further, understanding persistent ZIKV RNA in congenitally-exposed infants is also important for clinical management of infants and identifying adverse outcomes that may present several months after birth. Finally, understanding the relationship between persistence and viral load may inform clinical guidance and management of pregnant women and their families.

    In this study, we will estimate the prevalence and duration of persistent ZIKV RNA in pregnant women and congenitally exposed infants. We will also evaluate the diagnostic utility of PCR testing for ZIKV RNA on capillary blood and determine if persistent ZIKV RNA in pregnant women is associated with adverse outcomes or infection in infants. Finally, we will examine the association of different factors that are associated with persistent detection of ZIKV RNA in pregnant women and congenitally exposed infants.

    This study will provide critical data in establishing guidance for testing in pregnant women and congenitally exposed infants. There are no costs to the respondents other than their time. The total estimated annual burden hours are 785.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of respondents Form name Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of responses per respondent Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • ZIKV positive Pregnant women Pregnant women screening form 150 1 2/60 ZIKV positive Pregnant women Pregnant women enrollment questionnaire 150 1 8/60 ZIKV positive Pregnant women Pregnant women symptom questionnaire 150 1 8/60 ZIKV positive Pregnant women Pregnant women follow-up questionnaire 150 30 8/60 ZIKV positive Pregnant women Infant enrollment and delivery questionnaire 150 1 8/60 ZIKV positive Pregnant women Infant follow-up questionnaire 150 6 8/60
    Leroy A. Richardson, Chief, Information Collection Review Office, Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the Associate Director for Science, Office of the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24314 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [60Day-18-0931; Docket No. CDC-2017-0096] Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and Recommendations AGENCY:

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

    ACTION:

    Notice with comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as part of its continuing effort to reduce public burden and maximize the utility of government information, invites the general public and other Federal agencies the opportunity to comment on a proposed and/or continuing information collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This notice invites comment on a proposed information collection project titled “Healthy Homes and Lead Poisoning Surveillance System (HHLPSS)”. The overarching goal of the Healthy Homes and Lead Poisoning Surveillance System (HHLPSS) is to support healthy homes surveillance activities at the state and national levels.

    DATES:

    CDC must receive written comments on or before January 8, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CDC-2017-0096 by any of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    Mail: Leroy A. Richardson, Information Collection Review Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE., MS-D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket Number. CDC will post, without change, all relevant comments to Regulations.gov.

    Please note:

    Submit all Federal comments through the Federal eRulemaking portal (regulations.gov) or by U.S. mail to the address listed above.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request more information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the information collection plan and instruments, contact Leroy A. Richardson, Information Collection Review Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE., MS-D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329; phone: 404-639-7570; Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. In addition, the PRA also requires Federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each new proposed collection, each proposed extension of existing collection of information, and each reinstatement of previously approved information collection before submitting the collection to the OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, we are publishing this notice of a proposed data collection as described below.

    The OMB is particularly interested in comments that will help:

    1. Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    2. Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

    3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    4. Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submissions of responses.

    5. Assess information collection costs.

    Proposed Project

    Healthy Homes and Lead Poisoning Surveillance System (HHLPSS) (OMB Control Number 0920-0931, expires 05/31/2018)—Extension—National Center for Environmental Health (NCEH), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    Background and Brief Description

    The overarching goal of the Healthy Homes and Lead Poisoning Surveillance System (HHLPSS) is to support healthy homes surveillance activities at the state and national levels. CDC is requesting an 18-month extension to collect data from up to 40 state and local Healthy Homes Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Programs (CLPPP) and the state-based Adult Blood Lead Epidemiology and Surveillance (ABLES) programs. The state programs will report information (e.g., presence of lead paint, age of housing, occupation of adults and type of housing) to the CDC under a one-year cost extension of the Fiscal Year 2014 Funding Opportunity Announcement (Funding Opportunity Announcement Number CDC-RFA-14-1408) titled “(PPHF) Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention.” The 18-month extension will allow CDC to collect data for the third-year supplement, which represents the fourth and final year of awardee blood lead surveillance data under this program announcement.

    Over the last three years, seven states have adopted the HHLPPS and 13 are in beta-testing. Since October 2014, CDC has funded up to 40 state and local blood lead surveillance programs. All of these programs or their subcontractors at the local level are submitting lead surveillance data for an additional year.

    The objectives for this surveillance system remain two-fold. First, the HHLPSS allows CDC to track, systematically, how the state and local programs conduct case management and follow-up of residents with housing-related health outcomes. Second, the system allows for identification and collection of information on other housing-related risk factors. Childhood and adult lead poisoning is just one of many adverse health conditions related to common housing deficiencies. Multiple hazards in housing (e.g., mold, vermin, radon and the lack of safety devices) continue to affect, adversely, the health of residents. HHLPSS offers a coordinated, comprehensive, and systematic public health approach to eliminate multiple housing-related health hazards.

    HHLPSS enables flexibility to evaluate housing where the risk for lead poisoning is high, regardless of whether children less than 6 years of age currently reside there. Thus, HHLPSS supports CDC efforts for primary prevention of childhood and adult lead poisoning. Over the past several decades, there has been a remarkable reduction in environmental sources of lead, improved protection from occupational lead exposure, and an overall decreasing trend in the prevalence of elevated blood lead levels (BLLs) in U.S. adults. As a result, the U.S. national BLL geometric mean among adults was 1.2 µg/dL during 2009-2010. Nonetheless, lead exposures continue to occur at unacceptable levels. Current research continues to find that BLLs previously considered harmless can have harmful effects in adults, such as decreased renal function and increased risk for hypertension and essential tremor at BLLs <10 µg/dL.

    There is no cost to respondents other than their time. The total estimated time burden is 640 hours. There are no changes to the requested burden hours or the data collection.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of respondents Form name Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of responses per respondent Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • Total burden
  • (in hours)
  • State, Local, and Territorial Health Departments Healthy Homes and Lead Poisoning Surveillance System (HHLPSS) Variables 40 4 4 640 Total 640
    Leroy A. Richardson, Chief, Information Collection Review Office, Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the Associate Director for Science, Office of the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24318 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [30Day-18-17ADT] Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act Review

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has submitted the information collection request titled “Who's at Risk: From Hazards to Communities—An Approach for Operationalizing CDC Guidelines to Determine Risks, and Define, Locate, and Reach At-Risk Populations in Public Health Emergencies” to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. CDC previously published a “Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and Recommendations” notice on May 18, 2017 to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. CDC did not receive comments related to the previous notice. This notice serves to allow an additional 30 days for public and affected agency comments.

    CDC will accept all comments for this proposed information collection project. The Office of Management and Budget is particularly interested in comments that:

    (a) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (b) Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

    (c) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;

    (d) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including, through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses; and

    (e) Assess information collection costs.

    To request additional information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the information collection plan and instruments, call (404) 639-7570 or send an email to [email protected] Direct written comments and/or suggestions regarding the items contained in this notice to the Attention: CDC Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503 or by fax to (202) 395-5806. Provide written comments within 30 days of notice publication.

    Proposed Project

    Who's at Risk: From Hazards to Communities—An Approach for Operationalizing CDC Guidelines to Determine Risks, and Define, Locate, and Reach At-Risk Populations in Public Health Emergencies—New—Office of Public Health Preparedness and Response (OPHPR), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    Background and Brief Description

    The Risk Assessment, Mapping, and Planning (RAMP) tool is currently being developed by CDC for public health and medical emergency planners (especially Public Health Emergency Preparedness and Hospital Preparedness Program awardees) to assess and quantify risk, identify and map at-risk populations, and to determine response objectives for hazard-specific public health emergency plans at all jurisdictional levels in the United States.

    To assist in developing this tool, CDC will conduct key informant interviews/focus groups with public health and emergency management professionals from across the United States. To understand the needs of at-risk populations, CDC will also administer an anonymous survey to respondents from Los Angeles County Department of Public Health clinics.

    CDC seeks to obtain subject matter expertise and feedback for pilot testing the RAMP tool and anonymous demographic information from LA County DPH clinic guests. CDC will use the data to develop the RAMP tool.

    Public health and emergency manager respondents in pre-identified partner jurisdictions will participate in the interview and focus groups.

    CDC will offer Los Angeles Department of Public Health Clinic guests the Community Emergency Preparedness Survey in order to determine community perspectives on several emergency preparedness and response topics. CDC will offer the Community Emergency Preparedness Survey anonymously to three separate types of community members: LA County Public Health Center Clients, LA County Community Partner Stakeholders, and LA County Community Residents.

    CDC will collect information with the use of paper surveys. CDC will enter the information from the paper survey into a secured database. CDC will lock all paper surveys in the secure offices of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health Emergency Preparedness and Response Division. CDC will disseminate and report results in aggregate form only. The total number of estimated annual burden hours is 226. There are no costs to the respondents other than their time.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of respondents Form name Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • Public Health and Medical Emergency Planners Focus Group Questionnaire 100 1 1 LA County Public Health Center Guests Community Emergency Preparedness Survey 500 1 5/60 LA County Community Partner Stakeholders Community Emergency Preparedness Survey 500 1 5/60 LA County Community Residents Community Emergency Preparedness Survey 500 1 5/60
    Leroy A. Richardson, Chief, Information Collection Review Office, Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the Associate Director for Science, Office of the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24313 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services [Document Identifier: CMS-10653] Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is announcing an opportunity for the public to comment on CMS' intention to collect information from the public. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA), federal agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information (including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information) and to allow 60 days for public comment on the proposed action. Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding our burden estimates or any other aspect of this collection of information, including the necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions, the accuracy of the estimated burden, ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected, and the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received by January 8, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    When commenting, please reference the document identifier or OMB control number. To be assured consideration, comments and recommendations must be submitted in any one of the following ways:

    1. Electronically. You may send your comments electronically to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for “Comment or Submission” or “More Search Options” to find the information collection document(s) that are accepting comments.

    2. By regular mail. You may mail written comments to the following address: CMS, Office of Strategic Operations and Regulatory Affairs, Division of Regulations Development, Attention: Document Identifier/OMB Control Number __, Room C4-26-05, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850.

    To obtain copies of a supporting statement and any related forms for the proposed collection(s) summarized in this notice, you may make your request using one of following:

    1. Access CMS' Web site address at http://www.cms.hhs.gov/PaperworkReductionActof1995.

    2. Email your request, including your address, phone number, OMB number, and CMS document identifier, to [email protected]

    3. Call the Reports Clearance Office at (410) 786-1326.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    William Parham at (410) 786-4669.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Contents

    This notice sets out a summary of the use and burden associated with the following information collections. More detailed information can be found in each collection's supporting statement and associated materials (see ADDRESSES).

    CMS-10653 Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act

    Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. The term “collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA requires federal agencies to publish a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, CMS is publishing this notice.

    1. Type of Information Collection Request: Extension of a currently approved collection; Title of Information Collection: Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act; Use: The 2017 interim final regulations titled “Religious Exemptions and Accommodations for Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act” and “Moral Exemptions and Accommodations for Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act” expand exemptions for religious beliefs and moral convictions for certain entities or individuals whose health plans may otherwise be subject to a mandate of contraceptive coverage through guidance issued pursuant to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. The interim final rules extend the exemption to health insurance issuers that hold religious or moral objections in certain circumstances. The interim final rules also allow plan participants and enrollees with sincerely held religious or moral objections to request coverage that does not include contraceptive services.

    The interim final rules also leave the accommodation process in place as an optional process for objecting entities who wish to use it voluntarily. To avoid contracting, arranging, paying, or referring for contraceptive coverage, an organization seeking to be treated as an eligible organization may self-certify (by using EBSA Form 700), prior to the beginning of the first plan year to which an accommodation is to apply, that it meets the definition of an eligible organization. The eligible organization must provide a copy of its self-certification to each health insurance issuer that would otherwise provide such coverage in connection with the health plan (for insured group health plans or student health insurance coverage). The issuer that receives the self-certification must provide separate payments for contraceptive services for plan participants and beneficiaries (or students and dependents). For a self-insured group health plan, the self-certification must be provided to its third party administrator. An eligible organization may alternatively submit a notification to HHS as an alternative to submitting the EBSA Form 700 to the eligible organization's health insurance issuer or third party administrator. A health insurance issuer or third party administrator providing or arranging payments for contraceptive services for participants and beneficiaries in plans (or student enrollees and covered dependents in student health insurance coverage) of eligible organizations must provide a written notice to such plan participants and beneficiaries (or such student enrollees and covered dependents) informing them of the availability of such payments.

    Eligible organizations can revoke at any time the accommodation process if participants and beneficiaries receive written notice of such revocation from the issuer or third party administrator in accordance with guidance issued by the Secretary, and if the accommodation process is currently being utilized, such revocation will be effective on the first day of the first plan year that begins on or after thirty days after the date of revocation. Form Number: CMS-10653 (OMB control number 0938-1344); Frequency: On Occasion; Affected Public: Private Sector; Number of Respondents: 110; Number of Responses: 274,629; Total Annual Hours: 181. (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Usree Bandyopadhyay at 410-786-6650. For all other issues call (410) 786-1326.)

    Dated: November 3, 2017. William N. Parham, III, Director, Paperwork Reduction Staff, Office of Strategic Operations and Regulatory Affairs.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24305 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4120-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2016-D-1504] Recurrent Herpes Labialis: Developing Drugs for Treatment and Prevention; Guidance for Industry; Availability AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing the availability of a guidance for industry entitled “Recurrent Herpes Labialis: Developing Drugs for Treatment and Prevention.” The purpose of this guidance is to assist sponsors in all phases of development of treatments for recurrent herpes labialis (RHL). The guidance also addresses prevention of RHL. The guidance outlines the types of nonclinical studies and clinical trials recommended throughout the drug development process to support approval of antiviral drug products for the treatment or prevention of RHL. This guidance finalizes the draft guidance of the same name issued on July 1, 2016.

    DATES:

    The announcement of the guidance is published in the Federal Register on November 8, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit either electronic or written comments on Agency guidances at any time as follows:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social Security number, or confidential business information, such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.

    • If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

    Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    • For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. FDA-2016-D-1504 for “Recurrent Herpes Labialis: Developing Drugs for Treatment and Prevention; Guidance for Industry; Availability.” Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    • Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of your comments and you must identify this information as “confidential.” Any information marked as “confidential” will not be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access the information at: https://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR 10.115(g)(5)).

    Submit written requests for single copies of this guidance to the Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10001 New Hampshire Ave., Hillandale Building, 4th Floor, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing your requests. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic access to the guidance document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Regina Alivisatos, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 22, Rm. 6340, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-1500.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a guidance for industry entitled “Recurrent Herpes Labialis: Developing Drugs for Treatment and Prevention.” This guidance addresses nonclinical development, early phases of clinical development, phase 3 trial considerations, and safety considerations in the development of antiviral drug products used to treat or prevent RHL lesions. This guidance finalizes the draft guidance of the same name issued on July 1, 2016 (81 FR 43210). No substantive comments were received during the comment period. In addition to editorial and stylistic changes made in the guidance primarily for clarification, the requirement for a toxicity adverse event scale was omitted.

    This guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The guidance represents the current thinking of FDA on “Recurrent Herpes Labialis: Developing Drugs for Treatment and Prevention.” It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations. This guidance is not subject to Executive Order 12866.

    II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This guidance refers to previously approved collections of information that are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The collections of information in 21 CFR part 312 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0014.

    III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the internet may obtain the guidance at either https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm or https://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: November 3, 2017. Anna K. Abram, Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Planning, Legislation, and Analysis.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24308 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-D-0575] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Guidance for Industry on Expedited Programs for Serious Conditions—Drugs and Biologics AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    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 Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed revision of an existing collection of information, and to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the notice. This notice solicits comments on the information collection in the guidance for industry “Expedited Programs for Serious Conditions—Drugs and Biologics.”

    DATES:

    Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection of information by January 8, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late, untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments must be submitted on or before January 8, 2018. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until midnight Eastern Time at the end of January 8, 2018. Comments received by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions) will be considered timely if they are postmarked or the delivery service acceptance receipt is on or before that date.

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social Security number, or confidential business information, such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.

    • If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

    Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    • For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. FDA-2013-D-0575 for “Guidance for Industry on Expedited Programs for Serious Conditions—Drugs and Biologics.” Received comments, those filed in a timely manner (see ADDRESSES), will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    • Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of your comments and you must identify this information as “confidential.” Any information marked as “confidential” will not be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access the information at: https://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    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, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Guidance for Industry on Expedited Programs for Serious Conditions—Drugs and Biologics OMB Control Number 0910-0765—Revision

    This information collection supports the previous captioned Agency guidance. The guidance provides a single resource for information on FDA's policies and procedures related to the following expedited programs for serious conditions: (1) Fast track designation, (2) breakthrough therapy designation, (3) accelerated approval, and (4) priority review designation. The guidance describes threshold criteria generally applicable to expedited programs, including what is meant by serious condition, unmet medical need, and available therapy. The guidance addresses the applicability of expedited programs to rare diseases, clarification on available therapy, and additional detail on possible flexibility in manufacturing and product quality. The guidance also clarifies the qualifying criteria for breakthrough therapy designation and provides examples of surrogate endpoints and intermediate clinical endpoints used to support accelerated approval.

    The information collection resulting from requests for priority review designation and breakthrough therapy designation is set forth in rows 1 and 2 of table 1 and is approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under control number 0910-0765. The information collection resulting from requests for accelerated approval is approved by OMB under control numbers 0910-0001 and 0910-0338.

    The provisions of the guidance relating to fast track development and other issues such as serious condition and unmet medical need replace the guidance entitled “Fast Track Drug Development Programs—Designation, Development, and Application Review.” Consequently, the information collection resulting from the guidance “Fast Track Drug Development Programs—Designation, Development, and Application Review” (OMB control number 0910-0389) is now being incorporated into OMB control number 0910-0765 (guidance for industry “Expedited Programs for Serious Conditions—Drugs and Biologics”).

    A sponsor or applicant who seeks fast track designation is required to submit a request to the Agency showing that the drug product: (1) Is intended for a serious or life-threatening condition and (2) has the potential to address an unmet medical need. The Agency expects that most information to support a designation request will have been gathered under existing requirements for preparing an investigational new drug (IND), new drug application (NDA), or biologic license application (BLA). If such information has already been submitted to the Agency, the information may be summarized in the fast track designation request. A designation request should include, where applicable, additional information not specified elsewhere by statute or regulation. For example, additional information may be needed to show that a product has the potential to address an unmet medical need where an approved therapy exists for the serious or life-threatening condition to be treated. Such information may include clinical data, published reports, summaries of data and reports, and a list of references. The amount of information and discussion in a designation request need not be voluminous, but it should be sufficient to permit a reviewer to assess whether the criteria for fast track designation have been met.

    After the Agency makes a fast track designation, a sponsor or applicant may submit a premeeting package that may include additional information supporting a request to participate in certain fast track programs. The premeeting package serves as background information for the meeting and should support the intended objectives of the meeting. As with the request for fast track designation, the Agency expects that most sponsors or applicants will have gathered such information to meet existing requirements for preparing an IND, NDA, or BLA. These may include descriptions of clinical safety and efficacy trials not conducted under an IND (e.g., foreign studies) and information to support a request for accelerated approval. If such information has already been submitted to FDA, the information may be summarized in the premeeting package.

    The Agency estimates the total annual number of respondents submitting requests for fast track designation is approximately 140, and the number of requests received is approximately 187 annually. FDA estimates that the number of hours needed to prepare a request for fast track designation is approximately 60 hours per request (row 3 in table 1).

    Of the requests for fast track designation made per year, the Agency granted approximately 132 requests from 107 respondents, and for each of these granted requests, a premeeting package was submitted to the Agency. FDA estimates that the preparation hours are approximately 100 hours per premeeting package (row 4 in table 1).

    The guidance also refers to previously approved collections of information found in FDA regulations. The collections of information in 21 CFR 202.1 and 21 CFR parts 314, and 601, and sections 505(a), 506(a)(1), 735, and 736 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355(a), 356(a)(1), 379(g), and 379(h)) have been approved under OMB control numbers 0910-0686, 0910-0001, 0910-0338, 0910-0014, and 0910-0297.

    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows:

    Table 1—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden 1 Guidance for Industry: Expedited Programs for Serious Conditions—Drugs and Biologics Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Total annual responses Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • Total hours
    Priority review designation request 48 1.7 82 30 2,400 Breakthrough therapy designation request 87 1.29 113 70 7,910 Fast track designation request 140 1.33 187 60 11,220 Fast track premeeting packages 107 1.23 132 100 13,200 Total 34,730 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

    The data pertaining to fast track designation (last two rows of table 1) has changed since the last OMB approval.

    Dated: November 2, 2017. Anna K. Abram, Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Planning, Legislation, and Analysis.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24296 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2017-D-6100] Intent To Review an Analysis Data Reviewer's Guide; Notice of Availability, Request for Comments AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), is establishing a public docket to collect comments related to a proposed Analysis Data Reviewer's Guide (ADRG) template. As part of FDA's ongoing collaboration with the Pharmaceutical Users Software Exchange (PhUSE), an independent, non-profit consortium addressing computational science issues, a PhUSE working group developed the PhUSE ADRG template. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the template and determine whether FDA will recommend its use either as is, or in a modified form, for regulatory submissions of study data. FDA is seeking public comment on the use of the PhUSE ADRG template for regulatory submissions.

    DATES:

    Although you can comment on the PhUSE ADRG template at any time, to ensure that the Agency considers your comments in this review, please submit either electronic or written comments by January 8, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments as follows:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social Security number, or confidential business information, such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.

    • If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

    Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    • For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. FDA-2017-D-6100 for “Intent to Review an Analysis Data Reviewer's Guide Template.” Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of your comments and you must identify this information as “confidential.” Any information marked as “confidential” will not be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access the information at: https://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Crystal Allard, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 21, Rm. 1518, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-8856, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    FDA is a participating member of PhUSE, an independent, non-profit consortium of academic, regulatory, non-profit, and private sector entities. PhUSE provides a global platform for the discussion of topics encompassing the work of biostatisticians, data managers, statistical programmers, and e-clinical information technology professionals, with the mission of providing an open, transparent, and collaborative forum to address computational science issues. As part of this collaboration, PhUSE working groups develop and periodically publish proposals for enhancing the review and analysis of human and animal study data submitted to regulatory agencies. You can learn more about PhUSE working groups at http://www.phuse.eu/cs-working-groups.aspx. (FDA has verified the Web site addresses as of the date this document publishes in the Federal Register, but Web sites are subject to change over time.)

    In December 2014, FDA published the Study Data Technical Conformance Guide (the Guide, available at https://www.fda.gov/ForIndustry/DataStandards/StudyDataStandards/default.htm), which contains technical recommendations to sponsors for the submission of animal and human study data and related information in a standardized electronic format. In section 2.3 of the Guide, FDA recommends that sponsors should include a plan (e.g., in the New Drug Application (NDA)) describing the submission of standardized study data to FDA. The FDA's Analysis Data Resources Web page provides recommendations for preparing an ADRG.

    FDA now intends to review the PhUSE ADRG template, a deliverable of the working group effort described previously in this document, with the potential result that FDA could recommend the use of the template in its current form, or in a modified form, for use in the regulatory submission of study data in conformance with the Guide. FDA invites public comment on all matters regarding the use of the PhUSE ADRG template.

    II. Electronic Access

    The PhUSE ADRG template is available at: http://www.phusewiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=Analysis_Data_Reviewer%27s_Guide.

    Dated: November 1, 2017. Lauren Silvis, Chief of Staff.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24237 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2007-D-0256 (formerly 2007D-0089)] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Draft Guidance for Industry and Review Staff on Target Product Profile—A Strategic Development Process Tool AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Fax written comments on the collection of information by December 8, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    To ensure that comments on the information collection are received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer, Fax: 202-395-7285, or emailed to [email protected] All comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-NEW and title “Draft Guidance for Industry and Review Staff on Target Product Profile—A Strategic Development Process Tool.” Also include the FDA docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    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, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for review and clearance.

    Guidance for Industry and Review Staff on Target Product Profile—A Strategic Development Process Tool; OMB Control Number 0910-NEW

    This information collection request supports the above-captioned Agency guidance. The draft guidance is intended to provide sponsors and FDA review staff with information regarding target product profiles (TPPs). A TPP can be prepared by a sponsor and then shared voluntarily with the appropriate FDA review staff to facilitate communication regarding a particular drug development program. The TPP is based on a template that provides a summary of drug labeling concepts to focus discussions and aid in the understanding between sponsors and FDA. The resulting TPP is a format for a summary of a drug development program described in terms of labeling concepts. With the TPP, a sponsor specifies the labeling concepts that are the goals of the drug development program, documents the specific studies that are intended to support the labeling concepts, and then uses the TPP to assist in a constructive dialogue with FDA. The draft guidance describes the purpose of a TPP, its advantages, and its optimal use. It also provides information on how to complete a TPP and relates case studies that demonstrate a TPP's usefulness.

    Sponsors are not required to submit a TPP. The TPP does not represent an implicit or explicit obligation on the sponsor's part to pursue all stated goals. Submission of a TPP summary does not constrain the sponsor to submit draft labeling in a new drug application (NDA) or biologics license application (BLA) that is identical to the TPP. The TPP is part of the proprietary investigational new drug application (IND) file.

    The TPP is organized according to the key sections of the drug labeling and links drug development activities to specific concepts intended for inclusion in the drug labeling. The TPP is not a long summary. Generally, the TPP is shorter than the ultimate annotated draft labeling because it captures only a summary of the drug development activities and labeling concepts. Early TPPs can be brief depending on the status of the drug's development process.

    The Target Product Profile Template in Appendix C of the draft guidance details the suggested information to be included in each section of the TPP. The TPP includes information from each discipline comprising an NDA/BLA. Within each discipline, the TPP briefly summarizes the specific studies that will supply the evidence for each conclusion that is a labeling concept. A TPP is organized according to key sections in the drug's labeling. Typical key sections are:

    • Indications and Usage • Dosage and Administration • Dosage Forms and Strengths • Contraindications • Warnings and Precautions • Adverse Reactions • Drug Interactions • Use in Specific Populations • Drug Abuse and Dependence • Overdosage • Description • Clinical Pharmacology • Nonclinical Toxicology • Clinical Studies • References • How Supplied/Storage and Handling • Patient Counseling Information

    In the Federal Register of January 5, 2016 (81 FR 240), FDA published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed collection of information. No comments were received.

    FDA estimates the burden of the information collection as follows:

    Table 1—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden 1 Guidance recommendations Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of responses per respondent Total annual responses Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • Total hours
    TPPs 20 6.6 132 20 2,640 1 There are no capital or operating and maintenance costs associated with the information collection.

    Description of Respondents: Sponsors of applications seeking FDA approval to perform clinical investigations of a human drug before applying for marketing approval of the drug from FDA.

    Burden Estimate: FDA estimates that sponsors of approximately 10 percent of the number of active INDs submitted to FDA annually would prepare and submit TPPs. According to our records, this equals approximately 132 TPPs per year. Based on data received from the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, we estimate that approximately 20 sponsors would submit TPPs and that each submission would take approximately 20 hours to prepare. This information is reflected in table 1.

    Dated: November 3, 2017. Anna K. Abram, Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Planning, Legislation, and Analysis.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24335 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; RFA-RM-17-002: National Centers for Cryo-Electron Microscopy.

    Date: November 30-December 1, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One Bethesda Metro Center, 7400 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Contact Person: Nuria E. Assa-Munt, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4164, MSC 7806, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 451-1323, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; RFA Panel: Tobacco Regulatory Science A.

    Date: December 4, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Embassy Suites at the Chevy Chase Pavilion, 4300 Military Road NW., Washington, DC 20015.

    Contact Person: Wenchi Liang, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3150, MSC 7770, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-0681, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Vascular and Hematology AREA Application Review.

    Date: December 5, 2017.

    Time: 3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Katherine M. Malinda, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4140, MSC 7814, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-0912, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Multidisciplinary Studies of HIV and Viral Hepatitis Co-Infection.

    Date: December 6-7, 2017.

    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Kenneth A. Roebuck, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5106, MSC 7852, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-1166, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Conflict: Molecular Oncology.

    Date: December 6, 2017.

    Time: 12:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Reigh-Yi Lin, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-827-6009, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: November 2, 2017. Melanie J. Pantoja, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24263 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Center for Scientific Review: Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Thyroid disorders.

    Date: November 17, 2017.

    Time: 3:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Dianne Hardy, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6175, MSC 7892, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1154, [email protected]

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Topics in Bioengineering.

    Date: November 30, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Admiral Fell Inn, 888 South Broadway, Baltimore, MD 21231.

    Contact Person: Joseph D Mosca, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5158, MSC 7808, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-2344, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Shared Instrumentation for Genomics Studies.

    Date: December 1, 2017.

    Time: 10:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Luis Dettin, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 2208, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-451-1327, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Cardiovascular and Respiratory AREA (R15).

    Date: December 6, 2017.

    Time: 12:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Chee Lim, Ph.D., Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive Room 4128, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1850, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: November 2, 2017. David Clary, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24262 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of a meeting of the National Asthma Education Prevention Program Coordinating Committee.

    The meeting will be open to the public, with attendance limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting.

    Name of Committee: National Asthma Education Prevention Program Coordinating Committee.

    Date: December 14, 2017.

    Time: 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

    Agenda: Welcome and committee charge.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Suite 10018, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting-Webinar).

    Contact Person: James P. Kiley, Ph.D., Director, Division of Lung Diseases, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Suite 10018, Bethesda, MD 20892-7952, 301-435-0233, [email protected]

    Any interested person may file written comments with the committee by forwarding the statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person.

    Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page: http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health-pro/resources/lung/naci/asthma-info/naepp.htm, where an agenda and any additional information for the meeting will be posted when available.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.233, National Center for Sleep Disorders Research; 93.837, Heart and Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases Research; 93.839, Blood Diseases and Resources Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: November 2, 2017. Michelle Trout, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24265 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute: Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of a meeting of the NHLBI Special Emphasis Panel.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Special Emphasis Panel; NHLBI TOPMed Data Analysis.

    Date: December 1, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Embassy Suites at the Chevy Chase Pavilion, 4300 Military Road NW., Washington, DC 20015.

    Contact Person: Susan Wohler Sunnarborg, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review/DERA, National, Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 7182, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 827-7987, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.233, National Center for Sleep Disorders Research; 93.837, Heart and Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases Research; 93.839, Blood Diseases and Resources Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: November 2, 2017. Michelle Trout, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24266 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; Time-Sensitive Obesity Research.

    Date: November 27, 2017

    Time: 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Michele L. Barnard, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Room 7353, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-2542 (301) 594-8898, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; NIDDK P01-A1 Review.

    Date: December 1, 2017.

    Time: 9:50 a.m. to 11:50 a.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Xiaodu Guo, MD, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Room 7023, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452 (301) 594-4719, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; NIDDK RC2 Review.

    Date: December 5, 2017.

    Time: 10:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Xiaodu Guo, MD, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Room 7023, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452 (301) 594-4719, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; Personalized Biofeedback to Enhance Performance Training in Elite Athletes Using Exhaled Breath 13CO2/12CO2 as a Metabolic Marker.

    Date: December 11, 2017.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 2:15 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Paul A. Rushing, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Room 7345, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452 (301) 594-8895, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; NIDDK SBIR Phase II Exploratory Clinical Trials.

    Date: December 15, 2017.

    Time: 10:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Thomas A. Tatham, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Room 7021, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452 (301) 594-3993, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.847, Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Research; 93.848, Digestive Diseases and Nutrition Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology and Hematology Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: November 2, 2017. David Clary, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24267 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Center for Scientific Review: Amended Notice of Meeting

    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel,

    November 8, 2017, 2:00 p.m. to November 8, 2017, 4:00 p.m., National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD, 20892 which was published in the Federal Register on October 18, 2017, 82 FR 48522-48523.

    The meeting will be held on November 7, 2017. The meeting time and location remain the same. The meeting is closed to the public.

    Dated: November 2, 2017. Melanie J. Pantoja, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24264 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) Becoming the Sole CBP-Authorized Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) System for Generating, Transmitting and Updating Daily and Monthly Statements AGENCY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    General notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This document announces that the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) will be the sole electronic data interchange (EDI) system authorized by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) for generating, transmitting, and updating daily and monthly statements for all entries except reconciliation (type 09) entries. This document also announces that the Automated Commercial System (ACS) will no longer be a CBP-authorized EDI system for processing such statements.

    DATES:

    As of December 9, 2017, ACE will be the sole CBP-authorized EDI system for generating, transmitting, and updating daily and monthly statements, and ACS will no longer be a CBP-authorized EDI system for such purpose.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For policy-related questions, contact Randy Mitchell, Commercial Operations, Revenue and Entry, Trade Policy and Programs, Office of Trade, via email at [email protected] For technical questions, contact Celestine Harrell, Revenue Modernization Branch, Trade Transformation Office, Office of Trade, via email at [email protected] with a subject line identifier reading “Statement Processing in ACE”.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    Section 484 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1484), establishes the requirement for importers of record to make entry for merchandise to be imported into the customs territory of the United States. Customs entry information is used by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Partner Government Agencies (PGAs) to determine whether merchandise may be released from CBP custody. Importers of record are also obligated to complete the entry by filing an entry summary declaring the value, classification and rate of duty applicable to the merchandise and such other information as is necessary for CBP to properly assess duties, collect accurate statistics and determine whether any other applicable requirement of law is met. See 19 U.S.C. 1484(a)(1)(B).

    Section 505 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1505), establishes the requirement for importers of record to deposit with CBP the amount of duties and fees estimated to be payable on merchandise unless that merchandise is entered for warehouse or transportation, or under bond. According to section 141.101 of Title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), estimated duties shall either be deposited with a CBP officer at the time of filing of entry or entry summary documentation, or be transmitted to CBP pursuant to the statement processing method.

    A. Statement Processing

    Statement processing is a voluntary automated program for participants in the Automated Broker Interface (ABI) which allows entries to be grouped on a daily basis by importer or filer, and allows payment of related duties, fees and taxes by a single payment. See 19 CFR 24.1(a)(8) and 24.25 and 143.32(p). The preferred method of payment for users of statement processing is by Automated Clearinghouse (ACH). See 19 CFR 24.25(a). According to 19 CFR 143.32(p), ACS, or any other CBP-authorized EDI system, generates the statement, which is transmitted electronically to the filer, consisting of a list of entry summaries and the amount of duties, fees and taxes due for payment. Currently, the daily statements are generated, transmitted and updated in ACS.

    B. Periodic Monthly Statement Test Program

    As an alternative to paying ACH statements on a daily basis, participants in the periodic monthly statements (PMS) test may pay ACH statements on a monthly basis. CBP announced its plan to conduct the PMS test on February 4, 2004 in a notice in the Federal Register (69 FR 5362) which allows importers to deposit estimated duties, fees and taxes on a monthly basis using ACH. A PMS summarizes daily statements into a consolidated statement each month for a single monthly payment by the 15th working day of the month following the month of entry or release. CBP last modified and clarified the PMS test in a Federal Register notice (82 FR 50656) published on November 1, 2017. Currently, monthly statements are generated, transmitted and updated in ACS.

    II. Transition Into the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE)

    In an effort to modernize the business processes essential to securing U.S. borders, facilitating the flow of legitimate shipments, and targeting illicit goods pursuant to Title VI of the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act (Pub. L. 103-182, 107 Stat. 2057, December 8, 1993), commonly known as the Customs Modernization Act, or Mod Act, and the Security and Accountability for Every (SAFE) Port Act of 2006 (Pub. L. 109-347, 120 Stat. 1884), CBP developed ACE to eventually replace ACS as the CBP-authorized EDI system. Over the last several years, CBP has tested ACE and provided significant public outreach to ensure that the trade community is fully aware of the transition from ACS to ACE.

    On October 13, 2015, CBP published an Interim Final Rule in the Federal Register (80 FR 61278) that designated ACE as a CBP-authorized EDI system, to be effective November 1, 2015. In the Interim Final Rule, CBP stated that ACS would be phased out and anticipated that ACS would no longer be supported for entry and entry summary filing by the end of February 2016. Filers were encouraged to adjust their business practices so that they would be prepared when ACS was decommissioned.

    CBP has developed a staggered transition strategy for decommissioning ACS to give the trade additional time to adjust their business practices. The first two phases of the transition were announced in a Federal Register notice published on February 29, 2016 (81 FR 10264). The third phase was announced in a Federal Register notice published on May 16, 2016 (81 FR 30320). The fourth phase of the transition was announced in a Federal Register notice published on May 23, 2016 (81 FR 32339). This notice announces a further transition as CBP is transitioning statement processing for both daily and monthly statements from ACS to ACE.

    III. Announcement of Daily and Monthly Statements Being Generated, Transmitted and Updated in ACE

    This document announces that beginning on December 9, 2017, ACE will be the sole CBP-authorized EDI system for generating, transmitting and updating daily and monthly statements for all entries except reconciliation (type 09) entries, and that as of that date, ACS will be decommissioned for such purposes. Until reconciliation entries are filed in ACE, statements for reconciliation entries will continue to be generated, transmitted and updated in ACS. Once reconciliation entries are filed in ACE, ACE will be the sole CBP-authorized EDI system for generating, transmitting and updating all statements, and ACS will no longer be a CBP-authorized EDI system for such purpose.

    Dated: November 3, 2017. Brenda B. Smith, Executive Assistant Commissioner, Office of Trade.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24336 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-6059-N-01] Section 8 Housing Assistance Payments Program—Annual Adjustment Factors, Fiscal Year 2018 AGENCY:

    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy Development and Research, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Fiscal Year (FY) 2018 Annual Adjustment Factors (AAFs).

    SUMMARY:

    The United States Housing Act of 1937 requires that certain assistance contracts signed by owners participating in the Department's Section 8 housing assistance payment programs provide annual adjustments to monthly rentals for units covered by the contracts. This notice announces FY 2018 AAFs for adjustment of contract rents on the anniversary of those assistance contracts. The factors are based on a formula using residential rent and utility cost changes from the most recent annual Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index (CPI) survey. Beginning with the FY 2014 AAFs and continuing with these FY 2018 AAFs, the Puerto Rico CPI is used in place of the South Region CPI for all areas in Puerto Rico. These factors are applied at the anniversary of Housing Assistance Payment (HAP) contracts for which rents are to be adjusted using the AAF for those calendar months commencing after the effective date of this notice. AAFs are distinct from, and do not apply to the same properties as, Operating Cost Adjustment Factors (OCAFs). OCAFs are annual factors used to adjust rents for project-based rental assistance contracts issued under Section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 and renewed under section 515 or section 524 of the Multifamily Assisted Housing Reform and Affordability Act of 1997 (MAHRA). A separate Federal Register Notice, to be published at a later date, will be used in the calculation of the calendar year (CY) 2018 Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) renewal funding for public housing agencies (PHAs).

    DATES:

    Applicable November 8, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Contact Becky Primeaux, Director, Management and Operations Division, Office of Housing Voucher Programs, Office of Public and Indian Housing, 202-708-1380, for questions relating to the Project-Based Certificate and Moderate Rehabilitation programs (not the Single Room Occupancy program); Norman A. Suchar, Director, Office of Special Needs Assistance Programs, Office of Community Planning and Development, 202-402-5015, for questions regarding the Single Room Occupancy (SRO) Moderate Rehabilitation program; Katherine Nzive, Director, OAMPO Program Administration Office, Office of Multifamily Housing, 202-402-3440, for questions relating to all other Section 8 programs; and Marie Lihn, Economist, Economic and Market Analysis Division, Office of Policy Development and Research, 202-402-5866, for technical information regarding the development of the schedules for specific areas or the methods used for calculating the AAFs. The mailing address for these individuals is: Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20410. Hearing- or speech-impaired persons may contact the Federal Information Relay Service at 800-877-8339 (TTY). (Other than the “800” TTY number, the above-listed telephone numbers are not toll free.)

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Tables showing AAFs will be available electronically from the HUD data information page at http://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/aaf.html.

    I. Applying AAFs to Various Section 8 Programs

    AAFs established by this Notice are used to adjust contract rents for units assisted in certain Section 8 housing assistance payment programs during the initial (i.e., pre-renewal) term of the HAP contract and for all units in the Project-Based Certificate program. There are three categories of Section 8 programs that use the AAFs:

    Category 1: The Section 8 New Construction, Substantial Rehabilitation, and Moderate Rehabilitation programs;

    Category 2: The Section 8 Loan Management (LM) and Property Disposition (PD) programs; and

    Category 3: The Section 8 Project-Based Certificate (PBC) program.

    Each Section 8 program category uses the AAFs differently. The specific application of the AAFs is determined by the law, the HAP contract, and appropriate program regulations or requirements.

    AAFs are not used in the following cases:

    Renewal Rents. AAFs are not used to determine renewal rents after expiration of the original Section 8 HAP contract (either for projects where the Section 8 HAP contract is renewed under a restructuring plan adopted under 24 CFR part 401; or renewed without restructuring under 24 CFR part 402), except in the Project-Based Certificate program (Category 3). In general, renewal rents are established in accordance with the statutory provision in the Multifamily Assisted Housing Reform and Affordability Act of 1997 (MAHRA), as amended, under which the HAP is renewed. After renewal, annual rent adjustments will be provided in accordance with MAHRA.

    Budget-based Rents. AAFs are not used for budget-based rent adjustments. For projects receiving Section 8 subsidies under the LM program (24 CFR part 886, subpart A) and for projects receiving Section 8 subsidies under the PD program (24 CFR part 886, subpart C), contract rents are adjusted, at HUD's option, either by applying the AAFs or by budget-based adjustments in accordance with 24 CFR 886.112(b) and 24 CFR 886.312(b). Budget-based adjustments are used for most Section 8/202 projects.

    Housing Choice Voucher Program. AAFs are not used to adjust rents in the Tenant-Based or the Project-Based Voucher programs.

    II. Adjustment Procedures

    This section of the notice provides a broad description of procedures for adjusting the contract rent. Technical details and requirements are described in HUD notices H 2002-10 (Section 8 New Construction and Substantial Rehabilitation, Loan Management, and Property Disposition) and PIH 97-57 (Moderate Rehabilitation and Project-Based Certificates). Because of statutory and structural distinctions among the various Section 8 programs, there are separate rent adjustment procedures for the three program categories:

    Category 1: Section 8 New Construction, Substantial Rehabilitation, and Moderate Rehabilitation Programs

    In the Section 8 New Construction and Substantial Rehabilitation programs, the published AAF factor is applied to the pre-adjustment contract rent. In the Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation program (both the regular program and the single room occupancy program) the published AAF is applied to the pre-adjustment base rent.

    For Category 1 programs, the Table 1 AAF factor is applied before determining comparability (rent reasonableness). Comparability applies if the pre-adjustment gross rent (pre-adjustment contract rent plus any allowance for tenant-paid utilities) is above the published Fair Market Rent (FMR).

    If the comparable rent level (plus any initial difference) is lower than the contract rent as adjusted by application of the Table 1 AAF, the comparable rent level (plus any initial difference) will be the new contract rent. However, the pre-adjustment contract rent will not be decreased by application of comparability.

    In all other cases (i.e., unless the contract rent is reduced by comparability):

    • Table 1 AAF is used for a unit occupied by a new family since the last annual contract anniversary.

    • Table 2 AAF is used for a unit occupied by the same family as at the time of the last annual contract anniversary.

    Category 2: Section 8 Loan Management Program (24 CFR Part 886, Subpart A) and Property Disposition Program (24 CFR Part 886, Subpart C)

    Category 2 programs are not currently subject to comparability. Comparability will again apply if HUD establishes regulations for conducting comparability studies under 42 U.S.C. 1437f(c)(2)(C).

    The applicable AAF is determined as follows:

    • Table 1 AAF is used for a unit occupied by a new family since the last annual contract anniversary.

    • Table 2 AAF is used for a unit occupied by the same family as at the time of the last annual contract anniversary.

    Category 3: Section 8 Project-Based Certificate Program

    Under the PBC program, the PHA and owner must have executed an Agreement to enter a HAP contract before January 16, 2001. The aggregate total term of the PBC HAP contract (the initial and any renewal terms) may not exceed 15 years. Therefore, most PBC HAP contracts have expired (or have been renewed as a project-based voucher contract in accordance with 24 CFR 983.10(b)(1)(ii)). In the case of a PBC HAP contract that is still in effect, the following procedures are used to adjust contract rent:

    • Table 2 AAF is always used. The Table 1 AAF is not used.

    • Table 2 AAF is always applied before determining comparability (rent reasonableness).

    • Comparability always applies. If the comparable rent level is lower than the rent to owner (contract rent) as adjusted by application of the Table 2 AAF, the comparable rent level will be the new rent to owner.

    • The new rent to owner will not be reduced below the contract rent on the effective date of the HAP contract.

    III. When To Use Reduced AAFs (From AAF Table 2)

    In accordance with Section 8(c)(2)(A) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(c)(2)(A)), the AAF is reduced by 0.01:

    • For all tenancies assisted in the Section 8 Project-Based Certificate program.

    • In other Section 8 programs, for a unit occupied by the same family at the time of the last annual rent adjustment (and where the rent is not reduced by application of comparability (rent reasonableness)).

    The law provides that:

    Except for assistance under the certificate program, for any unit occupied by the same family at the time of the last annual rental adjustment, where the assistance contract provides for the adjustment of the maximum monthly rent by applying an annual adjustment factor and where the rent for a unit is otherwise eligible for an adjustment based on the full amount of the factor, 0.01 shall be subtracted from the amount of the factor, except that the factor shall not be reduced to less than 1.0. In the case of assistance under the certificate program, 0.01 shall be subtracted from the amount of the annual adjustment factor (except that the factor shall not be reduced to less than 1.0), and the adjusted rent shall not exceed the rent for a comparable unassisted unit of similar quality, type and age in the market area. 42 U.S.C. 1437f(c)(2)(A).

    Legislative history for this statutory provision states that “the rationale [for lower AAFs for non-turnover units is] that operating costs are less if tenant turnover is less . . .” (see Department of Veteran Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations for 1995, Hearings Before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations 103d Cong., 2d Sess. 591 (1994)). The Congressional Record also states the following:

    Because the cost to owners of turnover-related vacancies, maintenance, and marketing are lower for long-term stable tenants, these tenants are typically charged less than recent movers in the unassisted market. Since HUD pays the full amount of any rent increases for assisted tenants in section 8 projects and under the Certificate program, HUD should expect to benefit from this `tenure discount.' Turnover is lower in assisted properties than in the unassisted market, so the effect of the current inconsistency with market-based rent increases is exacerbated. (140 Cong. Rec. 8659, 8693 (1994)).

    To implement the law, HUD publishes two separate AAF Tables, Table 1 and Table 2. The difference between Table 1 and Table 2 is that each AAF in Table 2 is 0.01 less than the corresponding AAF in Table 1. Where an AAF in Table 1 would otherwise be less than 1.0, it is set at 1.0, as required by statute; the corresponding AAF in Table 2 will also be set at 1.0, as required by statute.

    IV. How To Find the AAF

    AAF Table 1 and Table 2 are posted on the HUD User Web site at http://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/aaf.html. There are two columns in each AAF table. The first column is used to adjust contract rent for rental units where the highest cost utility is included in the contract rent, i.e., where the owner pays for the highest cost utility. The second column is used where the highest cost utility is not included in the contract rent, i.e., where the tenant pays for the highest cost utility.

    The applicable AAF is selected as follows:

    • Determine whether Table 1 or Table 2 is applicable. In Table 1 or Table 2, locate the AAF for the geographic area where the contract unit is located.

    • Determine whether the highest cost utility is or is not included in contract rent for the contract unit.

    • If highest cost utility is included, select the AAF from the column for “Highest Cost Utility Included.” If highest cost utility is not included, select the AAF from the column for “Highest Cost Utility Excluded.”

    V. Methodology

    AAFs are rent inflation factors. Two types of rent inflation factors are calculated for AAFs: Gross rent factors and shelter rent factors. The gross rent factor accounts for inflation in the cost of both the rent of the residence and the utilities used by the unit; the shelter rent factor accounts for the inflation in the rent of the residence, but does not reflect any change in the cost of utilities. The gross rent inflation factor is designated as “Highest Cost Utility Included” and the shelter rent inflation factor is designated as “Highest Cost Utility Excluded.”

    AAFs are calculated using CPI data on “rent of primary residence” and “fuels and utilities.” 1 The CPI inflation index for rent of primary residence measures the inflation of all surveyed units regardless of whether utilities are included in the rent of the unit or not. In other words, it measures the inflation of the “contract rent” which includes units with all utilities included in the rent, units with some utilities included in the rent, and units with no utilities included in the rent. In producing a gross rent inflation factor and a shelter rent inflation factor, HUD decomposes the contract rent CPI inflation factor into parts to represent the gross rent change and the shelter rent change. This is done by applying data from the Consumer Expenditure Survey (CEX) on the percentage of renters who pay for heat (a proxy for the percentage of renters who pay shelter rent) and also American Community Survey (ACS) data on the ratio of utilities to rents. For Puerto Rico, the Puerto Rico Community Survey (PRCS) is used to determine the ratio of utilities to rents, resulting in different AAFs for some metropolitan areas in Puerto Rico.2

    1 CPI indexes CUUSA103SEHA and CUSR0000SAH2 respectively.

    2 The formulas used to produce these factors can be found in the Annual Adjustment Factors overview and in the FMR documentation at www.HUDUSER.gov.

    Survey Data Used To Produce AAFs

    The rent and fuel and utilities inflation factors for large metropolitan areas and Census regions are based on changes in the rent of primary residence and fuels and utilities CPI indices from 2015 to 2016. The CEX data used to decompose the contract rent inflation factor into gross rent and shelter rent inflation factors come from a special tabulation of 2016 CEX survey data produced for HUD. The utility-to-rent ratio used to produce AAFs comes from 2015 ACS median rent and utility costs.

    Geographic Areas

    AAFs are produced for all Class A CPI cities (CPI cities with a population of 1.5 million or more) and for the four Census Regions. They are applied to Core-Based Statistical Areas (CBSAs) where more than 75 percent of the population of the CBSA is covered by the CPI city-survey. The AAF that is based on that CPI survey is applied to the whole CBSA and to any HUD-defined metropolitan area, called the “HUD Metro FMR Area” (HMFA), within that CBSA. If the CBSA is not covered by a CPI city-survey, the CBSA uses the relevant regional CPI factor. All non-metropolitan counties use regional CPI factors, except for those that are in CPI cities, but have been dropped from metropolitan area by OMB definitions (Lenawee County, MI; Ashtabula County, OH; Henderson County, TX; King George County, VA; Island County, WA). For areas assigned the Census Region CPI factor, both metropolitan and non-metropolitan areas receive the same factor.

    Each metropolitan area that uses a local CPI update factor is listed alphabetically in the tables and each HMFA is listed alphabetically within its respective CBSA. Each AAF applies to a specific geographic area and to units of all bedroom sizes. AAFs are provided:

    • For separate metropolitan areas, including HMFAs and counties that are currently designated as non-metropolitan, but are part of the metropolitan area defined in the local CPI survey.

    • For the four Census Regions (to be used for those metropolitan and non-metropolitan areas that are not covered by a CPI city-survey).

    AAFs use the same OMB metropolitan area definitions, as revised by HUD, that are used for the FY 2018 FMRs.

    Area Definitions

    To make certain that they are using the correct AAFs, users should refer to the Area Definitions Table section at http://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/aaf.html. The Area Definitions Table lists CPI areas in alphabetical order by state, and the associated Census region is shown next to each state name. Areas whose AAFs are determined by local CPI surveys are listed first. All metropolitan areas with local CPI surveys have separate AAF schedules and are shown with their corresponding county definitions or as metropolitan counties. In the six New England states, the listings are for counties or parts of counties as defined by towns or cities. The remaining counties use the CPI for the Census Region and are not separately listed in the Area Definitions Table at http://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/aaf.html.

    Puerto Rico uses its own AAFs calculated from the Puerto Rico CPI as adjusted by the PRCS, the Virgin Islands uses the South Region AAFs and the Pacific Islands uses the West Region AAFs. All areas in Hawaii use the AAFs listed next to “Hawaii” in the Tables which are based on the CPI survey for the Honolulu metropolitan area. The Pacific Islands use the West Region AAFs.

    Dated: November 1, 2017. Todd M. Richardson, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office of Policy Development, Office of Policy Development and Research.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24330 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [Docket No. FWS-HQ-IA-2017-0070; FXIA16710900000-178-FF09A30000] Endangered Species; Marine Mammal Receipt of Applications for Permit AGENCY:

    Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of receipt of applications for permit.

    SUMMARY:

    We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, invite the public to comment on the following applications to conduct certain activities with endangered species, marine mammals, or both. With some exceptions, the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) prohibit activities with listed species unless Federal authorization is acquired that allows such activities.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments or requests for documents on or before December 8, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submitting Comments: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments on Docket No. FWS-HQ-IA-2017-0070.

    U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments Processing, Attn: Docket No. FWS-HQ-IA-2017-0070; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Headquarters, MS: BPHC; 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.

    When submitting comments, please indicate the name of the applicant and the PRT# you are commenting on. We will post all comments on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any personal information you provide us (see the Public Comments section for more information).

    Viewing Comments: Comments and materials we receive will be available for public inspection on http://www.regulations.gov, or by appointment, between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Management Authority, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803; telephone 703-358-2095.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Joyce Russell, Government Information Specialist, Division of Management Authority, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Headquarters, MS: IA; 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803; telephone 703-358-2023; facsimile 703-358-2280.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Public Comment Procedures A. How do I request copies of applications or comment on submitted applications?

    Send your request for copies of applications or comments and materials concerning any of the applications to the contact listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Please include the Federal Register notice publication date, the PRT-number, and the name of the applicant in your request or submission. We will not consider requests or comments sent to an email or address not listed under ADDRESSES. If you provide an email address in your request for copies of applications, we will attempt to respond to your request electronically.

    Please make your requests or comments as specific as possible. Please confine your comments to issues for which we seek comments in this notice, and explain the basis for your comments. Include sufficient information with your comments to allow us to authenticate any scientific or commercial data you include.

    The comments and recommendations that will be most useful and likely to influence agency decisions are: (1) Those supported by quantitative information or studies; and (2) Those that include citations to, and analyses of, the applicable laws and regulations. We will not consider or include in our administrative record comments we receive after the close of the comment period (see DATES) or comments delivered to an address other than those listed above (see ADDRESSES).

    B. May I review comments submitted by others?

    Comments, including names and street addresses of respondents, will be available for public review at the street address listed under ADDRESSES. The public may review documents and other information applicants have sent in support of the application unless our allowing viewing would violate the Privacy Act or Freedom of Information Act. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    II. Background

    To help us carry out our conservation responsibilities for affected species, and in consideration of section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.; ESA), and the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), along with Executive Order 13576, “Delivering an Efficient, Effective, and Accountable Government,” and the President's Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies of January 21, 2009—Transparency and Open Government (74 FR 4685; January 26, 2009), which call on all Federal agencies to promote openness and transparency in Government by disclosing information to the public, we invite public comment on these permit applications before final action is taken. Under the MMPA, you may request a hearing on any MMPA application received. If you request a hearing, give specific reasons why a hearing would be appropriate. The holding of such a hearing is at the discretion of the Service Director.

    III. Permit Applications

    We invite the public to comment on applications to conduct certain activities with endangered species. With some exceptions, the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.; ESA) prohibits activities with listed species unless Federal authorization is acquired that allows such activities.

    A. Endangered Species Applicant: John Warren, Austin, TX; PRT-47139C

    The applicant requests a permit to import one male sport-hunted cape mountain zebra (Equus zebra zebra) from a captive herd in Ezulu Game Reserve, South Africa, for the purpose of enhancing the propagation or survival of the species. This notification is for a single import.

    Applicant: Craig B. Stanford, South Pasadena, CA; PRT-47036C

    The applicant requests a captive-bred wildlife registration under 50 CFR 17.21(g) for aquatic box turtle (Terrapene coahuilensis) to enhance species propagation or survival. This notification covers activities to be conducted by the applicant over a 5-year period.

    Applicant: 777 Ranch, Inc., Hondo, TX; PRT-017404

    The applicant requests a captive-bred wildlife registration under 50 CFR 17.21(g) for barasingha (Cervus duvaucelii), Eld's Brow-antler deer (Cervus eldii), red lechwe (Kobus leche), and Arabian oryx (Oryx leucoryx) to enhance species propagation or survival. This notification covers activities to be conducted by the applicant over a 5-year period.

    Applicant: Houston Zoo, Inc., Houston, TX; PRT-44006C

    The applicant requests a permit to export samples of blue-billed curassow (Crax alberti) to the Museum of Zoology, University of Sao Paulo, Brazil, for scientific research. This notification is for a single export.

    Single Trophy

    The applicant requests a permit to import a sport-hunted trophy of one male bontebok (Damaliscus pygargus pygargus) culled from a captive herd maintained under the management program of the Republic of South Africa, for the purpose of enhancing the propagation or survival of the species.

    Applicant: Fred Jack Perret, Collierville, TN; PRT-47953C B. Marine Mammals Applicant: Stephen Kuhn-Hendricks, Tallahassee, FL; PRT-27209C

    The applicant requests a permit to acquire manatee mandibles (Trichechus manatus) from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission for the purpose of scientific research. This notification covers activities to be conducted by the applicant over a 5-year period.

    Applicant: Mote Marine Laboratory, Sarasota, Florida; PRT-100361

    The applicant requests authorization to renew and amend their permit to take Florida manatees (T. m. latirostris) and import manatees (Trichechus manatus, T. m. latirostris, T. m. manatus, T. inunguis, and T. senegalensis) and dugongs (Dugong dugon) for the purpose of scientific research. This notification covers activities to be conducted by the applicant over a 5-year period.

    IV. Next Steps

    If the Service decides to issue permits to any of the applicants listed in this notice, we will publish a notice in the Federal Register. You may locate the Federal Register notice announcing the permit issuance date by searching in www.regulations.gov under the permit number listed in this document.

    V. Public Comments

    You may submit your comments and materials concerning this notice by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. We will not consider comments sent by email or fax or to an address not listed in ADDRESSES.

    If you submit a comment via http://www.regulations.gov, your entire comment, including any personal identifying information, will be posted on the Web site. If you submit a hardcopy comment that includes personal identifying information, you may request at the top of your document that we withhold this information from public review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    We will post all hardcopy comments on http://www.regulations.gov.

    VI. Authorities

    Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.);

    Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.).

    Joyce Russell, Government Information Specialist, Branch of Permits, Division of Management Authority.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24249 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-HQ-R-2017-N118]; [FXGO1664091HCC0-FF09D00000-178] International Wildlife Conservation Council Establishment; Request for Nominations AGENCY:

    Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) is establishing and seeking nominations for the International Wildlife Conservation Council (Council). The Council will provide advice to the Federal Government, through the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary), on increasing public awareness domestically regarding the conservation, wildlife law enforcement, and economic benefits that result from U.S. citizens traveling to foreign nations to engage in hunting. Additionally, the Council shall advise the Secretary on the benefits international hunting has on foreign wildlife and habitat conservation, anti-poaching and illegal wildlife trafficking programs, and other ways in which international hunting benefits human populations in these areas.

    DATES:

    Comments regarding the establishment of this Council must be submitted no later than November 24, 2017. Nominations for the Council must be submitted by December 8, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments and/or nominations by any of the following methods:

    • Mail or hand-carry nominations to Joshua Winchell, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wildlife Refuge System, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803; or

    • Email nominations to: [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Joshua Winchell, Council Designated Federal Officer, by U.S. mail at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wildlife Refuge System, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803; by telephone at (703) 358-2639; or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Council is established under the authority of the Secretary and regulated by the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2). The duties of the Council are solely advisory and include, but are not limited to: Developing a plan for public engagement and education on the benefits of international hunting; reviewing and making recommendations for changes, when needed, on all Federal programs, and/or regulations, to ensure support of hunting as: (a) An enhancement to foreign wildlife conservation and survival, and (b) an effective tool to combat illegal trafficking and poaching; recommending strategies to benefit the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's permit office in receiving timely country data and information so as to remove barriers that impact consulting with range states; recommending removal of barriers to the importation into the United States of legally hunted wildlife; ongoing review of import suspension/bans and providing recommendations that seek to resume the legal trade of those items, where appropriate; reviewing seizure and forfeiture actions/practices, and providing recommendations for regulations that will lead to a reduction of unwarranted actions; reviewing the Endangered Species Act's foreign listed species and interaction with the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna, with the goal of eliminating regulatory duplications; and recommending methods for streamlining/expediting the process of import permits.

    The Council will meet approximately two times per year. The Secretary will appoint members and their alternates to the Council to serve up to a 3-year term. The Council will not exceed 18 discretionary members and 4 ex officio members.

    Ex officio members will include:

    • Secretary of the Interior or designated DOI representatives; and

    • Secretary of State or designated Department of State representatives.

    The remaining members will be selected from among, but not limited to, the entities listed below. These members must be senior-level representatives of their organizations and/or have the ability to represent their designated constituency.

    • Wildlife and habitat conservation/management organizations;

    • U.S. hunters actively engaged in international and/or domestic hunting conservation;

    • The firearms or ammunition manufacturing industry;

    • Archery and/or hunting sports industry; and

    • Tourism, outfitter, and/or guide industries related to international hunting.

    Nominations should include a resume providing an adequate description of the nominee's qualifications, including information that would enable DOI to make an informed decision regarding meeting the membership requirements of the Council and to permit DOI to contact a potential member.

    Members of the Council serve without compensation. However, while away from their homes or regular places of business, Council and subcommittee members engaged in Council or subcommittee business that the DFO approves may be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5703, in the same manner as persons employed intermittently in Federal Government service.

    Public Disclosure of Comments: 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.

    Certification Statement: I hereby certify that the International Wildlife Conservation Council is necessary and is in the public interest in connection with the performance of duties imposed on the Department of the Interior 43 U.S.C. 1457, under the provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 (16 U.S.C. 742a-742j), and other Acts applicable to specific bureaus.

    Authority:

    5 U.S.C. Appendix 2.

    Dated: November 3, 2017. Ryan K. Zinke, Secretary, Department of the Interior.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24328 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR [FWS-R4-ES-2017-N156; FVHC98220410150-XXX-FF04G01000] Notice of Availability; Florida Trustee Implementation Group Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Draft Phase V.2 Restoration Plan and Supplemental Environmental Assessment; Florida Coastal Access Project AGENCY:

    Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, the National Environmental Policy Act, the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Final Programmatic Damage Assessment and Restoration Plan and Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (Final PDARP/PEIS), and the resulting Consent Decree, the Federal and State natural resource trustee agencies for the Florida Trustee Implementation Group (Florida TIG) have prepared a Draft Phase V.2 Restoration Plan and Supplemental Environmental Assessment (Draft Phase V.2 RP/SEA). The Draft Phase V.2 RP/SEA supplements the 2016 Final Phase V Early Restoration Plan and Environmental Assessment (Final Phase V ERP/EA) and describes and proposes the second phase of the Florida Coastal Access Project intended to continue the process of restoring natural resources and services injured or lost as a result of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, which occurred on or about April 20, 2010, in the Gulf of Mexico.

    DATES:

    The Florida TIG will consider public comments received on or before December 8, 2017.

    Public Meeting: The Florida TIG has scheduled a public meeting to facilitate public review and comment on the Draft Phase V.2 RP/SEA. Both written and verbal comments will be taken at the public meeting. The Florida TIG will hold an open house followed by a public meeting. The public meeting will include a presentation of the Draft Phase V.2 RP/SEA. The public meeting schedule is as follows:

    Date Time Location November 16, 2017 5:30 to 6:30 p.m.: Open house—6:30 to 8:00 p.m.: Public meeting (presentations and discussion) Robert M. Moore Administration Building, 1000 Cecil G. Costin Sr. Blvd., Port St. Joe, FL 32456. ADDRESSES:

    Obtaining Documents: You may download the Draft Phase V.2 RP/SEA at any of the following sites:

    http://www.gulfspillrestoration.noaa.gov.

    http://www.doi.gov/deepwaterhorizon.

    http://dep.state.fl.us/deepwaterhorizon/default.htm.

    Alternatively, you may request a CD of the Draft Phase V.2 RP/SEA (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). You may also view the document at any of the public facilities listed at http://www.gulfspillrestoration.noaa.gov.

    Submitting Comments: You may submit comments on the Draft Phase V.2 RP/SEA by one of following methods:

    • Via the Web: http://www.gulfspillrestoration.noaa.gov.

    • Via U.S. Mail: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box 49567, Atlanta, GA 30345.

    In order to be considered, mailed comments must be postmarked on or before the comment deadline given in the DATES section of this notice.

    • In Person: Written and oral comments may be submitted at the public meeting on November 16, 2017 (see Public Availability of Comments below).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Nanciann Regalado, at 404-679-4161, or email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Introduction

    On or about April 20, 2010, the mobile offshore drilling unit Deepwater Horizon, which was being used to drill a well for BP Exploration and Production, Inc. (BP), in the Macondo prospect (Mississippi Canyon 252-MC252), experienced a significant explosion, fire, and subsequent sinking in the Gulf of Mexico, resulting in an unprecedented volume of oil and other discharges from the rig and from the wellhead on the seabed. The Deepwater Horizon oil spill is the largest off shore oil spill in U.S. history, discharging millions of barrels of oil over a period of 87 days. In addition, well over 1 million gallons of dispersants were applied to the waters of the spill area in an attempt to disperse the spilled oil. An undetermined amount of natural gas was also released into the environment as a result of the spill.

    The Trustees conducted the natural resource damage assessment (NRDA) for the Deepwater Horizon oil spill under OPA. Pursuant to OPA (OPA; 33 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.), Federal and State agencies act as trustees on behalf of the public to assess natural resource injuries and losses and to determine the actions required to compensate the public for those injuries and losses. OPA further instructs the designated trustees to develop and implement a plan for the restoration, rehabilitation, replacement, or acquisition of the equivalent of the injured natural resources under their trusteeship, including the loss of use and services from those resources from the time of injury until the time of restoration to baseline (the resource quality and conditions that would exist if the spill had not occurred) is complete.

    The Deepwater Horizon Trustees are:

    • U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), as represented by the National Park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Bureau of Land Management;

    • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), on behalf of the U.S. Department of Commerce;

    • U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA);

    • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA);

    • State of Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority, Oil Spill Coordinator's Office, Department of Environmental Quality, Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, and Department of Natural Resources;

    • State of Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality;

    • State of Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources and Geological Survey of Alabama;

    • State of Florida Department of Environmental Protection and Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission; and

    • State of Texas: Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Texas General Land Office, and Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.

    Upon completion of the NRDA, the Trustees reached and finalized a settlement of their natural resource damage claims with BP in an April 4, 2016, Consent Decree approved by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. Pursuant to that Consent Decree, restoration projects in the Florida Restoration Area are now chosen and managed by the Florida TIG. The Florida TIG is composed of the following six Trustees: State of Florida Department of Environmental Protection and Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission; DOI; NOAA; EPA; and USDA.

    Background

    In the 2011 Framework Agreement for Early Restoration Addressing Injuries Resulting from the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill (Framework Agreement), BP agreed to provide to the Trustees up to $1 billion toward early restoration projects in the Gulf of Mexico to address injuries to natural resources caused by the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. The Framework Agreement represented a preliminary step toward the restoration of injured natural resources and was intended to expedite the start of restoration in the Gulf in advance of the completion of the injury assessment process. Early restoration was not intended to and did not fully address all injuries caused by the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.

    In the five phases of the early restoration process, the Trustees selected, and BP agreed to fund, a total of 65 early restoration projects expected to cost a total of approximately $877 million. The Trustees selected these projects after public notice, public meetings, and consideration of public comments, through the Phase I Early Restoration Plan/Environmental Assessment (Phase I ERP/EA), Phase II Early Restoration Plan/Environmental Review (Phase II ERP/ER), Phase III ERP/PEIS, Phase IV Early Restoration Plan/Environment Assessments (Phase IV ERP/EA), and Phase V ERP/EA. These plans are available at: http://www.doi.gov/deepwaterhorizon.

    The April 4, 2016, Consent Decree terminated and replaced the Framework Agreement and provided that the Trustees shall use remaining early restoration funds as specified in the early restoration plans and in accordance with the Consent Decree. The Trustees have determined that decisions concerning any unexpended early restoration funds are to be made by the appropriate Trustee Implementation Group for that project.

    Overview of the Draft Phase V.2 RP/SEA

    In the Final Phase V ERP/EA, the Deepwater Horizon State and Federal natural resource trustees (Trustees) evaluated and selected the first phase of the Florida Coastal Access Project. The Final Phase V ERP/EA provided that the Florida Coastal Access Project would proceed in phases, and that these future phases would consist of similar restoration activities to be identified and selected by the Trustees in the same manner and using the same criteria as described in the Final Phase V ERP/EA, in accordance with OPA, NEPA, and other applicable laws, and after public review of the proposed activities.

    The proposed second phase of the Florida Coastal Access Project is consistent with the early restoration program alternatives selected in the Final Phase III Early Restoration Plan/Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (Final Phase III ERP/PEIS) and the Final PDARP/PEIS. The purpose of this notice is to inform the public of the availability of the Draft Phase V.2 RP/SEA and to seek public comments on the proposed second phase of the Florida Coastal Access Project and supporting analysis.

    The Draft Phase V.2 RP/SEA is being released in accordance with OPA, NRDA regulations found in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 15 CFR part 990, NEPA, the Consent Decree, the Final PDARP/PEIS, the Phase III ERP/PEIS and the Phase V ERP/EA.

    The Florida TIG is considering the second phase of the Florida Coastal Access Project in the Draft Phase V.2 RP/SEA to address lost recreational opportunities in Florida caused by the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. In the Draft Phase V.2 RP/SEA, the Florida TIG proposes one preferred alternative, the Salinas Park Addition, which involves the acquisition and enhancement of a 6.6-acre coastal parcel. The Florida Coastal Access Project was allocated approximately $45.4 million in early restoration funds, and the Salinas Park Addition would cost approximately $3.1 million of the $6.4 million remaining funds not utilized in the first phase of the Florida Coastal Access Project. The Florida TIG also considered two additional land acquisition and improvement alternatives, as well as the no action alternative in the Draft Phase V.2 RP/SEA. One or more alternatives may be selected for implementation by the Florida TIG in the Final Phase V.2 RP/SEA or in future restoration plans. Details on the proposed second phase of the Florida Coastal Access Project are provided in the Draft Phase V.2 RP/SEA.

    The proposed second phase of the Florida Coastal Access Project is intended to continue the process of using restoration funding to restore natural resources, ecological services, and recreational use services injured or lost as a result of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Additional restoration planning for the Florida Restoration Area will continue.

    Next Steps

    As described above, a public meeting is scheduled to facilitate the public review and comment process on the Draft Phase V.2 RP/SEA. After the public comment period ends, the Florida TIG will consider and address the comments received before issuing a final Phase V.2 RP/SEA.

    Public Availability of Comments

    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.

    Administrative Record

    The documents comprising the Administrative Record for the Draft Phase V.2 RP/SEA can be viewed electronically at http://www.doi.gov/deepwaterhorizon/administrativerecord.

    Authority

    The authority of this action is the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.) and its implementing Natural Resource Damage Assessment regulations found at 15 CFR part 990 and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).

    Kevin D. Reynolds, Designated Department of the Interior Natural Resource Trustee Official.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24197 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Office of the Secretary [18XD0120AF/DT20000000/DST000000/241A/T0110100] Tribal Consultation on Indian Trust Asset Reform Act (ITARA) Sec. 304, Transition Plan for the Office of the Special Trustee for American Indians AGENCY:

    Office of the Secretary, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces that the Department of the Interior (Department) will be hosting two Tribal consultation sessions on a proposal to transfer the Office of the Special Trustee for American Indians (OST) to report to the Office of the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs (AS-IA) in FY 2018 via a Secretary's Order. Under the proposal, the office would be headed temporarily by the Principal Deputy Special Trustee, who would be delegated the authorities of the Special Trustee for American Indians. Subsequently, the Department plans to appoint a career executive to act as the Director of OST.

    DATES:

    Tribal consultation sessions will be held by phone on Wednesday, December 13, 1:00 p.m.- 4:00 p.m. EST, and Thursday, December 14, 9:00 a.m.- 12:00 p.m. EST. Comments on this proposal must be received by January 15, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Please submit comments via email to [email protected] or mail to Attn: ITARA Transition, c/o Elizabeth Appel, Office of Regulatory Affairs & Collaborative Action—Indian Affairs, 1849 C Street NW., Mail Stop 4660, Washington, DC 20240. The toll free call-in number for the consultation sessions is: (888) 324-2907, and the passcode is 9793554. Additional information is available at www.doi.gov/OST/ITARA.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Elizabeth Appel, Director, Office of Regulatory Affairs & Collaborative Action, Office of the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs, at [email protected] or (202) 273-4680.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    OST was established in the Department by the American Indian Trust Fund Management Reform Act of 1994 (1994 Act), Public Law 103-412, when Congress decided a Special Trustee was needed to oversee reforms relating to trust responsibilities throughout the Department. In 1996, the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) transferred management of Indian trust funds from the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to the OST. See Secretarial Order No. 3197. OST has implemented reforms and managed Indian trust funds for over 20 years.

    In June 2016, Congress passed the Indian Trust Asset Reform Act (ITARA), Public Law 114-178. ITARA Section 304(a) requires the Secretary to prepare and submit a plan for the transition of functions of the OST to other bureaus or agencies within the Department within two years of submission of the plan to Congress. Beginning in August 2016, the Department held one listening session and 10 Tribal consultation sessions throughout Indian Country and held an open period to solicit comments via a notice in the Federal Register. Based on consultation feedback, the Department determined that the most appropriate place for OST's core functions is to remain with OST as a permanent organization. To ensure fully integrated Indian policy and programs, we propose to realign OST to report to AS-IA. To meet the two-year deadline required by ITARA Section 304(a), the Department proposes transferring the OST to AS-IA in FY 2018 via a Secretary's Order.

    Today, the OST holds approximately $5 billion under trust management and administers approximately 3,400 tribal trust accounts for more than 250 Indian Tribes and over 400,000 Individual Indian Money (IIM) accounts. Each year, OST disburses roughly $1.2 billion to individual Indians and tribes. Receipting, investing, and disbursing activity is accomplished through the processing of 10.3 million financial transactions.

    The OST organization features five Regional Trust Administrators with extensive backgrounds in trust management, with over 50 Fiduciary Trust Officers to serve as the primary point-of-contact for beneficiaries on trust matters, allowing OST to coordinate trust asset management activities with the BIA, tribes, and individual beneficiaries in their respective geographic areas. The OST operates a Trust Beneficiary Call Center (TBCC) to support a strong beneficiary trust relationship as envisioned in the original reform goals.

    Section 306 of ITARA requires the Secretary to identify cost savings that would result from the elimination of “any program, function, service, or activity . . . of the Office of the Special Trustee that will not be operated or carried out as a result of a transfer of functions and personnel following enactment of this Act”. As the proposed plan calls for all functions of OST to be transferred under AS-IA intact, there will be no cost savings as defined by ITARA.

    Moreover, appropriations for OST increased relatively quickly after its inception as functions were transferred from other organizations within the Department to OST. Funding levels peaked in FY 2007 when OST received $223.3 million. In the last decade, however, funding has steadily decreased as reforms have been completed and efficiencies have been realized. In FY 2017, OST received $138.8 million—a 38 percent decrease from its peak funding. Any cost savings resulting from trust reforms have already been captured in the form of decreased budget requests.

    Authority:

    E.O. 13175, 65 FR 67250.

    Jerold Gidner, Principal Deputy Special Trustee.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24319 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4334-63-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0024147; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000] Notice of Inventory Completion: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Alaska Region, Anchorage, AK AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Alaska Region, (Alaska Region USFWS), has completed an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects, in consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, and has determined that there is a cultural affiliation between the human remains and associated funerary objects and present-day Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request to the Alaska Region USFWS. If no additional requestors come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the lineal descendants, Indian Tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.

    DATES:

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to the Alaska Region USFWS at the address in this notice by December 8, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Edward J. DeCleva, Regional Historic Preservation Officer, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Alaska Region, 1011 East Tudor Road, MS-235, Anchorage, AK 99503, telephone (907) 786-3399, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects under the control of the Alaska Region USFWS. The human remains and associated funerary objects were recovered from site 049-KOD-00083, Kodiak Island Borough, AK.

    This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.

    Consultation

    A detailed assessment of the human remains was made by the Alaska Region USFWS professional staff in consultation with representatives of the Alutiiq Museum and Archaeological Repository of Kodiak, Alaska, acting as agent for the Alutiiq Tribe of Old Harbor (previously listed as Native Village of Old Harbor and Village of Old Harbor), Kaguyak Village, Native Village of Afognak, Native Village of Akhiok, Native Village of Larsen Bay, Native Village of Ouzinkie, Native Village of Port Lions, Sun'aq Tribe of Kodiak (previously listed as the Shoonaq' Tribe of Kodiak), and the Tangirnaq Native Village (formerly Lesnoi Village (aka Woody Island)).

    History and Description of the Remains

    Beginning in 1961 and continuing through 1963, human remains representing, at minimum, 23 individuals, including 17 adults (two possible males, two possible females, and 13 individuals of indeterminate sex), five sub adults, and one infant were removed from the Three Saints Bay site (049-KOD-00083) on Kodiak Island as part of the Aleut-Konyag project conducted by the University of Wisconsin-Madison, under the direction of Morgan Usadel, Donald Clark, William Workman, and Peter Storck. The collection was curated and stored at the University of Wisconsin-Madison until 2006. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, working with the Regional Historic Preservation Officer of the Alaska Region USFWS to determine locations of Alaskan archeological collections, located and recovered this collection, conducted a complete inventory, and returned the human remains to the Alaska Region USFWS for storage. No known individuals were identified. The 23 associated funerary objects include 19 unmodified faunal remains, 1 lot of charcoal samples, 1 carved bone figurine pin, 1 amber bead, and 1 bone buckle.

    The Three Saints Bay site is a two component site, the lower component corresponds to the prehistoric late Kachemak tradition winter settlement dating to BP 2000 to 1100. The upper component consists of seven or eight log houses, warehouse, barns, bunkhouses, carpentry shop, and storage buildings of the first settlement established in North America by the Russian American Company in 1784. Five to nine burials were encountered at Three Saints Bay which, according to Donald Clark's 1970 report, exhibited burial practices that fit within the general Kachemak traditional pattern.

    The present-day descendant of the Kachemak tradition is the Alutiiq Tribe of Old Harbor (previously listed as Native Village of Old Harbor and Village of Old Harbor).

    Determinations Made by the Alaska Region USFWS

    Officials of the Alaska Region USFWS have determined that:

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of 23 individuals of Native American ancestry.

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(A), the 23 associated funerary objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and the Alutiiq Tribe of Old Harbor (previously listed as Native Village of Old Harbor and Village of Old Harbor).

    Additional Requestors and Disposition

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Edward DeCleva, Regional Historic Preservation Officer, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Alaska Region, 1011 East Tudor Road, MS-235, Anchorage, AK 99503, telephone (907) 786-3399, email [email protected], by December 8, 2017. After that date, if no additional requestors have come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the Alutiiq Tribe of Old Harbor (previously listed as Native Village of Old Harbor and Village of Old Harbor) may proceed.

    The Alaska Region, USFWS are responsible for notifying the Alutiiq Museum and Archaeological Repository of Kodiak, Alaska, acting as agent for the Alutiiq Tribe of Old Harbor (previously listed as Native Village of Old Harbor and Village of Old Harbor), Kaguyak Village, Native Village of Afognak, Native Village of Akhiok, Native Village of Larsen Bay, Native Village of Ouzinkie, Native Village of Port Lions, Sun'aq Tribe of Kodiak (previously listed as the Shoonaq' Tribe of Kodiak), Tangirnaq Native Village (formerly Lesnoi Village (aka Woody Island)) that this notice has been published.

    Dated: September 14, 2017. Melanie O'Brien, Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24231 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-52-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0024164; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000] Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items: Museum of Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Museum of Texas Tech University, in consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, has determined that the cultural items listed in this notice meet the definition of sacred objects. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request to the Museum of Texas Tech University. If no additional claimants come forward, transfer of control of the cultural items to the lineal descendants, Indian Tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.

    DATES:

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to the Museum of Texas Tech University at the address in this notice by December 8, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Dr. Eileen Johnson, Museum of Texas Tech University, 3301 4th Street, Box 43191, Lubbock, TX 79409-3191, telephone (806) 742-2442, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3005, of the intent to repatriate cultural items under the control of the Museum of Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, that meet the definition of sacred objects under 25 U.S.C. 3001.

    This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American cultural items. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.

    History and Description of the Cultural Items

    At an unknown date, 39 cultural items were removed from multiple unknown locations. Of these, 38 of the cultural items were purchased by Dr. Lou Dunn Diekemper from the Morning Star Gallery in Santa Fe, NM, between 1985 and 1987. The history of these cultural items prior to being acquired by the Morning Star Gallery is unknown. Dr. Lou Dunn Diekemper donated these items to the Museum of Texas Tech University in 2006. The remaining item was purchased by Evelyn Davies in 2004 from the Adobe Gallery in Santa Fe, NM. The history of this object prior to being acquired by the Adobe Gallery is unknown. Evelyn Davies donated this item to the Museum of Texas Tech University in 2016. The 39 sacred items are 4 pahoes, 1 bandolier bag, and 3 jish and their contents that make up the remaining 31 items.

    Representatives of the Navajo Nation, Arizona, New Mexico & Utah examined records for these items, and consider them all to be sacred objects and objects of cultural patrimony belonging to the Navajo people. These representatives confirmed that Navajo jish are still in ceremonial use by the Navajo today, and can be possessed only by someone with proper ceremonial knowledge. Information from the Morning Star Gallery associated with the cultural items states that they are Navajo items intended for ceremonial use, and this information is consistent with related accession, catalog, and documentary information maintained by the Museum of Texas Tech University.

    Determinations Made by the Museum of Texas Tech University

    Officials of the Museum of Texas Tech University have determined that:

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(C), the 39 cultural items described above are specific ceremonial objects needed by traditional Native American religious leaders for the practice of traditional Native American religions by their present-day adherents.

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the sacred objects and Navajo Nation, Arizona, New Mexico & Utah.

    Additional Requestors and Disposition

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to Dr. Eileen Johnson, Museum of Texas Tech University, 3301 4th Street, Box 43191, Lubbock, TX 79409-3191, telephone (806) 742-2442, email [email protected], by December 8, 2017. After that date, if no additional claimants have come forward, transfer of control of the sacred objects to Navajo Nation, Arizona, New Mexico & Utah may proceed.

    The Museum of Texas Tech University is responsible for notifying the Navajo Nation, Arizona, New Mexico & Utah that this notice has been published.

    Dated: September 15, 2017. Melanie O'Brien, Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24232 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-52-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0024193; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000] Notice of Inventory Completion: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Tuzigoot National Monument, Clarkdale, AZ AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Tuzigoot National Monument, has completed an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects, in consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, and has determined that there is a cultural affiliation between the human remains and associated funerary objects and present-day Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request to Tuzigoot National Monument. If no additional requestors come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the lineal descendants, Indian Tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.

    DATES:

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Tuzigoot National Monument at the address in this notice by December 8, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Dorothy FireCloud, Superintendent, Tuzigoot National Monument, P.O. Box 219, Camp Verde, AZ 86322, telephone (928) 567-5276, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects under the control of the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Tuzigoot National Monument, Clarkdale, AZ. The human remains and associated funerary objects were removed from a site in Yavapai County, AZ.

    This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the Superintendent, Tuzigoot National Monument.

    Consultation

    A detailed assessment of the human remains was made by Tuzigoot National Monument professional staff in consultation with representatives of the Ak-Chin Indian Community (previously listed as the Ak Chin Indian Community of the Maricopa (Ak Chin) Indian Reservation, Arizona); Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation, Arizona; Gila River Indian Community of the Gila River Indian Reservation, Arizona; Hopi Tribe of Arizona; Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community of the Salt River Reservation, Arizona; Tohono O'odham Nation of Arizona; Yavapai-Prescott Indian Tribe (previously listed as the Yavapai-Prescott Tribe of the Yavapai Reservation, Arizona); and Zuni Tribe of the Zuni Reservation, New Mexico (hereafter referred to as “The Tribes”).

    History and Description of the Remains

    In 1955, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from a prehistoric village site located on the east side of the Clarkdale Smelter property in Yavapai County, AZ, by Ed Starkey and later donated to Tuzigoot National Monument. No known individuals were identified. The 22 associated funerary objects are 16 shell bracelets, 1 jar, and 5 bowls.

    The Ak Chin Indian Community of Maricopa (Ak Chin) Reservation, Arizona; Gila River Indian Community of the Gila River Indian Reservation, Arizona; Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community of the Salt River Reservation, Arizona; and the Tohono O'odham Nation of Arizona comprise one cultural group known as the O'odham. Material culture items found at the site, including associated funerary objects, demonstrate continuity between the people of the prehistoric village site located on the east side of the Clarkdale Smelter and the O'odham. These items include a Sacaton red on buff bowl and locally made plainware ceramics that are similar in construction and appearance to plainware ceramics made in lands attributed to the Hohokam archeological culture, commonly considered to be ancestral O'odham. Consultation with O'odham Tribes also indicates that oral traditions exist that describe ancestral O'odham people living in the Verde Valley.

    The Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation, Arizona, traces ancestry to Yavapai bands once living in the Verde Valley. Consultation with Yavapai Tribes indicates the existence of specific ancestral names for the sites in the Verde Valley and a belief that ancestors lived near the sites. Archeological sites identified as Yavapai have also been found near the prehistoric village site on the east side of the Clarkdale Smelter. Additionally, the prehistoric village site on the east side of the Clarkdale Smelter is identified as being within the Yavapai traditional lands.

    The Hopi Tribe of Arizona considers all of Arizona to be within traditional Hopi lands or within areas where Hopi clans migrated in the past. Evidence demonstrating continuity between the people that lived at the prehistoric village site on the east side of the Clarkdale Smelter and the Hopi Tribe includes archeological, anthropological, linguistic, folkloric and oral traditions. Ceramic vessels associated with the Kayenta tradition demonstrate continuity between the prehistoric village, and the Hopi people. During consultation, Hopi clan members also identified ancestral names and traditional stories about specific events and ancestral people in the Verde Valley.

    The Yavapai-Prescott Indian Tribe (previously listed as the Yavapai-Prescott Tribe of the Yavapai Reservation, Arizona) traces ancestry to Yavapai bands once living in the Verde Valley. Consultation with Yavapai Tribes indicates the existence of specific ancestral names for the sites in the Verde Valley and a belief that ancestors lived near the sites. Archeological sites identified as Yavapai have also been found near the prehistoric village site on the east side of the Clarkdale Smelter. Additionally, the prehistoric village site on the east side of the Clarkdale Smelter is identified as being within the Yavapai traditional lands.

    The Zuni Tribe of the Zuni Reservation, New Mexico, considers the Verde Valley to be within the migration path of ancestral Zuni people. Archeological evidence, including similarities in ceramic designs demonstrates continuity between the people of the Verde Valley during A.D. 1125-1425 and the people of Zuni.

    Determinations Made by Tuzigoot National Monument

    Officials of Tuzigoot National Monument have determined that:

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of one individual of Native American ancestry.

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(A), the 22 objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects and The Tribes.

    Additional Requestors and Disposition

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Dorothy FireCloud, Superintendent, Tuzigoot National Monument, P.O. Box 219, Camp Verde, AZ 86322, telephone (928) 567-5276, email [email protected], by December 8, 2017. After that date, if no additional requestors have come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to The Tribes may proceed.

    Tuzigoot National Monument is responsible for notifying The Tribes that this notice has been published.

    Dated: September 21, 2017. Melanie O'Brien, Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24235 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-70-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0024161; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000] Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items: New York State Museum, Albany, NY AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The New York State Museum, in consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, has determined that the cultural items listed in this notice meet the definition of sacred objects. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request to the New York State Museum. If no additional claimants come forward, transfer of control of the cultural items to the lineal descendants, Indian Tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.

    DATES:

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to the New York State Museum at the address in this notice by December 8, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Lisa Anderson, New York State Museum, 3049 Cultural Education Center, Albany, NY 12230, telephone (518) 486-2020, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3005, of the intent to repatriate cultural items under the control of the New York State Museum, Albany, NY, that meet the definition of sacred objects under 25 U.S.C. 3001.

    This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American cultural items. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.

    History and Description of the Cultural Items

    In 1898, the New York State Museum (hereafter “Museum”) acquired one cultural item from Harriet Maxwell Converse of New York City, NY. Museum records indicate that Converse acquired the mask from Charlie Adams on the Tonawanda Seneca Reservation (E-37613).

    In 1906, Arthur C. Parker, Museum ethnologist and archeologist, purchased one cultural item for the New York State Museum. The cultural item is a wooden medicine mask (E-37039). Museum records indicate the medicine face was obtained from an individual on the Tonawanda Seneca Reservation who ceremonially passed the object and its inhabiting spirit on to Parker's care.

    In 1918, Arthur C. Parker purchased a cultural item for the Museum from Mrs. Laura Doctor on the Tonawanda Seneca Reservation. The cultural item is a wooden medicine face (E-36869). Museum records indicate the medicine mask once belonged to Ely S. Parker, a prominent member of the Tonawanda Seneca Nation who was the uncle of Mrs. Doctor and the great-uncle of Arthur C. Parker. Ely S. Parker assisted Lewis Henry Morgan with his study of Iroquois culture, served in the Civil War as adjutant for General Ulysses S. Grant, and later became the first Native American Commissioner of Indian Affairs.

    Traditional religious leaders of the Tonawanda Band of Seneca (previously listed as the Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians of New York) have identified these three medicine masks as being needed for the practice of traditional Native American religions by present-day adherents. Museum documentation, supported by oral evidence presented during consultation with members of the Haudenosaunee Standing Committee on Burial Rules and Regulations, indicates that these medicine masks are culturally affiliated with the Tonawanda Band of Seneca (previously listed as the Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians of New York).

    Determinations Made by the New York State Museum

    Officials of the New York State Museum have determined that:

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(C), the three cultural items described above are specific ceremonial objects needed by traditional Native American religious leaders for the practice of traditional Native American religions by their present-day adherents.

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the sacred objects and the Tonawanda Band of Seneca (previously listed as the Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians of New York).

    Additional Requestors and Disposition

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to Lisa Anderson, New York State Museum, 3049 Cultural Education Center, Albany, NY 12230 telephone (518) 486-2020, email [email protected], by December 8, 2017. After that date, if no additional claimants have come forward, transfer of control of the sacred objects to the Tonawanda Band of Seneca (previously listed as the Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians of New York) may proceed.

    The New York State Museum is responsible for notifying the Cayuga Nation; Oneida Nation (previously listed as the Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin); Oneida Nation of New York; Onondaga Nation; Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe (previously listed as the St. Regis Band of Mohawk Indians of New York); Seneca Nation of Indians (previously listed as the Seneca Nation of New York); Seneca-Cayuga Nation (previously listed as the Seneca-Cayuga Tribe of Oklahoma); Tonawanda Band of Seneca (previously listed as the Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians of New York); and Tuscarora Nation that this notice has been published.

    Dated: September 15, 2017. Melanie O'Brien, Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24230 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-52-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0024162; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000] Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items: New York State Museum, Albany, NY AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The New York State Museum, in consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, has determined that the cultural items listed in this notice meet the definition of sacred objects. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request to the New York State Museum. If no additional claimants come forward, transfer of control of the cultural items to the lineal descendants, Indian Tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.

    DATES:

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to the New York State Museum at the address in this notice by December 8, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Lisa Anderson, New York State Museum, 3049 Cultural Education Center, Albany, NY 12230, telephone (518) 486-2020, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3005, of the intent to repatriate cultural items under the control of the New York State Museum, Albany, NY, that meet the definition of sacred objects under 25 U.S.C. 3001.

    This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American cultural items. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.

    History and Description of the Cultural Items

    In 1898, Harriet Maxwell Converse of New York City, NY, donated 18 cultural items to the New York State Museum (hereafter “Museum”). The 18 cultural items are wooden medicine masks (E-36730, E-36914, E-37016, E-37017, E-37033, E-37038, E-37053, E-37054, E-37057, E-37598, E-37601, E-37604, E-37608, E-37616, E-52, E-59). Museum records identify the masks as Seneca.

    In the late 19th or early 20th century, the Museum acquired two cultural items. The two cultural items are wooden medicine masks (E-37023, E-37605) identified in Museum records as Seneca.

    In 1905, Arthur C. Parker, Museum ethnologist and archeologist, acquired one cultural item (E-37031). The cultural item is a wooden medicine mask identified in Museum records as Seneca.

    In 1909, Arthur C. Parker acquired one cultural item, a wooden medicine mask (E-37042) for the Museum. The mask is identified in Museum records as Seneca.

    In 1909, John M. Clarke, Museum Director, acquired one cultural item, a wooden medicine mask (E-36867) for the Museum. Museum records identify the mask as probably Seneca.

    In 1910, Arthur C. Parker acquired one cultural item, a cornhusk medicine mask (E-36925) for the Museum. Museum records indicate the mask is Seneca.

    In 1913, Arthur C. Parker acquired two cultural items for the Museum. The two cultural items are cornhusk medicine masks (E-36924A, E-36924B). Museum records indicate the masks are Seneca.

    In 1916, Arthur C. Parker acquired one cultural item, a cornhusk medicine mask (E-37570F) for the Museum. The mask was used in an exhibit, and may have been commissioned from Sophia Jones of Lawton, NY.

    In 1956, the Museum purchased two cultural items from the Logan Museum of Anthropology, Beloit College, WI. The cultural items were part of a larger collection made by Albert Green Heath. One cultural item is a wooden medicine mask (E-50316), and the other is a turtle shell medicine mask purchased from an individual identified only as P.W. (E-50318).

    In 1957, Archibald T. Shorey of Albany, NY, donated three cultural items to the Museum. The cultural items are wooden medicine masks (E-50400, E-50401, E-50402). Museum records identify the three cultural items as Seneca.

    In 1958, the Museum acquired one cultural item from Sam Grey Wolf (E-50415). The cultural item is a wooden medicine mask. A notation written on the inside of the mask indicates it was made by Jessie Cornplanter.

    In 2008, the Schenectady Historical Society, Schenectady, NY, transferred one cultural item. The cultural item is a miniature cornhusk medicine mask (E2008.5.41). Museum records identify the mask as Seneca.

    Traditional religious leaders of the Seneca Nation of Indians (previously listed as the Seneca Nation of New York) and the Tonawanda Band of Seneca (previously listed as the Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians of New York) have identified these 32 medicine masks as being needed for the practice of traditional Native American religions by present-day adherents. Museum documentation, supported by oral evidence presented during consultation with members of the Haudenosaunee Standing Committee on Burial Rules and Regulations, indicates that these medicine masks are culturally affiliated with the Seneca Nation of Indians (previously listed as the Seneca Nation of New York) and the Tonawanda Band of Seneca (previously listed as the Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians of New York).

    Determinations Made by the New York State Museum

    Officials of the New York State Museum have determined that:

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(C), the 32 cultural items described above are specific ceremonial objects needed by traditional Native American religious leaders for the practice of traditional Native American religions by their present-day adherents.

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the sacred objects and the Seneca Nation of Indians (previously listed as the Seneca Nation of New York) and the Tonawanda Band of Seneca (previously listed as the Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians of New York).

    Additional Requestors and Disposition

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to Lisa Anderson, New York State Museum, 3049 Cultural Education Center, Albany, NY 12230 telephone (518) 486-2020, email [email protected], by December 8, 2017. After that date, if no additional claimants have come forward, transfer of control of the sacred objects to the Seneca Nation of Indians (previously listed as the Seneca Nation of New York) and the Tonawanda Band of Seneca (previously listed as the Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians of New York) may proceed.

    The New York State Museum is responsible for notifying the Cayuga Nation; Oneida Nation (previously listed as the Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin); Oneida Nation of New York; Onondaga Nation; Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe (previously listed as the St. Regis Band of Mohawk Indians of New York); Seneca Nation of Indians (previously listed as the Seneca Nation of New York); Seneca-Cayuga Nation (previously listed as the Seneca-Cayuga Tribe of Oklahoma); Tonawanda Band of Seneca (previously listed as the Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians of New York); and the Tuscarora Nation that this notice has been published.

    Dated: September 15, 2017. Melanie O'Brien, Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24228 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-52-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0024192: PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000] Notice of Inventory Completion: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Tuzigoot National Monument, Clarkdale, AZ; Correction AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice; correction.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Tuzigoot National Monument, has corrected an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects, published in a Notice of Inventory Completion in the Federal Register on July 28, 2014. This notice corrects the minimum number of individuals and number of associated funerary objects. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request to Tuzigoot National Monument. If no additional requestors come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the lineal descendants, Indian Tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.

    DATES:

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Tuzigoot National Monument at the address in this notice by December 8, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Dorothy FireCloud, Superintendent, Tuzigoot National Monument, P.O. Box 219, Camp Verde, AZ 86322, telephone (928) 567-5276, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the correction of an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects under the control of the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Tuzigoot National Monument, Clarkdale, AZ. The human remains and associated funerary objects were removed from multiple locations in Coconino and Yavapai Counties, AZ.

    This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the Superintendent, Tuzigoot National Monument.

    This notice corrects the minimum number of individuals and number of associated funerary objects published in a Notice of Inventory Completion in the Federal Register (79 FR 43774, July 28, 2014). The human remains and associated funerary objects were inadvertently omitted from the published notice. Transfer of control of the additional items in this correction notice has not occurred.

    Correction

    In the Federal Register (79 FR 43775, July 28, 2014), column 2, paragraph 3, sentence 1, under the heading “History and Description of the Remains,” is corrected by substituting the following sentence:

    At unknown dates, human remains representing, at minimum, 20 individuals were removed from unknown locations in Yavapai County, AZ.

    In the Federal Register (79 FR 43775, July 28, 2014), column 2, paragraph 5, under the heading “History and Description of the Remains,” is corrected by substituting the following paragraph:

    At unknown dates, human remains representing, at minimum, 19 individuals were removed from unknown locations in Yavapai County, AZ. The remains were found in Tuzigoot National Monument collections at the National Park Service's Western Archeological and Conservation Center and so were likely removed from the area of the monument. No known individuals were identified. The one associated funerary object is a soil sample.

    In the Federal Register (79 FR 43775, July 28, 2014), column 2, under the heading “History and Description of the Remains,” is corrected by adding the following paragraph after paragraph 7:

    In 1954, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from the Will Steele property in Coconino County, AZ by Tapco workmen working on the property. No known individuals were identified. The one associated funerary object is a bead.

    In the Federal Register (79 FR 43775, July 28, 2014), column 3, paragraph 2, under the heading “Determinations Made by Tuzigoot National Monument,” is corrected by substituting the following paragraphs:

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of 51 individuals of Native American ancestry.

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(A), the two objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony. The National Park Service intends to convey the associated funerary objects to the Tribes pursuant to 54 U.S.C. 102503(g) through (i) and 54 U.S.C 102504.

    Additional Requestors and Disposition

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary object should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Dorothy FireCloud, Superintendent, Tuzigoot National Monument, P.O. Box 219, Camp Verde, AZ 86322, telephone (928) 567-5276, email [email protected], by December 8, 2017. After that date, if no additional requestors have come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the Ak Chin Indian Community (previously listed as the Ak Chin Indian Community of the Maricopa (Ak Chin) Indian Reservation, Arizona); Apache Tribe of Oklahoma; Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation, Arizona; Fort Sill Apache Tribe of Oklahoma; Gila River Indian Community of the Gila River Indian Reservation, Arizona; Hopi Tribe of Arizona; Hualapai Indian Tribe of the Hualapai Indian Reservation, Arizona; Jicarilla Apache Nation, New Mexico; Mescalero Apache Tribe of the Mescalero Reservation, New Mexico; Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community of the Salt River Reservation, Arizona; San Carlos Apache Tribe of the San Carlos Reservation, Arizona; Tohono O'odham Nation of Arizona; Tonto Apache Tribe of Arizona; White Mountain Apache Tribe of the Fort Apache Reservation, Arizona; Yavapai-Apache Nation of the Camp Verde Indian Reservation, Arizona; Yavapai-Prescott Indian Tribe (previously listed as the Yavapai-Prescott Tribe of the Yavapai Reservation, Arizona); and Zuni Tribe of the Zuni Reservation, New Mexico (hereafter referred to as “The Tribes”) may proceed.

    Tuzigoot National Monument is responsible for notifying The Tribes that this notice has been published.

    Dated: September 21, 2017 Melanie O'Brien, Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24234 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-52-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0024154; PCU00RP14.R50000-PPWOCRDN0] Notice of Inventory Completion: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Washington, DC AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, has completed an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects, in consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, and has determined that there is no cultural affiliation between the human remains and associated funerary objects and any present-day Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. Representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request to the Bureau of Indian Affairs. If no additional requestors come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.

    DATES:

    Representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to the Bureau of Indian Affairs at the address in this notice by December 8, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Anna Pardo, Museum Program Manager/NAGPRA Coordinator, U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 12220 Sunrise Valley Drive, Room 6084, Reston, VA 20191, telephone (703) 390-6343, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects under the control of the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Washington, DC. The human remains and associated funerary objects were removed from a site in the southern portion of the Blackfeet Indian Reservation of Montana, Glacier County, MT.

    This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3) and 43 CFR 10.11(d). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.

    Consultation

    A detailed assessment of the human remains was made by the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, professional staff in consultation with representatives of the Blackfeet Tribe of the Blackfeet Indian Reservation of Montana.

    History and Description of the Remains

    In September of 1961, human remains representing, at minimum, four individuals were removed by Thomas Kehoe, Archeologist and Curator of the Museum of the Plains Indian, from a site in Glacier County, MT. At the time of this surface removal, the Museum of the Plains Indian was a part of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and Kehoe had been conducting extensive archeological surveys throughout the Blackfeet Indian Reservation. A note found in the box with these items states, “Surface burial found in Southern portion of Blackfeet Reservation, CUA, 9/61.” The human remains have continued to be housed at the Museum since being collected. No known individuals were identified. The 41 associated funerary objects are 5 small wooden ladders, 4 spoons, 1 partial key, 1 bullet press, 1 iron, 1 ladle, 1 enamel tin cup, 2 belt buckles, 1 scissors blade, 1 bucket part, 16 beads, and 7 brass buttons.

    Determinations Made by the Bureau of Indian Affairs

    Officials of the Bureau of Indian Affairs have determined that:

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice are Native American based on biological and historical evidence.

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of four individuals of Native American ancestry.

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(A), the 41 objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), a relationship of shared group identity cannot be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects and any present-day Indian Tribe.

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (15), the land from which the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects were removed is the tribal land of the Blackfeet Tribe of the Blackfeet Indian Reservation of Montana.

    • Pursuant to 43 CFR 10.11(c)(1), the disposition of the human remains and associated funerary objects may be to the Blackfeet Tribe of the Blackfeet Indian Reservation of Montana.

    Additional Requestors and Disposition

    Representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Anna Pardo, Museum Program Manager/NAGPRA Coordinator, U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 12220 Sunrise Valley Drive, Room 6084, Reston, VA 20191, telephone (703) 390-6343, email [email protected], by December 8, 2017. After that date, if no additional requestors have come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the Blackfeet Tribe of the Blackfeet Indian Reservation of Montana may proceed.

    The Bureau of Indian Affairs is responsible for notifying the Blackfeet Tribe of the Blackfeet Indian Reservation of Montana that this notice has been published.

    Dated: September 14, 2017. Melanie O'Brien, Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24233 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-52-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0024163; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000] Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items: New York State Museum, Albany, NY AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The New York State Museum, in consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, has determined that the cultural items listed in this notice meet the definition of sacred objects. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request to the New York State Museum. If no additional claimants come forward, transfer of control of the cultural items to the lineal descendants, Indian Tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.

    DATES:

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to the New York State Museum at the address in this notice by December 8, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Lisa Anderson, New York State Museum, 3049 Cultural Education Center, Albany, NY 12230, telephone (518) 486-2020, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3005, of the intent to repatriate cultural items under the control of the New York State Museum, Albany, NY, that meet the definition of sacred objects under 25 U.S.C. 3001.

    This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American cultural items. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.

    History and Description of the Cultural Items

    In 1898, the New York State Museum (hereafter “Museum”) acquired three wooden medicine masks from Harriet Maxwell Converse of New York City, NY. Two of the cultural items were obtained on the Cattaraugus Reservation (E-37059, E-37623), and one was acquired at Salamanca, NY (E-37048).

    In 1905, Arthur C. Parker, Museum ethnologist and archeologist, acquired two wooden medicine masks from the Cattaraugus Reservation for the Museum. Parker reported one of the masks, made of wood and rabbit skin, was used to expel the causes of venereal disease (E-36897). The other reportedly represented Ganuska, the Stone Giant, and was purchased from Nancy Cook through Mrs. A. C. Parker (E-36928).

    In 1908, Arthur C. Parker obtained four wooden medicine masks for the Museum from Delos Kettle of Lawton, NY. Parker attributed three of the medicine masks to the I'dos Society (E-36864, E-36865, E-36866). A fourth medicine mask was unattributed (E-37022).

    In June of 1909, Arthur C. Parker commissioned one partially carved medicine mask for the Museum to be made on the Cattaraugus Reservation (E-36917). The face was carved on the trunk of a basswood tree by a man named either Jonas or Green, with Delos Kettle in attendance.

    In 1910, Arthur C. Parker acquired two cornhusk medicine masks on the Cattaraugus Reservation in New York for the Museum (E-36922A, E-36922B).

    In 1933, Willard A. Gibson of Salamanca, NY, donated one cultural item to the Museum. The item is a cornhusk medicine mask that was given to him by Louis Plummer at Allegany, NY (E-37965).

    In 1956, the Museum purchased two cultural items from the Logan Museum of Anthropology at Beloit College, WI. The cultural items were part of a larger collection made by Albert Green Heath. One of the cultural items is a wooden medicine mask that Heath purchased from Wilson Stevens on the Cattaraugus Reservation (E-50315). The other is a miniature cornhusk medicine mask that he obtained from Delos Big Kettle at Lawtons, NY, in 1912 (E-50312).

    Traditional religious leaders of the Seneca Nation of Indians (previously listed as the Seneca Nation of New York) have identified these 15 medicine faces as being needed for the practice of traditional Native American religions by present-day adherents. Museum documentation, supported by oral evidence presented during consultation with members of the Haudenosaunee Standing Committee on Burial Rules and Regulations, indicates that these medicine faces are culturally affiliated with the Seneca Nation of Indians (previously listed as the Seneca Nation of New York).

    Determinations Made by the New York State Museum

    Officials of the New York State Museum have determined that:

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(C), the 15 cultural items described above are specific ceremonial objects needed by traditional Native American religious leaders for the practice of traditional Native American religions by their present-day adherents.

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the sacred objects and the Seneca Nation of Indians (previously listed as the Seneca Nation of New York).

    Additional Requestors and Disposition

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to Lisa Anderson, New York State Museum, 3049 Cultural Education Center, Albany, NY 12230 telephone (518) 486-2020, email [email protected], by December 8, 2017. After that date, if no additional claimants have come forward, transfer of control of the sacred objects to the Seneca Nation of Indians (previously listed as the Seneca Nation of New York) may proceed.

    The New York State Museum is responsible for notifying the Cayuga Nation; Oneida Nation (previously listed as the Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin); Oneida Nation of New York; Onondaga Nation; Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe (previously listed as the St. Regis Band of Mohawk Indians of New York); Seneca Nation of Indians (previously listed as the Seneca Nation of New York); Seneca-Cayuga Nation (previously listed as the Seneca-Cayuga Tribe of Oklahoma); Tonawanda Band of Seneca (previously listed as the Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians of New York); and the Tuscarora Nation that this notice has been published.

    Dated: September 15, 2017. Melanie O'Brien, Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24229 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-52-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0024160; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000] Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items: New York State Museum, Albany, NY AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The New York State Museum, in consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, has determined that the cultural items listed in this notice meet the definition of sacred objects. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request to the New York State Museum. If no additional claimants come forward, transfer of control of the cultural items to the lineal descendants, Indian Tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.

    DATES:

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to the New York State Museum at the address in this notice by December 8, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Lisa Anderson, New York State Museum, 3049 Cultural Education Center, Albany, NY 12230, telephone (518) 486-2020, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3005, of the intent to repatriate cultural items under the control of the New York State Museum, Albany, NY, that meet the definition of sacred objects under 25 U.S.C. 3001.

    This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American cultural items. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.

    History and Description of the Cultural Items

    In 1850, the New York State Museum (hereafter “Museum”) purchased one cultural item from Lewis Henry Morgan of Rochester, NY. The cultural item is a wooden medicine mask that Morgan obtained from a member of the Onondaga Nation at the Six Nations Reserve in Canada (E-36909).

    In 1898, Harriet Maxwell Converse of New York City, NY, donated five cultural items to the Museum. The cultural items are five wooden medicine masks (E-37015, E-37043, E-37614, E-37626, E-94). Museum records indicate one of the masks was purchased from the son of Tadodaho in July 1898.

    In 1907, the Museum purchased one cultural item from Mark R. Harrington of Covert and Harrington in New York City, NY. The cultural item is a wood and cornhusk medicine mask obtained from Albert Silversmith at the Six Nations Reserve in Canada (E-37018).

    In 1911, Arthur C. Parker, Museum ethnologist and archeologist, acquired one cultural item for the Museum. The cultural item is a wooden medicine mask obtained (E-37037).

    Traditional religious leaders of the Onondaga Nation have identified these eight medicine faces as being needed for the practice of traditional Native American religions by present-day adherents. Museum documentation, supported by oral evidence presented during consultation with members of the Haudenosaunee Standing Committee on Burial Rules and Regulations, indicates that these medicine faces are culturally affiliated with the Onondaga Nation.

    Determinations Made by the New York State Museum

    Officials of the New York State Museum have determined that:

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(C), the 8 cultural items described above are specific ceremonial objects needed by traditional Native American religious leaders for the practice of traditional Native American religions by their present-day adherents.

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the sacred objects and the Onondaga Nation.

    Additional Requestors and Disposition

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to Lisa Anderson, New York State Museum, 3049 Cultural Education Center, Albany, NY 12230 telephone (518) 486-2020, email [email protected], by December 8, 2017. After that date, if no additional claimants have come forward, transfer of control of the sacred objects to the Onondaga Nation may proceed.

    The New York State Museum is responsible for notifying the Cayuga Nation; Oneida Nation (previously listed as the Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin); Oneida Nation of New York; Onondaga Nation; Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe (previously listed as the St. Regis Band of Mohawk Indians of New York); Seneca Nation of Indians (previously listed as the Seneca Nation of New York); Seneca-Cayuga Nation (previously listed as the Seneca-Cayuga Tribe of Oklahoma); Tonawanda Band of Seneca (previously listed as the Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians of New York); and the Tuscarora Nation that this notice has been published.

    Dated: September 15, 2017. Melanie O'Brien, Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24227 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-52-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [PPWODIREP0;PPMPSPD1Y.YM0000] “Made in America” Outdoor Recreation Advisory Committee Establishment; Request for Nominations AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) is establishing and seeking nominations for the “Made in America” Outdoor Recreation Advisory Committee (Committee). The Committee will provide advice to the Secretary of the Interior on the public-private partnerships across all public lands, with the goal of expanding access to and improving infrastructure on public lands and waterways.

    DATES:

    Comments regarding the establishment of this Committee must be submitted no later than November 24, 2017. Nominations for the Committee must be submitted by December 8, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments and/or nominations by any of the following methods:

    • Mail or hand-carry nominations to Terry Austin, Associate Director for Business Services, National Park Service, Office of Business Services, 1849 C Street NW., MS 2717, Washington, DC 20240; or

    • Email nominations to: [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Terry Austin, by U.S. mail at the National Park Service, Office of Business Services, 1849 C Street NW., MS 2717, Washington, DC 20240; by telephone at (202) 513-7241; or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Committee is established under the authority of the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) and regulated by the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2). The Committee's duties are strictly advisory and will include, but are not limited to, providing recommendations on policies and programs that: Expand and improve visitor infrastructure developed through public-private partnerships; implement sustainable operations embracing fair, efficient, and convenient fee collection and strategic use of the collected fees; improve interpretation using technology; and create better tools and/or opportunities for Americans to discover their lands and waters. The Committee will also provide recommendations for implementation of Secretary's Order 3347—Conservation Stewardship and Outdoor Recreation.

    The Committee will meet approximately two times per year. The Secretary of the Interior will appoint members and their alternates to the Committee to serve up to a 3-year term. The Committee will not exceed 18 discretionary and 2 ex officio members.

    Ex officio members will include:

    • Secretary of the Interior and/or a designated Department of the Interior representative.

    The Secretary will select remaining members from among, but not limited to, the entities listed below. These members must be senior-level representatives of their organizations:

    • Camping, recreational, and/or all-terrain vehicle (ATV) industries;

    • Tourism and/or guide industries related to outdoor recreation;

    • Hospitality industries;

    • Outdoor outfitter industries;

    • Saltwater and freshwater recreational fishing organizations;

    • Recreational boating organizations;

    • Industrial Manufacturing industries; and

    • Transportation industries.

    Nominations should include a resume providing an adequate description of the nominee's qualifications, including information that would enable DOI to make an informed decision regarding meeting the membership requirements of the Committee and to permit DOI to contact a potential member.

    Members of the Committee serve without compensation. However, while away from their homes or regular places of business, Committee and subcommittee members engaged in Committee or subcommittee business that the DFO approves may be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5703, in the same manner as persons employed intermittently in Federal Government service.

    Public Disclosure of Comments: 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.

    Certification Statement: I hereby certify that the “Made in America” Outdoor Recreation Advisory Committee is necessary, is in the public interest, established under the authority of the Secretary of the Interior, and in furtherance of the National Park Service Organic Act (16 U.S.C. 1), the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 (16 U.S.C. 742a), the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701), the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (16 U.S.C. 668dd), and other Acts applicable to specific bureaus.

    Authority:

    5 U.S.C. Appendix 2.

    Dated: November 2, 2017. Ryan K. Zinke, Secretary, Department of the Interior.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24325 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-52-P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 332-345] Recent Trends in U.S. Services Trade, 2018 Annual Report AGENCY:

    United States International Trade Commission.

    ACTION:

    Schedule for 2018 report and opportunity to submit information.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission has prepared and published annual reports in this series under investigation No. 332-345, Recent Trends in U.S. Services Trade, since 1996. The 2018 report, which the Commission plans to publish in May 2018, will provide aggregate data on cross-border trade in services for the period ending in 2017, and transactions by affiliates based outside the country of their parent firm for the period ending in 2015. The report's analysis will focus on electronic services (including audiovisual, computer, and telecommunication services).The Commission is inviting interested members of the public to furnish information and views in connection with the 2018 report.

    DATES:

    December 20, 2017: Deadline for filing written submissions. May 30, 2018: Anticipated date for publishing the report.

    ADDRESSES:

    All Commission offices are located in the United States International Trade Commission Building, 500 E St. SW., Washington, DC. All written submissions should be addressed to the Secretary, United States International Trade Commission, 500 E St. SW., Washington, DC 20436. The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket information system (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov/.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Project Leaders Jeremy Streatfeild (202-205-3349, [email protected]) and Isaac Wohl (202-205-3356, [email protected]), or Services Division Chief Martha Lawless (202-205-3497, [email protected]) for information specific to this investigation. For information on the legal aspects of these investigations, contact William Gearhart of the Commission's Office of the General Counsel (202-205-3091 or [email protected]). The media should contact Margaret O'Laughlin, Office of External Relations (202-205-1819 or [email protected]). Hearing-impaired individuals may obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal at 202-205-1810. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server (http://www.usitc.gov). Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000.

    Background: The 2018 annual services trade report will provide aggregate data on cross-border trade and affiliate transactions in services, and more specific data and information on trade in electronic services (audiovisual, computer, and telecommunication services). Under Commission investigation No. 332-345, the Commission publishes two annual reports, one on services trade (Recent Trends in U.S. Services Trade), and a second on merchandise trade (Shifts in U.S. Merchandise Trade). The Commission's 2017 annual report in the series of reports on Recent Trends in U.S. Services Trade is now available online at http://www.usitc.gov.

    The initial notice of institution of this investigation was published in the Federal Register on September 8, 1993 (58 FR 47287) and provided for what is now the report on merchandise trade. The Commission expanded the scope of the investigation to cover services trade in a separate report, which it announced in a notice published in the Federal Register on December 28, 1994 (59 FR 66974). The separate report on services trade has been published annually since 1996, except in 2005. As in past years, the report will summarize trade in services in the aggregate and provide analyses of trends and developments in selected services industries during the latest period for which data are published by the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

    Written Submissions: Interested parties are invited to file written submissions and other information concerning the matters to be addressed by the Commission in its 2018 report. For the 2018 report, the Commission is particularly interested in receiving information relating to trade in electronic services (audiovisual, computer, and telecommunication services). Submissions should be addressed to the Secretary. To be assured of consideration by the Commission, written submissions related to the Commission's report should be submitted at the earliest practical date and should be received not later than 5:15 p.m., December 20, 2017. All written submissions must conform with the provisions of section 201.8 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 201.8). Section 201.8 and the Commission's Handbook on Filing Procedures, https://www.usitc.gov/secretary/documents/handbook_on_filing_procedures.pdf require that interested parties file documents electronically on or before the filing deadline and submit eight (8) true paper copies by 12:00 p.m. eastern time on the next business day. In the event that confidential treatment of a document is requested, interested parties must file, at the same time as the eight paper copies, at least four (4) additional true paper copies in which the confidential information must be deleted (see the paragraph below for further information regarding confidential business information). Persons with questions regarding electronic filing should contact the Office of the Secretary, Docket Services Division (202-205-1802).

    Confidential business information: Any submissions that contain confidential business information (CBI) must also conform with the requirements in section 201.6 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 201.6). Section 201.6 of the rules requires that the cover of the document and the individual pages be clearly marked as to whether they are confidential or non-confidential, and that the confidential business information be clearly identified by means of brackets. All written submissions, except for confidential business information, will be made available for inspection by interested parties.

    The Commission intends to prepare only a public report in this investigation. The report that the Commission makes available to the public will not contain confidential business information. However, all information, including confidential business information, submitted in this investigation may be disclosed to and used: (i) By the Commission, its employees and Offices, and contract personnel (a) for developing or maintaining the records of this or a related proceeding, or (b) in internal investigations, audits, reviews, and evaluations relating to the programs, personnel, and operations of the Commission including under 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S. government employees and contract personnel solely for cybersecurity purposes. The Commission will not otherwise disclose any confidential business information in a manner that would reveal the operations of the firm supplying the information.

    Summaries of Written Submissions: The Commission intends to publish summaries of the positions of interested persons in this report. If you wish to have a summary of your position included in an appendix of the report, please include a summary with your written submission. The summary may not exceed 500 words, should be in MSWord format or a format that can be easily converted to MSWord, and should not include any confidential business information. The summary will be published as provided if it meets these requirements and is germane to the subject matter of the investigation. In the report the Commission will identify the name of the organization furnishing the summary, and will include a link to the Commission's Electronic Document Information System (EDIS) where the full written submission can be found.

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: November 2, 2017. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24261 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337-TA-1081] Certain LED Lighting Devices, LED Power Supplies, and Components Thereof Institution of Investigation AGENCY:

    U.S. International Trade Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that a complaint was filed with the U.S. International Trade Commission on September 21, 2017, under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, on behalf of Philips Lighting North America Corp. of Somerset, New Jersey and Philips Lighting Holding B.V. of the Netherlands. Supplements to the complaint were filed on October 6 and 30, 2017. The complaint alleges violations of section 337 based upon the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain LED lighting devices, LED power supplies, and components thereof by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,586,890 (“the '890 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 7,038,399 (“the '399 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 7,256,554 (“the '554 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 7,262,559 (“the '559 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 8,070,328 (“the '328 patent”). The complaint further alleges that an industry in the United States exists as required by the applicable Federal Statute.

    The complainants request that the Commission institute an investigation and, after the investigation, issue a limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders.

    ADDRESSES:

    The complaint, except for any confidential information contained therein, is 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., Room 112, Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000. Hearing impaired individuals are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on (202) 205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at (202) 205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server at https://www.usitc.gov. The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    The Office of Docket Services, U.S. International Trade Commission, telephone (202) 205-1802.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Authority: The authority for institution of this investigation is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 and in section 210.10 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10 (2017).

    Scope of Investigation: Having considered the complaint, the U.S. International Trade Commission, on November 2, 2017, ordered that—

    (1) Pursuant to subsection (b) of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, an investigation be instituted to determine whether there is a violation of subsection (a)(1)(B) of section 337 in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation of certain LED lighting devices, LED power supplies, and components thereof by reason of infringement of one or more of claims 14, 22, and 30 of the '890 patent; claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 17-19, 34, 35, 47, 48, and 58-60 of the '399 patent; claims 1, 2, 5-7, 12, 46, 47, and 49-51 of the '554 patent; claims 6 and 12 of the '559 patent; and claims 1, 2, 4, 7, and 9 of the '328 patent; and whether an industry in the United States exists as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337;

    (2) For the purpose of the investigation so instituted, the following are hereby named as parties upon which this notice of investigation shall be served:

    (a) The complainant is:

    Philips Lighting North America Corp., 200 Franklin Square Drive, Somerset, NJ 08873. Philips Lighting Holding B.V., High Tech Campus 45, Eindhoven, 5656 AE, Netherlands.

    (b) The respondents are the following entities alleged to be in violation of section 337, and are the parties upon which the complaint is to be served:

    Feit Electric Company, Inc., 4901 Gregg Road, Pico Rivera, CA 90660. Edgewell Personal Care Brands, LLC, 6 Research Drive, Shelton, CT 06484. Feit Electric Company, Inc. (China), Zone B, 2/F, Xinyu Building, No. 17 Huoju East Road, Huli District Xiamen, China. Lowe's Companies, Inc., 1000 Lowe's Boulevard, Mooresville, NC 28117. L G Sourcing, Inc., 1605 Curtis Bridge Road, North Wilkesboro, NC 28659. MSi Lighting, Inc., 622 Banyan Trail Suite 200, Boca Raton, FL 33431. Satco Products, Inc., 110 Heartland Boulevard, Brentwood, NY 11717. Topaz Lighting Corp., 925 Waverly Avenue, Holtsville, NY 11742. Wangs Alliance Corporation d/b/a WAC, Lighting Co., 44 Harbor Park Drive, Port Washington, NY 11050. WAC Lighting (Shanghai) Co. Ltd., No. 14, Lane 299, Bi Sheng Road, Zhang Jiang, Pu Dong District, Shanghai, China 201204.

    (3) For the investigation so instituted, the Chief Administrative Law Judge, U.S. International Trade Commission, shall designate the presiding Administrative Law Judge.

    The Office of Unfair Import Investigations will not participate as a party in the investigation.

    Responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation must be submitted by the named respondents in accordance with section 210.13 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.13. Pursuant to 19 CFR 201.16(e) and 210.13(a), such responses will be considered by the Commission if received not later than 20 days after the date of service by the Commission of the complaint and the notice of investigation. Extensions of time for submitting responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation will not be granted unless good cause therefor is shown.

    Failure of a respondent to file a timely response to each allegation in the complaint and in this notice may be deemed to constitute a waiver of the right to appear and contest the allegations of the complaint and this notice, and to authorize the administrative law judge and the Commission, without further notice to the respondent, to find the facts to be as alleged in the complaint and this notice and to enter an initial determination and a final determination containing such findings, and may result in the issuance of an exclusion order or a cease and desist order or both directed against the respondent.

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: November 3, 2017. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24323 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-471F] Established Aggregate Production Quotas for Schedule I and II Controlled Substances and Assessment of Annual Needs for the List I Chemicals Ephedrine, Pseudoephedrine, and Phenylpropanolamine for 2018 AGENCY:

    Drug Enforcement Administration, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    Final order.

    SUMMARY:

    This final order establishes the initial 2018 aggregate production quotas for controlled substances in schedules I and II of the Controlled Substances Act and the assessment of annual needs for the list I chemicals ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, and phenylpropanolamine.

    APPLICABLE DATE:

    Applicable November 8, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Michael J. Lewis, Diversion Control Division, Drug Enforcement Administration, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, VA 22152, Telephone: (202) 598-6812.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Legal Authority

    Section 306 of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) (21 U.S.C. 826) requires the Attorney General to establish aggregate production quotas for each basic class of controlled substance listed in schedules I and II and for the list I chemicals ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, and phenylpropanolamine. The Attorney General has delegated this function to the Administrator of the DEA pursuant to 28 CFR 0.100.

    Background

    The 2018 aggregate production quotas and assessment of annual needs represent those quantities of schedule I and II controlled substances and the list I chemicals ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, and phenylpropanolamine that may be manufactured in the United States in 2018 to provide for the estimated medical, scientific, research, industrial needs of the United States, lawful export requirements, and the establishment and maintenance of reserve stocks. These quotas include imports of ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, and phenylpropanolamine, but do not include imports of controlled substances for use in industrial processes.

    On August 7, 2017, a notice titled “Proposed Aggregate Production Quotas for Schedule I and II Controlled Substances and Assessment of Annual Needs for the List I Chemicals Ephedrine, Pseudoephedrine, and Phenylpropanolamine for 2018” was published in the Federal Register. 82 FR 36830. This notice proposed the 2018 aggregate production quotas for each basic class of controlled substance listed in schedules I and II and the 2018 assessment of annual needs for the list I chemicals ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, and phenylpropanolamine. All interested persons were invited to comment on or object to the proposed aggregate production quotas and the proposed assessment of annual needs on or before September 6, 2017.

    Comments Received

    Within the public comment period, the DEA received seventeen comments from three DEA-registered manufacturers regarding sixteen different schedule I and II controlled substances and one comment from a DEA-registered manufacturer regarding the proposed assessment of annual needs for the list I chemical phenylpropanolamine (for conversion). Commenters stated the proposed aggregate production quotas for 4-anilino-n-phenethyl-4-piperadine (ANPP), amphetamine (for conversion), codeine (for sale), diphenoxylate, fentanyl, gamma hydroxybutyric acid, hydrocodone (for sale), lisdexamfetamine, methadone, methadone-intermediate, methylphenidate, morphine (for conversion), morphine (for sale), oxycodone (for sale), oxymorphone (for sale), sufentanil, as well as the proposed assessment of annual needs for phenylpropanolamine (for conversion), were insufficient to provide for the estimated medical, scientific, research, and industrial needs of the United States, export requirements, and the establishment and maintenance of reserve stocks. These comments were considered in setting the final 2018 Aggregate Production Quotas as discussed below.

    In addition to these seventeen comments, the DEA received one comment from a DEA-registered manufacturer seeking clarification on whether DEA considers manufacturing at outsourcing facilities when determining the Aggregate Production Quotas. The DEA notes that it is the responsibility of all DEA-registered dosage form manufacturers to submit quota applications by April 1, in order for their individual business practices to be considered when the DEA proposes the Aggregate Production Quota for the following year. 21 CFR 1303.12(b). These quota applications and comments with discrete data regarding the quantities of the basic classes of schedule I or II controlled substances received during the comment period for the proposed Aggregate Production Quotas are taken into consideration before establishing the values presented in this Final Order. This DEA-registered manufacturer provided no quantitative data supporting the position that the proposed quota for 2018 will adversely impact outsourcing facilities for DEA to consider. The DEA also received one hundred five comments that expressed concern that DEA's proposed reduction of opioids by twenty percent would adversely impact the availability of pain relieving prescription drugs for people with chronic pain. These comments were general in nature, and raised issues of specific medical illnesses and medical treatment, and therefore are outside of the scope of this Final Order for 2018. As a result, these one hundred and six comments did not provide new discrete data for consideration, and do not impact the original analysis involved in establishing the 2018 aggregate production quotas.

    Determination of 2018 Aggregate Production Quotas and Assessment of Annual Needs

    In determining the 2018 aggregate production quotas and assessment of annual needs, the DEA has taken into consideration the above comments along with the factors set forth in 21 CFR 1303.11 and 21 CFR 1315.11, in accordance with 21 U.S.C. 826(a), and other relevant factors, including the 2017 manufacturing quotas, current 2017 sales and inventories, anticipated 2018 export requirements, industrial use, additional applications for 2018 quotas, as well as information on research and product development requirements. Based on all of the above, the Administrator is adjusting the 2018 aggregate production quotas for 2-(4-bromo-2,5-dimethoxyphenyl)-n-(2-methoxybenzyl) ethanamine, 3,4,5-trimethoxy amphetamine, 4-bromo-2,5-dimethoxy-amphetamine, acryl fentanyl, alfentanil, amobarbital, methylphenidate, and nabilone, are warranted. Adjustment to the proposed assessment of annual needs for pseudoephedrine (for sale) was also determined to be warranted. This final order reflects those adjustments.

    Regarding 4-anilino-n-phenethyl-4-piperadine (ANPP), amphetamine (for conversion), codeine (for sale), diphenoxylate, fentanyl, gamma hydroxybutyric acid, hydrocodone (for sale), lisdexamfetamine, methadone, methadone-intermediate, morphine (for conversion), morphine (for sale), oxycodone (for sale), oxymorphone (for sale), sufentanil, and phenylpropanolamine (for conversion), the DEA has determined the proposed aggregate production quotas and assessment of annual needs are sufficient to provide for the 2018 estimated medical, scientific, research, industrial needs of the United States, export requirements, and the establishment and maintenance of reserve stocks. This final order establishes these aggregate production quotas and assessment of annual needs at the same amounts as proposed.

    In accordance with 21 U.S.C. 826, 21 CFR 1303.11, and 21 CFR 1315.11, the Administrator hereby establishes the 2018 aggregate production quotas for the following schedule I and II controlled substances and the 2018 assessment of annual needs for the list I chemicals ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, and phenylpropanolamine, expressed in grams of anhydrous acid or base, as follows:

    Basic class 2018
  • Established
  • quotas
  • (g)
  • Temporarily Scheduled Substances Acryl fentanyl 25 Schedule I 1-(1-Phenylcyclohexyl)pyrrolidine 10 1-(5-Fluoropentyl)-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole (AM2201) 30 1-(5-Fluoropentyl)-3-(2-iodobenzoyl)indole (AM694) 30 1-[1-(2-Thienyl)cyclohexyl]piperidine 15 1-Benzylpiperazine 25 1-Methyl-4-phenyl-4-propionoxypiperidine 2 2-(2,5-Dimethoxy-4-ethylphenyl)ethanamine (2C-E) 30 2-(2,5-Dimethoxy-4-methylphenyl)ethanamine (2C-D) 30 2-(2,5-Dimethoxy-4-nitro-phenyl)ethanamine (2C-N) 30 2-(2,5-Dimethoxy-4-n-propylphenyl)ethanamine (2C-P) 30 2-(2,5-Dimethoxyphenyl)ethanamine (2C-H) 30 2-(4-Bromo-2,5-dimethoxyphenyl)-N-(2-methoxybenzyl)ethanamine (25B-NBOMe; 2C-B-NBOMe; 25B; Cimbi-36) 30 2-(4-Chloro-2,5-dimethoxyphenyl)ethanamine (2C-C) 30 2-(4-Chloro-2,5-dimethoxyphenyl)-N-(2-methoxybenzyl)ethanamine (25C-NBOMe; 2C-C-NBOMe; 25C; Cimbi-82) 25 2-(4-Iodo-2,5-dimethoxyphenyl)ethanamine (2C-I) 30 2-(4-Iodo-2,5-dimethoxyphenyl)-N-(2-methoxybenzyl)ethanamine (25I-NBOMe; 2C-I-NBOMe; 25I; Cimbi-5) 30 2,5-Dimethoxy-4-ethylamphetamine (DOET) 25 2,5-Dimethoxy-4-n-propylthiophenethylamine 25 2,5-Dimethoxyamphetamine 25 2-[4-(Ethylthio)-2,5-dimethoxyphenyl]ethanamine (2C-T-2) 30 2-[4-(Isopropylthio)-2,5-dimethoxyphenyl]ethanamine (2C-T-4) 30 3,4,5-Trimethoxyamphetamine 30 3,4-Methylenedioxyamphetamine (MDA) 55 3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) 50 3,4-Methylenedioxy-N-ethylamphetamine (MDEA) 40 3,4-Methylenedioxy-N-methylcathinone (methylone) 40 3,4-Methylenedioxypyrovalerone (MDPV) 35 3-FMC; 3-Fluoro-N-methylcathinone 25 3-Methylfentanyl 30 3-Methylthiofentanyl 30 4-Bromo-2,5-dimethoxyamphetamine (DOB) 30 4-Bromo-2,5-dimethoxyphenethylamine (2-CB) 25 4-Fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl 30 4-FMC; Flephedrone 25 4-MEC; 4-Methyl-N-ethylcathinone 25 4-Methoxyamphetamine 150 4-Methyl-2,5-dimethoxyamphetamine (DOM) 25 4-Methylaminorex 25 4-Methyl-N-methylcathinone (mephedrone) 45 4-Methyl-α-pyrrolidinopropiophenone (4-MePPP) 25 5-(1,1-Dimethylheptyl)-2-[(1R,3S)-3-hydroxycyclohexyl]-phenol 50 5-(1,1-Dimethyloctyl)-2-[(1R,3S)-3-hydroxycyclohexyl]-phenol (cannabicyclohexanol or CP-47,497 C8-homolog) 40 5F-ADB; 5F-MDMB-PINACA (methyl 2-(1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamido)-3,3-dimethylbutanoate) 30 5F-AMB (methyl 2-(1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamido)-3-methylbutanoate) 30 5F-APINACA; 5F-AKB48 (N-(adamantan-1-yl)-1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide) 30 5-Fluoro-PB-22; 5F-PB-22 20 5-Fluoro-UR144, XLR11 ([1-(5-fluoro-pentyl)-1Hindol-3-yl](2,2,3,3-tetramethylcyclopropyl)methanone 25 5-Methoxy-3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine 25 5-Methoxy-N,N-diisopropyltryptamine 25 5-Methoxy-N,N-dimethyltryptamine 25 AB-CHMINACA 30 AB-FUBINACA 50 AB-PINACA 30 ADB-FUBINACA (N-(1-amino-3,3-dimethyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-(4-fluorobenzyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide) 30 Acetyl Fentanyl 100 Acetyl-alpha-methylfentanyl 30 Acetyldihydrocodeine 30 Acetylmethadol 2 Acryl Fentanyl 25 ADB-PINACA (N-(1-amino-3,3-dimethyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-pentyl-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide) 50 AH-7921 30 Allylprodine 2 Alphacetylmethadol 2 alpha-Ethyltryptamine 25 Alphameprodine 2 Alphamethadol 2 alpha-Methylfentanyl 30 alpha-Methylthiofentanyl 30 alpha-Methyltryptamine (AMT) 25 alpha-Pyrrolidinobutiophenone (α-PBP) 25 alpha-Pyrrolidinopentiophenone (α-PVP) 25 Aminorex 25 APINCA, AKB48 (N-(1-adamantyl)-1-pentyl-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide) 25 Benzylmorphine 30 Betacetylmethadol 2 beta-Hydroxy-3-methylfentanyl 30 beta-Hydroxyfentanyl 30 beta-Hydroxythiofentanyl 30 Betameprodine 2 Betamethadol 4 Betaprodine 2 Bufotenine 3 Butylone 25 Butyryl fentanyl 30 Cathinone 24 Codeine methylbromide 30 Codeine-N-oxide 192 Desomorphine 25 Diethyltryptamine 25 Difenoxin 8,225 Dihydromorphine 1,000,160 Dimethyltryptamine 35 Dipipanone 5 Etorphine 30 Fenethylline 30 Furanyl fentanyl 30 gamma-Hydroxybutyric acid 37,130,000 Heroin 45 Hydromorphinol 40 Hydroxypethidine 2 Ibogaine 30 JWH-018 and AM678 (1-Pentyl-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole) 35 JWH-019 (1-Hexyl-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole) 45 JWH-073 (1-Butyl-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole) 45 JWH-081 (1-Pentyl-3-[1-(4-methoxynaphthoyl)]indole) 30 JWH-122 (1-Pentyl-3-(4-methyl-1-naphthoyl)indole) 30 JWH-200 (1-[2-(4-Morpholinyl)ethyl]-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole) 35 JWH-203 (1-Pentyl-3-(2-chlorophenylacetyl)indole) 30 JWH-250 (1-Pentyl-3-(2-methoxyphenylacetyl)indole) 30 JWH-398 (1-Pentyl-3-(4-chloro-1-naphthoyl)indole) 30 Lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) 40 MAB-CHMINACA; ADB-CHMINACA (N-(1-amino-3,3-dimethyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-(cyclohexylmethyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide) 30 MDMB-CHMICA; MMB-CHMINACA(methyl 2-(1-(cyclohexylmethyl)-1H-indole-3-carboxamido)-3,3-dimethylbutanoate) 30 MDMB-FUBINACA (methyl 2-(1-(4-fluorobenzyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamido)-3,3-dimethylbutanoate) 30 Marihuana 443,680 Mecloqualone 30 Mescaline 25 Methaqualone 60 Methcathinone 25 Methyldesorphine 5 Methyldihydromorphine 2 Morphine methylbromide 5 Morphine methylsulfonate 5 Morphine-N-oxide 150 N,N-Dimethylamphetamine 25 Naphyrone 25 N-Ethyl-1-phenylcyclohexylamine 5 N-Ethylamphetamine 24 N-Hydroxy-3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine 24 Noracymethadol 2 Norlevorphanol 55 Normethadone 2 Normorphine 40 Para-fluorofentanyl 25 Parahexyl 5 PB-22; QUPIC 20 Pentedrone 25 Pentylone 25 Phenomorphan 2 Pholcodine 5 Psilocybin 30 Psilocyn 50 SR-18 and RCS-8 (1-Cyclohexylethyl-3-(2-methoxyphenylacetyl)indole) 45 SR-19 and RCS-4 (1-Pentyl-3-[(4-methoxy)-benzoyl]indole) 30 Tetrahydrocannabinols 384,460 Thiofentanyl 25 THJ-2201 ( [1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indazol-3-yl](naphthalen-1-yl)methanone) 30 Tilidine 25 Trimeperidine 2 UR-144 (1-pentyl-1H-indol-3-yl)(2,2,3,3-tetramethylcyclopropyl)methanone 25 U-47700 30 Schedule II 1-Phenylcyclohexylamine 4 1-Piperidinocyclohexanecarbonitrile 4 4-Anilino-N-phenethyl-4-piperidine (ANPP) 1,342,320 Alfentanil 6,200 Alphaprodine 2 Amobarbital 20,100 Amphetamine (for conversion) 11,280,000 Amphetamine (for sale) 39,856,000 Carfentanil 20 Cocaine 92,120 Codeine (for conversion) 15,040,000 Codeine (for sale) 40,015,800 Dextropropoxyphene 35 Dihydrocodeine 264,140 Dihydroetorphine 2 Diphenoxylate (for conversion) 14,100 Diphenoxylate (for sale) 770,800 Ecgonine 88,134 Ethylmorphine 30 Etorphine hydrochloride 32 Fentanyl 1,342,320 Glutethimide 2 Hydrocodone (for conversion) 114,680 Hydrocodone (for sale) 50,348,280 Hydromorphone 4,547,720 Isomethadone 30 Levo-alphacetylmethadol (LAAM) 5 Levomethorphan 30 Levorphanol 12,126 Lisdexamfetamine 17,869,000 Meperidine 2,717,540 Meperidine Intermediate-A 5 Meperidine Intermediate-B 30 Meperidine Intermediate-C 5 Metazocine 15 Methadone (for sale) 22,278,000 Methadone Intermediate 24,064,000 Methamphetamine 1,446,754 [846,000 grams of levo-desoxyephedrine for use in a non-controlled, non-prescription product; 564,000 grams for methamphetamine mostly for conversion to a schedule III product; and 36,754 grams for methamphetamine (for sale)] Methylphenidate 64,600,000 Morphine (for conversion) 4,089,000 Morphine (for sale) 33,958,440 Nabilone 31,000 Noroxymorphone (for conversion) 14,044,540 Noroxymorphone (for sale) 376,000 Opium (powder) 84,600 Opium (tincture) 564,000 Oripavine 24,534,000 Oxycodone (for conversion) 2,453,400 Oxycodone (for sale) 95,692,000 Oxymorphone (for conversion) 20,962,000 Oxymorphone (for sale) 3,395,280 Pentobarbital 25,850,000 Phenazocine 5 Phencyclidine 35 Phenmetrazine 25 Phenylacetone 40 Racemethorphan 5 Racemorphan 5 Remifentanil 2,820 Secobarbital 161,682 Sufentanil 1,880 Tapentadol 18,388,280 Thebaine 94,000,000 List I Chemicals Ephedrine (for conversion) 47,000 Ephedrine (for sale) 4,136,000 Phenylpropanolamine (for conversion) 14,100,000 Phenylpropanolamine (for sale) 7,990,000 Pseudoephedrine (for conversion) 40 Pseudoephedrine (for sale) 180,000,000

    The Administrator also establishes aggregate production quotas for all other schedule I and II controlled substances included in 21 CFR 1308.11 and 1308.12 at zero. In accordance with 21 CFR 1303.13 and 21 CFR 1315.13, upon consideration of the relevant factors, the Administrator may adjust the 2018 aggregate production quotas and assessment of annual needs as needed.

    Dated: November 1, 2017. Robert W. Patterson, Acting Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24306 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Foreign Claims Settlement Commission [F.C.S.C. Meeting and Hearing Notice No. 10-17] Sunshine Act Meeting

    The Foreign Claims Settlement Commission, pursuant to its regulations (45 CFR part 503.25) and the Government in the Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b), hereby gives notice in regard to the scheduling of open meetings as follows:

    Thursday, November 16, 2017:

    10:00 a.m.—Issuance of Proposed Decisions in claims against Iraq.

    Status:

    Open.

    All meetings are held at the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission, 600 E Street NW., Washington, DC. Requests for information, or advance notices of intention to observe an open meeting, may be directed to: Patricia M. Hall, Foreign Claims Settlement Commission, 600 E Street NW., Suite 6002, Washington, DC 20579. Telephone: (202) 616-6975.

    Brian M. Simkin, Chief Counsel.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24361 Filed 11-6-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-BA-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Notice of Lodging of Proposed Consent Decree Under the Clean Air Act

    On October 31, 2017, the Department of Justice lodged a proposed consent decree with the United States District Court for the District of Colorado in the lawsuit entitled United States of America and the State of Colorado v. PDC Energy, Inc., Civil Action No. 1:17-cv-01552-MSK-MJW.

    The lawsuit seeks injunctive relief and civil penalties for violations of the Clean Air Act, the Colorado Air Pollution Prevention and Control Act (“Colorado Act”), Colorado's federally approved State Implementation Plan (“Colorado SIP”), and Colorado Air Quality Control Commission Regulation Number 7 (“Regulation No. 7”) at tank batteries (referred to in the consent decree as “Tank Systems”) owned and operated by PDC Energy, Inc. (“PDC”) in a portion of the Denver-Julesburg Basin in Colorado (known as the “8-hour Ozone Control Area”) designated as non-attainment with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for ground-level ozone. The violations relate to alleged failures to adequately design, operate, and maintain vapor control systems at the Tank Systems, resulting in emissions of volatile organic compounds (“VOC”) and other pollutants to the atmosphere.

    The proposed consent decree covers PDC's Tank Systems in the 8-hour Ozone Control Area equipped with vapor control systems pursuant to Regulation No. 7 to achieve required system-wide emission reductions (more than 600 Tank Systems). The proposed decree requires PDC to perform injunctive relief, including conducting engineering evaluations of the vapor control systems at each of the Tank Systems and completing any necessary corrective actions to ensure that the vapor control systems are adequately designed and sized. PDC must also complete two environmental mitigation projects at a cost of $1.7 million and pay a $2.5 million civil penalty, $1 million of which is anticipated to be used to perform one or more State-Only Supplemental Environmental Projects. Entering into and fully complying with the proposed consent decree will release PDC from past civil liability at the Tank Systems and associated vapor control systems for violations of the Colorado SIP and Regulation No. 7 relating to VOC emissions from condensate storage tanks.

    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 United States, et al. v. PDC Energy, Inc., D.J. Ref. No. 90-5-2-1-11467. All comments must be submitted no later than thirty (30) days after the publication date of this notice. Comments may be submitted either by email or by mail:

    To submit comments: Send them to: By email [email protected] By mail Assistant Attorney General, U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, D.C. 20044-7611.

    During the public comment period, the consent decree may be examined and downloaded at this Justice Department Web site: https://www.justice.gov/enrd/consent-decrees. We will provide a paper copy of the consent decree upon written request and payment of reproduction costs. Please mail your request and payment to: Consent Decree Library, U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044-7611.

    Please enclose a check or money order for $25.25 (25 cents per page reproduction cost) payable to the United States Treasury.

    Jeffrey Sands, Assistant Section Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and Natural Resources Division.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24250 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-15-P
    NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Notice of Availability and Notice of Public Meeting for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Green Bank Observatory, Green Bank, West Virginia AGENCY:

    National Science Foundation.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability and notice of public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Science Foundation (NSF) has made available for public review and comment the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for Green Bank Observatory. This DEIS has been prepared for the National Science Foundation (NSF) to evaluate the potential environmental impacts resulting from proposed operational changes due to funding constraints for the Green Bank Observatory in Green Bank, West Virginia. The DEIS was prepared in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. Consultation under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) is being conducted concurrent with the NEPA process.

    DATES:

    NSF will accept comments on the DEIS for 60 days following publication of this Notice of Availability; an additional 15 days are being provided beyond the standard 45-day review period to allow for the holidays). Comments may be submitted verbally during the public meeting scheduled for November 30, 2017 (see details in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION) or in writing until January 8th, 2018. Substantive comments will be addressed in a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS).

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit written comments by either of the following methods:

    Email to: [email protected], with subject line “Green Bank Observatory”.

    Mail to: Elizabeth Pentecost, RE: Green Bank Observatory, National Science Foundation, 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Suite W9152, Alexandria, VA 22314.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For further information regarding the EIS process or Section 106 consultation, contact: Elizabeth Pentecost, National Science Foundation, Division of Astronomical Sciences, 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Suite W9152, Alexandria, VA 22314; telephone: (703) 292-4907; email: [email protected]

    DEIS Information: The DEIS, as well as information about the public meeting, is posted at www.nsf.gov/AST. A copy of the DEIS will be available for review at the following libraries: Green Bank Public Library, 5683 Potomac Highlands Trail, Green Bank, WV 24944, Durbin Community Library, 4361 Staunton Parkersburg Turnpike, Durbin, WV 26264.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Green Bank Observatory (GBO) is located in Pocahontas County, West Virginia, adjacent to the Monongahela National Forest. NSF owns the GBO land, which consists of numerous parcels acquired by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in the 1950s, when GBO was formed as the first (and then, only) site of the National Radio Astronomy Observatory (NRAO). The GBO facilities include the Robert C. Byrd Green Bank Telescope, the largest fully steerable radio telescope in the world; the 43-meter Telescope; the Green Bank Solar Radio Burst Spectrometer; the 20-meter Geodetic Telescope; the 40-foot Telescope; the Interferometer Range; and previously operational telescopes.

    The NSF Directorate for Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Division of Astronomical Sciences (AST), through a series of academic community-based reviews, has identified the need to divest several facilities from its portfolio. This would allow NSF to retain the balance of capabilities needed to deliver the best performance on emerging and key science technology of the present decade and beyond. In 2012, AST's portfolio review committee recommended divestment of the Green Bank Telescope (GBT) from the AST portfolio, stating the following: “The GBT is the world's most sensitive single-dish radio telescope at wavelengths shorter than 10 cm; however, its capabilities are not as critical to New World New Horizons [astronomy and astrophysics decadal survey] science goals as the higher-ranked facilities.” In response to these recommendations, in 2016, NSF completed a feasibility study to inform and define options for the Observatory's future disposition that would involve significantly decreasing or eliminating NSF funding of Green Bank Observatory. NSF issued a Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS on October 19, 2016, held scoping meetings on November 9, 2016, and held a 30-day public comment period that closed on November 25, 2016.

    Alternatives to be evaluated in the EIS, which may be refined through public input, include the following:

    • Collaboration with interested parties for continued science- and education-focused operations with reduced NSF funding (Agency-preferred Alternative).

    • Collaboration with interested parties for operation as a technology and education park.

    • Mothballing of facilities (suspension of operations in a manner such that operations could resume efficiently at some future date).

    • Demolition and site restoration.

    • No-Action Alternative: Continued NSF investment for science-focused operations.

    No final decisions will be made regarding the proposed changes to operations at Green Bank Observatory prior to issuance of an FEIS, and, subsequently, a Record of Decision for the Proposed Action.

    Public Meeting: A public meeting to address the DEIS and to solicit public input under Section 106 of the NHPA will take place in Green Bank with notification of the time and location published in the local newspapers, as follows:

    Public meeting: November 30, 2017, at 5:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.

    Green Bank Science Center 155 Observatory Road Green Bank, WV 24915 Telephone: (304) 456-2011

    The meeting will be transcribed by a court reporter.

    Dated: November 3, 2017. Suzanne H. Plimpton, Reports Clearance Officer, National Science Foundation.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24322 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC-2016-0201] Nuclear Power Plant Instrumentation for Earthquakes AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Regulatory guide, issuance.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing Revision 3 of Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.12, “Nuclear Power Plant Instrumentation for Earthquakes.” This revision to the guide addresses new reactor plant configurations and the state of practice of seismic instrumentation since Revision 2 of RG 1.12 in 1997. The revision describes the seismic instrumentation criteria, including instrumentation type, locations, characteristics, and maintenance, that the NRC staff considers acceptable for nuclear power plants.

    DATES:

    Revision 3 to RG 1.12 is available on November 8, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2016-0201 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this document using any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2016-0201. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-3463; email: [email protected] For technical questions, contact the individuals listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

    NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “ADAMS Public Documents” and then select “Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected] The ADAMS accession number for each document referenced (if it is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that it is mentioned. The RG 1.12 is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17094A831.

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

    Regulatory guides are not copyrighted, and NRC approval is not required to reproduce them.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sarah Tabatabai, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, telephone: 301-415-2982, email: [email protected]; Vladimir Graizer, Office of New Reactors, telephone 301-415-0675, email: [email protected], and Edward O'Donnell, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, telephone: 301-415-3317, email: [email protected] All are staff members of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Discussion

    The NRC is issuing a revision to an existing guide in the NRC's “Regulatory Guide” series. This series was developed to describe and make available to the public information regarding methods that are acceptable to the NRC staff for implementing specific parts of the agency's regulations, techniques that the NRC staff uses in evaluating specific issues or postulated events, and data that the NRC staff needs in its review of applications for permits and licenses.

    Revision 3 of RG 1.12 was issued with a temporary identification of draft Regulatory Guide, DG-1332. The NRC revised the guide to incorporate advances in seismic instrumentation and operating experience since the issuance of Revision 2 of RG 1.12 in 1997. The revision describes the seismic instrumentation criteria, including instrumentation type, locations, characteristics, and maintenance, that the NRC staff considers acceptable for nuclear power plants.

    II. Additional Information

    The NRC published a notice of the availability of DG-1332 in the Federal Register on September 21, 2016 (81 FR 64954), for a 60-day public comment period. The public comment period closed on November 21, 2016. Public comments on DG-1332 and the staff responses to the public comments are available under ADAMS under Accession No. ML17095A314.

    III. Congressional Review Act

    This RG is a rule as defined in the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801-808). However, the Office of Management and Budget has not found it to be a major rule as defined in the Congressional Review Act.

    IV. Backfitting and Issue Finality

    This RG describes the seismic instrumentation criteria, including instrumentation type, locations, characteristics, and maintenance, that the staff of the NRC considers acceptable for nuclear power plants. Issuance of this RG does not constitute backfitting as defined in § 50.109 of title 10 of the Code of the Federal Regulations (10 CFR), (the Backfit Rule) and is not otherwise inconsistent with the issue finality provisions in 10 CFR part 52. As discussed in the “Implementation” section of this RG, the NRC has no current intention to impose this guide on holders of current operating licenses or combined licenses.

    This RG may be applied to applications for operating licenses, combined licenses, early site permits, and certified design rules docketed by the NRC as of the date of issuance of the final regulatory guide, as well as future applications submitted after the issuance of the regulatory guide. Such action would not constitute backfitting as defined in the Backfit Rule or be otherwise inconsistent with the applicable issue finality provision in 10 CFR part 52, inasmuch as such applicants or potential applicants are not within the scope of entities protected by the Backfit Rule or the relevant issue finality provisions in part 52.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 31th day of October, 2017.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    Thomas H. Boyce, Chief, Regulatory Guidance and Generic Issues Branch, Division of Engineering, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24333 Filed 11-7-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 70-1257; NRC-2017-0148] AREVA, Inc.; Consideration of Approval of Transfer of License; Correction AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Application for indirect transfer of license; opportunity to comment, request a hearing, and petition for leave to intervene; correction.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is correcting a notice that was published in the Federal Register on June 29, 2017, regarding an application for indirect transfer of license filed by AREVA, Inc., on April 14, 2017. This action is necessary to add licenses that were omitted from the original application. The original application requested NRC approval of the indirect transfer of Material License SNM-1227, Import License IW009, and Export Licenses XSNM3471, XSNM3551, XSNM3697, XSNM3747, XSOU8833, and XCOM1202, for the Richland, Washington Fuel Manufacturing Facility from AREVA SA, the current parent company of the license holder to Electricite de France (EDF). The amended application adds Export Licenses XCOM1304, XSNM3780, XSNM3781, XSNM3782, and XW015 to the requested action.

    DATES:

    Comments and/or a request for a hearing must be filed by December 8, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by any of the following methods (unless this document describes a different method for submitting comments on a specific subject):

    Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2017-0148. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-3463; email: [email protected] For technical questions contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

    Email comments to: [email protected] If you do not receive an automatic email reply confirming receipt, then contact us at 301-415-1677.

    Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at 301-415-1101.

    Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff.

    Hand deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (Eastern Time) Federal workdays; telephone: 301-415-1677.

    For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting comments, see “Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments” in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kevin Ramsey, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-7506, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2017-0148 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2017-0148.

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

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

    B. Submitting Comments

    Please include Docket ID NRC-2017-0148 in your comment submission.

    The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC posts all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as entering the comment submissions into ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove identifying or contact information.

    If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment submissions into ADAMS.

    II. Introduction

    The NRC is considering the issuance of an order under Section 184 of the Atomic Energy Act, as amended, and § 70.36 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), approving the indirect transfer of control of the AREVA Richland Fuel Fabrication Facility, Material License SNM-1227, Import License IW009, and Export Licenses XSNM3471, XSNM3551, XSNM3697, XSNM3747, XSOU8833, XCOM1202, XCOM1304, XSNM3780, XSNM3781, XSNM3782, and XW015 from AREVA SA, the current parent company of the license holder to Electricite de France (EDF).

    According to the application for approval filed by AREVA, Inc., the transaction will result in a transfer of controlling interest in AREVA SA's nuclear power business from its current parent company (AREVA SA) to EDF. AREVA, Inc., which is a North American subsidiary of AREVA SA, will continue to operate the facility and hold the licenses.

    No physical changes to the Richland Fuel Fabrication Facility or operational changes are being proposed in the application.

    The original application was submitted by letter dated April 14, 2017, titled “AREVA Internal Reorganization and Indirect Transfer to EDF: Request for NRC Consent to License Transfers” (ADAMS Accession No. ML17108A259). The application was supplemented by the following documents:

    • Letter dated July 14, 2017, titled “AREVA Internal Reorganization and Indirect Transfer to EDF: Request for NRC Consent to License Transfers” (ADAMS Accession No. ML17200C949).

    • Letter dated August 31, 2017, titled “Response to a Request for Additional Information Regarding Application for U.S. NRC Consent to License Transfers” (ADAMS Accession No. ML17265A374).

    • Letter dated October 4, 2017, titled “Update to Request for NRC Consent to License Transfers” (ADAMS Accession No. ML17283A110).

    Section 184 of the Atomic Energy Act provides “[n]o license granted hereunder and no right to utilize or produce special nuclear material granted hereby shall be transferred, assigned or in any manner disposed of, either voluntarily or involuntarily, directly or indirectly, through transfer of control of any license to any person, unless the Commission shall, after securing full information, find that the transfer is in accordance with the provisions of this Act, and shall give its consent in writing.” For the part 70 license that AREVA Inc. possesses, the Commission will approve an application for the indirect transfer of a license if the Commission determines that the proposed transfer of controlling interest will not affect the qualifications of the licensee to hold the license and that the licensee has provided the financial assurance for decommissioning required by 10 CFR 70.25.

    III. Opportunity To Comment

    Within 30 days from the date of publication of this notice, persons may submit written comments regarding the license transfer application, as provided for in §§ 2.1305 and 110.81. The Commission will consider and, if appropriate, respond to these comments, but such comments will not otherwise constitute part of the decisional record. Comments should be submitted as described in the ADDRESSES section of this document.

    IV. Opportunity To Request a Hearing and Petition for Leave To Intervene

    Within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice, any persons (petitioner) whose interest may be affected by this action may file a request for a hearing and petition for leave to intervene (petition) with respect to the action. Petitions shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's “Agency Rules of Practice and Procedure” in 10 CFR parts 2 and 110. Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309 and 110.82. The NRC's regulations are accessible electronically from the NRC Library on the NRC's Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. Alternatively, a copy of the regulations is available at the NRC's Public Document Room, located at One White Flint North, Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. If a petition is filed, the Commission or a presiding officer will rule on the petition and, if appropriate, a notice of a hearing will be issued.

    With respect to Material License SNM-1227, 10 CFR 2.309(d) requires that the petition specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following general requirements for standing: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the petitioner; (2) the nature of the petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest. Further, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f), the petition must also set forth the specific contentions which the petitioner seeks to have litigated in the proceeding. Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner must provide a brief explanation of the bases for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner must also provide references to the specific sources and documents on which the petitioner intends to rely to support its position on the issue. The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant or licensee on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions must be limited to matters within the scope of the proceeding. The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner who fails to satisfy the requirements at 10 CFR 2.309(f) with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.

    With respect to Export Licenses XSNM3471, XSNM3551, XSNM3697, XSNM3747, XSOU8833, XCOM1202, XCOM1304, XSNM3780, XSNM3781, XSNM3782, and XW015, 10 CFR 110.82 requires petitioners to explain why a hearing or an intervention would be in the public interest and how a hearing or intervention would assist the Commission in making the determinations required by § 110.45.

    Petitions must be filed no later than 20 days from the date of publication of this notice. Petitions and motions for leave to file new or amended contentions that are filed after the deadline will not be entertained absent a determination by the presiding officer that the filing demonstrates good cause by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i) through (iii). The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in the “Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)” section of this document.

    A State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof, may submit a petition to the Commission to participate as a party under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1). The petition should state the nature and extent of the petitioner's interest in the proceeding. The petition should be submitted to the Commission by December 8, 2017. The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in the “Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)” section of this document, and should meet the requirements for petitions set forth in this section. Alternatively, a State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof may participate as a non-party under 10 CFR 2.315(c).

    If a hearing is granted, any person who is not a