Federal Register Vol. 82, No.220,

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 220 (November 16, 2017)

Page Range53397-54287
FR Document

82_FR_220
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
82 FR 53522 - Sunshine Act MeetingsPDF
82 FR 53426 - Department of the Treasury Acquisition Regulations; Tax Check RequirementsPDF
82 FR 53513 - California; Amendment No. 5 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
82 FR 53514 - South Carolina; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
82 FR 53514 - Puerto Rico; Amendment No. 5 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
82 FR 53515 - Puerto Rico; Amendment No. 4 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
82 FR 53440 - United States Air Force 81st Security Forces Anti-Terrorism Office, Restricted Area, Keesler Air Force Base, Biloxi, MississippiPDF
82 FR 53422 - United States Navy Restricted Area, Menominee River, Marinette Marine Corporation Shipyard, Marinette, WisconsinPDF
82 FR 53438 - Establishment of a Permanent Restricted Area for U.S. Coast Guard Yard, Baltimore, Maryland, in Curtis Creek and Arundel CovePDF
82 FR 53555 - Notice of Determinations: Culturally Significant Object Imported for Exhibition Determinations: “Rembrandt's Self-Portrait at the Age of 34” ExhibitionPDF
82 FR 53553 - Notice of Issuance of a Presidential Permit to Enbridge Energy, Limited PartnershipPDF
82 FR 53442 - Repeal of Emission Requirements for Glider Vehicles, Glider Engines, and Glider KitsPDF
82 FR 53503 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 53480 - Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act; General Provisions for Domestic Fisheries; Application for Exempted Fishing PermitPDF
82 FR 53423 - Tebufenozide; Pesticide Tolerance ActionsPDF
82 FR 53430 - Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Summer Flounder Fishery; Commercial Quota Harvested for the State of Rhode IslandPDF
82 FR 53516 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Probate of Indian Estates, Except for Members of the Osage Nation and Five Civilized TribesPDF
82 FR 53566 - Veterans and Community Oversight and Engagement Board, Notice of MeetingPDF
82 FR 53521 - Polytetrafluoroethylene (“PTFE”) Resin From China and IndiaPDF
82 FR 53530 - Notice of Request for Certification of Texas Capital Counsel MechanismPDF
82 FR 53529 - Notice of Request for Certification of Arizona Capital Counsel MechanismPDF
82 FR 53528 - Notice of Lodging of the Proposed Second Amended Consent Decree Under the Clean Water ActPDF
82 FR 53500 - Board of Scientific Counselors, National Center for Health Statistics (BSC, NCHS)PDF
82 FR 53555 - Notice of Intent of Waiver With Respect to LandPDF
82 FR 53432 - Airworthiness Criteria: Special Class Airworthiness Criteria for the FlightScan Corporation Camcopter S-100PDF
82 FR 53456 - Final Results of Changed Circumstances Review: Antidumping Duty Order on Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod From MexicoPDF
82 FR 53473 - Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Hardwood Plywood Products From the People's Republic of China: Final Affirmative Determination, and Final Affirmative Critical Circumstances Determination, in PartPDF
82 FR 53460 - Certain Hardwood Plywood Products From the People's Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, and Final Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances, in PartPDF
82 FR 53452 - Certain Tool Chests and Cabinets From the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional MeasuresPDF
82 FR 53456 - Certain Tool Chests and Cabinets From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Postponement of Final Determination, and Extension of Provisional MeasuresPDF
82 FR 53493 - Combined Notice of FilingsPDF
82 FR 53552 - Presidential Declaration Amendment of a Major Disaster for the State of TexasPDF
82 FR 53471 - Biodiesel From the Republic of Indonesia: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty DeterminationPDF
82 FR 53477 - Biodiesel From the Republic of Argentina: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty DeterminationPDF
82 FR 53496 - Combined Notice of FilingsPDF
82 FR 53481 - Fair Credit Reporting Act DisclosuresPDF
82 FR 53482 - Final Language Access Plan for the Consumer Financial Protection BureauPDF
82 FR 53552 - Presidential Declaration Amendment of a Major Disaster for the State of CaliforniaPDF
82 FR 53553 - Presidential Declaration of a Major Disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of KansasPDF
82 FR 53479 - Ripe Olives From Spain: Postponement of Preliminary Determination in the Less-Than-Fair-Value InvestigationPDF
82 FR 53515 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved Collection: Notice of Appeal of Decision Under Section 210 or 245APDF
82 FR 53523 - Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Resin From Brazil, Indonesia, Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan; DeterminationsPDF
82 FR 53433 - Best Practices for Convening a Generally Recognized as Safe Panel: Draft Guidance for Industry; AvailabilityPDF
82 FR 53418 - Safety Zones; Humboldt Bay Bar, Eureka, CA, Noyo River Entrance, Ft. Bragg, CA, and Crescent City Harbor Entrance Channel, Crescent City, CAPDF
82 FR 53531 - Business and Operations Advisory Committee; Notice of MeetingPDF
82 FR 53414 - Special Local Regulation; Mavericks Surf Competition, Half Moon Bay, CAPDF
82 FR 53500 - Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding CompaniesPDF
82 FR 53563 - Notice of Submission of Proposed Information Collection to OMBPDF
82 FR 53558 - Mazda Motor Corporation, Receipt of Petition for Determination of Inconsequentiality of Takata's Defect Information Report Filing Under NHTSA Campaign Number 17E-034 for PSDI-5 Desiccated Driver Air Bag Inflators and Decision Denying Request for Deferral of DeterminationPDF
82 FR 53508 - Bone, Reproductive and Urologic Drugs Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting; Establishment of a Public Docket; Request for CommentsPDF
82 FR 53505 - Assessing User Fees Under the Biosimilar User Fee Amendments of 2017; Draft Guidance for Industry; AvailabilityPDF
82 FR 53504 - Proposed Information Collection Activity; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 53561 - Ford Motor Company, Receipt of Petition for Inconsequentiality and Decision Denying Request for Deferral of DeterminationPDF
82 FR 53451 - Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Delaware Advisory CommitteePDF
82 FR 53517 - National Park System Advisory Board; Request for NominationsPDF
82 FR 53556 - Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation; Exemption Renewal for Ford Motor CompanyPDF
82 FR 53529 - Notice of Lodging of Proposed Amendment to Consent Decree Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act and the Resource Conservation and Recovery ActPDF
82 FR 53520 - Certain Wireless Audio Systems and Components Thereof; Commission Determination Not To Review an Initial Determination Granting Complainant's Motion for Leave To Amend the ComplaintPDF
82 FR 53524 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Application and Permit for Temporary Importation of Firearms and Ammunition by Nonimmigrant Aliens-ATF F 6NIA (5330.3D)PDF
82 FR 53523 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Report of Multiple Sale or Other Disposition of Certain Rifles-ATF Form 3310.12PDF
82 FR 53421 - Safety Zone; Annual Fireworks Display on the Ohio River, Monongahela River, Allegheny River, Pittsburgh, PAPDF
82 FR 53515 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Comment Request; Extension of an Information CollectionPDF
82 FR 53527 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Reinstatement, With Change, of a Previously Approved Collection: 2018 Census of State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies (CSLLEA)PDF
82 FR 53518 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Pipelines and Pipeline Rights-of-WayPDF
82 FR 53519 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Operations in the Outer Continental Shelf for Minerals Other Than Oil, Gas, and SulphurPDF
82 FR 53400 - Special Conditions: General Electric Company, GE9X Engine Models; Endurance Test Special ConditionsPDF
82 FR 53531 - Notice of Permit Applications Received Under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978PDF
82 FR 53507 - Mepergan Fortis Capsules; Final Decision on Proposal To Refuse Approval of Supplemental New Drug Application; Availability of Final DecisionPDF
82 FR 53421 - Safety Zone; Atlantic Ocean, Rehoboth Beach, DEPDF
82 FR 53501 - Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and RecommendationsPDF
82 FR 53403 - Offer Caps in Markets Operated by Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent System OperatorsPDF
82 FR 53489 - Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-725HH); Comment Request; Revision and ExtensionPDF
82 FR 53497 - Public Utility District No. 2 of Grant County; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and ProtestsPDF
82 FR 53494 - City of Vernon, California; Notice of FilingPDF
82 FR 53497 - Citizens Energy Corporation; Notice of Petition for Declaratory OrderPDF
82 FR 53488 - Elk Hills Power, LLC; Notice of Request for WaiverPDF
82 FR 53492 - East Cheyenne Gas Storage, LLC; Notice of ApplicationPDF
82 FR 53490 - Combined Notice of Filings #2PDF
82 FR 53498 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
82 FR 53491 - America First Hydro, LLC; Notice of Intent To File License Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document (PAD), Denying Use of the Traditional Licensing Process, Commencement of Licensing Proceeding, Scoping, and Solicitation of Study Requests and Comments on the PAD and Scoping DocumentPDF
82 FR 53494 - Southern Partners, INC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 AuthorizationPDF
82 FR 53495 - EF Oxnard LLC, Notice of Request for WaiverPDF
82 FR 53494 - Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America LLC; Notice of ApplicationPDF
82 FR 53496 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
82 FR 53487 - Submission of Data by State Educational Agencies; Submission Dates for State Revenue and Expenditure Reports for Fiscal Year 2017, Revisions to Those Reports, and Revisions to Prior Fiscal Year ReportsPDF
82 FR 53510 - Submission for OMB Review; 30-Day Comment Request; NCI Cancer Genetics Services Directory Web-Based Application and Update Mailer (National Cancer Institute)PDF
82 FR 53536 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; LCH SA; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change, Security-Based Swap Submission, or Advance Notice Relating to Wrong Way Risk MarginPDF
82 FR 53540 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Modify Its Fees for Physical PortsPDF
82 FR 53532 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Modify Its Fees for Physical PortsPDF
82 FR 53549 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats BYX Exchange, Inc.; Bats BZX Exchange, Inc.; Bats EDGA Exchange, Inc.; Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc.; BOX Options Exchange LLC; C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc.; Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.; Investors Exchange LLC; Miami International Securities Exchange, LLC; MIAX PEARL LLC; Nasdaq BX, Inc.; Nasdaq GEMX, LLC; Nasdaq ISE, LLC; Nasdaq MRX, LLC; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; New York Stock Exchange LLC; NYSE Arca, Inc. and NYSE MKT LLC; Notice of Designation of Longer Period for Commission Action on Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove Proposed Rule Changes To Establish Fees for Industry Members To Fund the Consolidated Audit TrailPDF
82 FR 53534 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Related to Fees for Use on Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc.PDF
82 FR 53543 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 1059, Accommodation TransactionsPDF
82 FR 53540 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on a Proposed Rule Change To List and Trade Shares of the Breakwave Dry Bulk Shipping ETF Under NYSE Arca Rule 8.200-E, Commentary .02PDF
82 FR 53547 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Modify Its Fees for Physical Ports as They Apply to the Exchange's Equity Options PlatformPDF
82 FR 53511 - Submission for OMB Review; 30-Day Comment Request; Generic Clearance To Support the Safe To Sleep® Campaign (Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development); CorrectionPDF
82 FR 53511 - Submission for OMB Review; 30-Day Comment Request; Generic Clearance for the Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery (Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development); CorrectionPDF
82 FR 53512 - Prospective Grant of Exclusive Patent Commercialization License: Direct Reading Detection Kits for Surface Contamination by Antineoplastic DrugsPDF
82 FR 53509 - Government-Owned Inventions; Availability for LicensingPDF
82 FR 53525 - Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act Of 1993-fd.io Project, Inc.PDF
82 FR 53527 - Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993-Node.Js FoundationPDF
82 FR 53525 - Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993-Oregon Manufacturing Innovation Center Research and DevelopmentPDF
82 FR 53526 - Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993-ODVA, Inc.PDF
82 FR 53526 - Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993-National Armaments ConsortiumPDF
82 FR 53527 - Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993-Automation and Public Safety Common Solutions ConsortiumPDF
82 FR 53527 - Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993-Integrated Photonics Institute for Manufacturing Innovation Operating Under the Name of the American Institute for Manufacturing Integrated PhotonicsPDF
82 FR 53532 - Product Change-Priority Mail Negotiated Service AgreementPDF
82 FR 53510 - National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
82 FR 53512 - National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
82 FR 53513 - National Eye Institute; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
82 FR 53511 - Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
82 FR 53525 - Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993-The Open Group, L.L.C.PDF
82 FR 53521 - Global Digital Trade 2: The Business-to-Business Market, Key Foreign Trade Restrictions, and U.S. Competitiveness; and Global Digital Trade 3: The Business-to-Consumer Market, Key Foreign Trade Restrictions, and U.S. Competitiveness; Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Global Digital Trade QuestionnairePDF
82 FR 53553 - Surrender of License of Small Business Investment CompanyPDF
82 FR 53538 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 53539 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 53542 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 53545 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 53537 - Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 53551 - Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 53546 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 53499 - Filing Dates for the Pennsylvania Special Election in the 18th Congressional DistrictPDF
82 FR 53552 - Surrender of License of Small Business Investment CompanyPDF
82 FR 53552 - National Women's Business Council; Quarterly Public MeetingPDF
82 FR 53450 - Notice of Request for Renewal and Revision of the Currently Approved Information CollectionPDF
82 FR 53500 - Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding CompanyPDF
82 FR 53411 - Kentucky Regulatory ProgramPDF
82 FR 53397 - Oranges, Grapefruit, Tangerines, and Pummelos Grown in Florida; Change in Size Requirements for OrangesPDF
82 FR 54232 - Air Quality Designations for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)PDF
82 FR 53568 - Medicare Program; CY 2018 Updates to the Quality Payment Program; and Quality Payment Program: Extreme and Uncontrollable Circumstance Policy for the Transition YearPDF
82 FR 53531 - Membership of National Science Foundation's Senior Executive Service Performance Review BoardPDF
82 FR 53531 - Membership of the National Science Foundation's Office of Inspector Generals Senior Executive Service Performance Review BoardPDF

Issue

82 220 Thursday, November 16, 2017 Contents Agricultural Marketing Agricultural Marketing Service RULES Oranges, Grapefruit, Tangerines, and Pummelos Grown in Florida; Change in Size Requirements for Oranges, 53397-53400 2017-24701 Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Agricultural Marketing Service

See

Federal Crop Insurance Corporation

Alcohol Tobacco Firearms Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Application and Permit for Temporary Importation of Firearms and Ammunition By Nonimmigrant Aliens, 53524-53525 2017-24822 Report of Multiple Sale or Other Disposition of Certain Rifles, 53523-53524 2017-24821 Antitrust Division Antitrust Division NOTICES Changes under the National Cooperative Research and Production Act: Automation and Public Safety Common Solutions Consortium, 53527 2017-24767 fd.io Project, Inc., 53525-53526 2017-24772 Integrated Photonics Institute for Manufacturing Innovation operating under the name of the American Institute for Manufacturing Integrated Photonics, 53527 2017-24766 National Armaments Consortium, 53526 2017-24768 Node.js Foundation, 53527 2017-24771 ODVA, Inc., 53526 2017-24769 Oregon Manufacturing Innovation Center Research and Development, 53525 2017-24770 The Open Group, L.L.C., 53525 2017-24758 Consumer Financial Protection Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection NOTICES Fair Credit Reporting Act Disclosures, 53481-53482 2017-24855 Final Language Access Plan for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 53482-53487 2017-24854 Safety Enviromental Enforcement Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Operations in the Outer Continental Shelf for Minerals Other than Oil, Gas, and Sulphur, 53519-53520 2017-24815 Pipelines and Pipeline Rights-of-Way, 53518-53519 2017-24817 Centers Disease Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 53501-53503 2017-24804 Meetings: Board of Scientific Counselors, National Center for Health Statistics, 53500-53501 2017-24871 Centers Medicare Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services RULES Medicare Programs: CY 2018 Updates to the Quality Payment Program; and Quality Payment Program: Extreme and Uncontrollable Circumstance Policy for Transition Year, 53568-54229 2017-24067 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 53503-53504 2017-24816 2017-24883 Children Children and Families Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Interstate Administrative Subpoena and Notice of Interstate Lien, 53504 2017-24830 Civil Rights Civil Rights Commission NOTICES Meetings: Delaware Advisory Committee, 53451-53452 2017-24828 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Safety Zones: Annual Fireworks Display on the Ohio River, Monongahela River, Allegheny River, Pittsburgh, PA, 53421 2017-24820 Atlantic Ocean, Rehoboth Beach, DE, 53421 2017-24805 Humboldt Bay Bar, Eureka, CA, Noyo River Entrance, Ft. Bragg, CA, and Crescent City Harbor Entrance Channel, Crescent City, CA, 53418-53421 2017-24842 Special Local Regulations: Mavericks Surf Competition, Half Moon Bay, CA, 53414-53418 2017-24840 Commerce Commerce Department See

International Trade Administration

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Defense Department Defense Department See

Engineers Corps

Education Department Education Department NOTICES Submission of Data by State Educational Agencies: Submission Dates for State Revenue and Expenditure Reports for Fiscal Year 2017, Revisions to Those Reports, and Revisions to Prior Fiscal Year Reports, 53487-53488 2017-24787 Energy Department Energy Department See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Engineers Engineers Corps RULES Restricted Areas: United States Navy Restricted Area, Menominee River, Marinette Marine Corporation Shipyard, Marinette, WI, 53422-53423 2017-24890 PROPOSED RULES Restricted Areas: U.S. Coast Guard Yard, Baltimore, Maryland, in Curtis Creek and Arundel Cove, 53438-53440 2017-24888 United States Air Force 81st Security Forces Anti-Terrorism Office, Restricted Area, Keesler Air Force Base, Biloxi, MS, 53440-53442 2017-24892 Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Air Quality Designations for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards, 54232-54287 2017-24640 Pesticide Tolerances: Tebufenozide, 53423-53426 2017-24881 PROPOSED RULES Repeal of Emission Requirements for Glider Vehicles, Glider Engines, and Glider Kits, 53442-53449 2017-24884 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration RULES Special Conditions: General Electric Company, GE9X Engine Models; Endurance Test Special Conditions, 53400-53403 2017-24812 PROPOSED RULES Airworthiness Criteria: Special Class Airworthiness Criteria for the FlightScan Corporation Camcopter S-100, 53432-53433 2017-24866 NOTICES Waivers of Aeronautical Land-Use Assurance, 53555-53556 2017-24867 Federal Crop Federal Crop Insurance Corporation NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 53450-53451 2017-24743 Federal Election Federal Election Commission NOTICES Filing Dates: Pennsylvania Special Election in the 18th Congressional District, 53499-53500 2017-24748 Federal Emergency Federal Emergency Management Agency NOTICES Major Disaster Declarations: California; Amendment No. 5, 53513 2017-24910 Puerto Rico; Amendment No. 4, 53515 2017-24907 Puerto Rico; Amendment No. 5, 53514 2017-24908 South Carolina; Amendment No. 1, 53514 2017-24909 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission RULES Offer Caps in Markets Operated by Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent System Operators, 53403-53411 2017-24803 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 53489-53490 2017-24802 Applications: America First Hydro, LLC, 53491-53492 2017-24793 East Cheyenne Gas Storage, LLC, 53492-53493 2017-24797 Natural Gas Pipeline Co. of America LLC, 53494-53495 2017-24790 Public Utility District No. 2 of Grant County, 53497-53498 2017-24801 Combined Filings, 53490-53491, 53493-53494, 53496, 53498-53499 2017-24789 2017-24795 2017-24796 2017-24856 2017-24860 Filings: Vernon, CA, 53494 2017-24800 Initial Market-Based Rate Filings Including Requests for Blanket Section 204 Authorizations: Southern Partners, INC, 53494 2017-24792 Petitions for Declaratory Orders: Citizens Energy Corp., 53497 2017-24799 Requests for Waivers: EF Oxnard LLC, 53495 2017-24791 Elk Hills Power, LLC, 53488-53489 2017-24798 Federal Motor Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration NOTICES Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation; Exemption Renewals: Ford Motor Co., 53556-53558 2017-24826 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System NOTICES Changes in Bank Control: Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding Company, 53500 2017-24739 Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies, 53500 2017-24835 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration PROPOSED RULES Guidance: Best Practices for Convening a Generally Recognized as Safe Panel, 53433-53438 2017-24845 NOTICES Guidance: Assessing User Fees Under the Biosimilar User Fee Amendments of 2017, 53505-53507 2017-24831 Meetings: Bone, Reproductive and Urologic Drugs Advisory Committee, 53508-53509 2017-24832 New Drug Applications: Mepergan Fortis Capsules, 53507-53508 2017-24806 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

See

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

See

Children and Families Administration

See

Food and Drug Administration

See

National Institutes of Health

Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

See

Federal Emergency Management Agency

See

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

See

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement

Indian Affairs Indian Affairs Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Probate of Indian Estates, Except for Members of the Osage Nation and Five Civilized Tribes, 53516-53517 2017-24879 Interior Interior Department See

Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement

See

Indian Affairs Bureau

See

National Park Service

See

Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office

International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Biodiesel from the Republic of Argentina, 53477-53479 2017-24857 Biodiesel from the Republic of Indonesia, 53471-53473 2017-24858 Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Mexico, 53456 2017-24865 Certain Hardwood Plywood Products from the People's Republic of China, 53473-53477 2017-24864 Determinations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Hardwood Plywood Products from the People's Republic of China, 53460-53471 2017-24863 Certain Tool Chests and Cabinets from the People's Republic of China, 53456-53460 2017-24861 Certain Tool Chests and Cabinets from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, 53452-53455 2017-24862 Ripe Olives from Spain, 53479-53480 2017-24848 International Trade Com International Trade Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Global Digital Trade Questionnaire, 53521-53522 2017-24757 Investigations; Determinations, Modifications, and Rulings, etc.: Certain Wireless Audio Systems and Components Thereof, 53520-53521 2017-24824 Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from Brazil, Indonesia, Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan, 53523 2017-24846 Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin from China and India, 53521 2017-24875 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 53522-53523 2017-24975 Justice Department Justice Department See

Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau

See

Antitrust Division

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: 2018 Census of State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies, 53527-53528 2017-24818 Consent Decrees under CERCLA, 53529-53530 2017-24825 Proposed Consent Decrees under the Clean Water Act, 53528-53529 2017-24872 Request for Certification of Arizona Capital Counsel Mechanism, 53529 2017-24873 Request for Certification of Texas Capital Counsel Mechanism, 53530 2017-24874
National Highway National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NOTICES Petitions for Determinations of Inconsequentiality; Denials: Ford Motor Co., 53561-53563 2017-24829 Mazda Motor Corp., 53558-53561 2017-24833 National Institute National Institutes of Health NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Generic Clearance for the Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery; Correction, 53511 2017-24775 Generic Clearance to Support the Safe to Sleep Campaign; Correction, 53511 2017-24776 National Cancer Institute Cancer Genetics Services Directory Web-Based Application and Update Mailer, 53510-53511 2017-24786 Government-Owned Inventions; Availability for Licensing, 53509-53510 2017-24773 Meetings: Center for Scientific Review, 53511-53512 2017-24759 National Eye Institute, 53513 2017-24760 National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 53510, 53512 2017-24761 2017-24762 Prospective Grant of Exclusive Patent Licenses: Direct Reading Detection Kits for Surface Contamination by Antineoplastic Drugs, 53512-53513 2017-24774 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RULES Fisheries of the Northeastern United States: Summer Flounder Fishery; Commercial Quota Harvested for the State of Rhode Island, 53430-53431 2017-24880 NOTICES Exempted Fishing Permit; Applications: General Provisions for Domestic Fisheries, 53480-53481 2017-24882 National Park National Park Service NOTICES Requests for Nominations: National Park System Advisory Board, 53517-53518 2017-24827 National Science National Science Foundation NOTICES Antarctic Conservation Act Permits, 53531-53532 2017-24808 Meetings: Business and Operations Advisory Committee, 53531 2017-24841 Membership Announcements: National Science Foundation, 53531 2017-23810 Performance Review Board, 53531 2017-23812 Postal Service Postal Service NOTICES Product Changes: Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement, 53532 2017-24763 2017-24764 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 53537-53539, 53542, 53545-53547, 53551-53552 2017-24749 2017-24750 2017-24751 2017-24752 2017-24753 2017-24754 2017-24755 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Bats BYX Exchange, Inc., Bats BZX Exchange, Inc., Bats EDGA Exchange, Inc., Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc., et al., 53549-53551 2017-24781 Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc., 53534-53536, 53540-53542 2017-24780 2017-24783 Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc., 53532-53534, 53547-53549 2017-24777 2017-24782 LCH SA, 53536-53537 2017-24784 Nasdaq PHLX LLC, 53543-53545 2017-24779 NYSE Arca, Inc., 53540 2017-24778 Small Business Small Business Administration NOTICES Disaster Declarations: California; Amendment 4, 53552-53553 2017-24850 Kansas, 53553 2017-24849 Texas; Amendment 8, 53552 2017-24859 Meetings: National Women's Business Council, 53552 2017-24744 Surrender of Licenses of Small Business Investment Companies: Grayhawk Venture Fund I, L.P., 53552 2017-24745 Shepherd Ventures II, LP, 53553 2017-24756 State Department State Department NOTICES Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition: Rembrandt's Self-Portrait at the Age of 34, 53555 2017-24887 Presidential Permits: Enbridge Energy, Limited Partnership, 53553-53554 2017-24886 Surface Mining Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office RULES Kentucky Regulatory Program, 53411-53414 2017-24707 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

See

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 53563-53566 2017-24834
Treasury Treasury Department RULES Acquisition Regulations: Tax Check Requirements, 53426-53430 2017-24911 U.S. Citizenship U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 53515-53516 2017-24847 Immigration U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 53515 2017-24819 Veteran Affairs Veterans Affairs Department NOTICES Meetings: Veterans and Community Oversight and Engagement Board, 53566 2017-24878 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Health and Human Services Department, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 53568-54229 2017-24067 Part III Environmental Protection Agency, 54232-54287 2017-24640 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.

82 220 Thursday, November 16, 2017 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service 7 CFR Part 905 [Doc. No. AMS-SC-17-0064; SC17-905-2 IR] Oranges, Grapefruit, Tangerines, and Pummelos Grown in Florida; Change in Size Requirements for Oranges AGENCY:

Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

ACTION:

Interim rule with request for comments.

SUMMARY:

This rule implements a recommendation from the Citrus Administrative Committee (Committee) to relax the minimum size requirements currently prescribed under the marketing Order for oranges, grapefruit, tangerines, and pummelos grown in Florida (Order). The Committee locally administers the order and is comprised of growers and handlers operating within the production area and one public member. This rule relaxes the minimum size requirements for oranges from 28/16 inches to 24/16 inches in diameter. This rule will maximize shipments by allowing more oranges to be shipped to the fresh market and help reduce the losses sustained by the citrus industry during the September 2017 hurricane in Florida. This rule also contains a formatting change to subpart references to bring the Order language into conformance with Office of Federal Register's guidelines.

DATES:

Effective November 17, 2017; comments received by January 16, 2018 will be considered prior to issuance of a final rule.

ADDRESSES:

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Abigail Campos, Marketing Specialist, or Christian D. Nissen, Regional Director, Southeast Marketing Field Office, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA; Telephone: (863) 324-3375, Fax: (863) 291-8614, or Email: [email protected] or [email protected]

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This rule is issued under Marketing Order No. 905, as amended (7 CFR part 905), regulating the handling of oranges, grapefruit, tangerines, and pummelos grown in Florida, hereinafter referred to as the “Order.” The Order is effective under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), hereinafter referred to as the “Act.”

The Department of Agriculture (USDA) is issuing this rule in conformance with Executive Orders 13563 and 13175. This rule falls within a category of regulatory actions that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) exempted from Executive Order 12866 review. Additionally, because this rule does not meet the definition of a significant regulatory action it does not trigger the requirements contained in Executive Order 13771. See OMB's Memorandum titled “Interim Guidance Implementing Section 2 of the Executive Order of January 30, 2017, titled `Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs' ” (February 2, 2017).

This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This rule is not intended to have retroactive effect.

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

This rule relaxes the minimum size requirements for oranges prescribed under the Order. This rule relaxes the minimum size requirements for oranges from 28/16 inches to 24/16 inches in diameter. This rule will maximize shipments by allowing more oranges to be shipped to the fresh market and help reduce the losses sustained by the orange industry during the September 2017 hurricane in Florida. This change was unanimously recommended by the Committee at meetings held on June 29, 2017, and September 28, 2017.

Section 905.52 of the Order provides authority to establish minimum size requirements for Florida citrus. Section 905.306 of the rules and regulation issued under the Order specifies, in part, the minimum size requirements for oranges. Requirements for domestic shipments are specified in § 905.306 in Table I of paragraph (a) and export shipments in Table II of paragraph (b).

At its June 29, 2017, meeting, the Committee discussed the continuing decline in production as a result of losses from citrus greening, which is affecting the entire production area. The Committee also recognized that some consumers are now showing a preference for smaller-sized fruit. The Committee agreed the current minimum size should be relaxed in order to make additional fruit available for shipment.

The Committee met again on September 28, 2017, to discuss the additional damage Hurricane Irma caused to the current crop and revisited the discussion regarding the need to reduce the minimum size requirements. The major orange-growing regions in Florida suffered significant damage and fruit loss from the hurricane. The strong winds from the storm blew substantial volumes of fruit off the trees. The impact of the storm is also expected to produce a much higher than normal fruit drop. The extent of the loss is evident in the official USDA crop estimate for this season, which reflects a 21 percent decrease from last year's estimate. Further, as the industry continues to assess the damage caused by the storm, fruit loss estimates may go even higher. Given the limited supply of fruit due to greening and the impact of Hurricane Irma, the Committee believes relaxing the size requirements for oranges is needed to make more fruit available for shipment.

Committee members recognized that with the special circumstances surrounding this season, and with the ongoing impacts of citrus greening, some allowances should be made to assist growers and handlers and provide additional volume to the market. The Committee believes relaxing the size requirements will make more fruit available to meet market demand, help maximize fresh shipments, increase returns to growers and handlers, and help address the losses stemming from the hurricane. Consequently, the Committee recommended changing the minimum size requirements for oranges from 28/16 inches to 24/16 inches in diameter.

The Committee also recommended a relaxation in the minimum size requirements for grapefruit covered under the Order. That change is being considered under a separate action.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

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

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

There are approximately 20 handlers of Florida citrus who are subject to regulation under the Order and approximately 500 citrus producers in the regulated area. Small agricultural service firms are defined by the Small Business Administration (SBA) as those having annual receipts of less than $7,500,000, and small agricultural producers are defined as those having annual receipts of less than $750,000 (13 CFR 121.201).

According to data from the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), the industry, and the Committee, the average f.o.b. price for Florida oranges during the 2016-17 season was $31.90 per box, and total fresh orange shipments were approximately 2.1 million boxes. Using the average f.o.b. price and shipment data, the majority of Florida orange handlers could be considered small businesses under SBA's definition ($31.90 times 2.1 million boxes equals $66.99 million divided by 20 handlers equals $3,349,500 per handler). In addition, based on the NASS data, the average grower price for the 2016-2017 season was $17.51 per box. Based on grower price, shipment data, and the total number of Florida citrus growers, the average annual grower revenue is below $750,000 ($17.51 times 2.1 million boxes equals $36,771,000 divided by 500 growers equals $73,542 per grower). Thus, the majority of handlers and producers of oranges may be classified as small entities.

This rule relaxes the minimum size requirements for oranges covered under the Order from 28/16 inches to 24/16 inches in diameter. This change is expected to maximize shipments by allowing more oranges to be shipped to the fresh market and will help reduce the losses sustained by the grapefruit industry as a result of citrus greening and the September 2017 hurricane in Florida. Authority for this change is provided in § 905.52. This rule amends § 905.306. The Committee unanimously recommended this change at its June 29, 2017, and September 28, 2017, meetings.

This action is not expected to increase the costs associated with the Order's requirements. Rather, it is anticipated this action will have a beneficial impact. Reducing the size requirements will make additional fruit available for shipment to the fresh market, provide an outlet for fruit that may otherwise go unharvested, and afford more opportunity to meet consumer demand. This change will provide additional fruit to fill the shortage caused by citrus greening and by Hurricane Irma. Further, by maximizing shipments, this action will help provide additional returns to growers and handlers as they work to recover from the losses stemming from the hurricane.

This action may also help reduce harvesting costs. By reducing the minimum size, more fruit will be able to be harvested immediately. This may eliminate the need to leave fruit on the tree to increase in size, which requires follow-up picking later in the season. Given the amount of fruit loss, this could help reduce picking costs substantially. The benefits of this rule are expected to be equally available to all fresh orange growers and handlers, regardless of their size.

An alternative to this action would be to maintain the current minimum requirements for domestic shipments of oranges. However, leaving the requirements unchanged would not make additional of fruit available for shipment. Following the significant damage experienced by the industry from the September 2017 hurricane, maximizing shipments will help provide additional returns to growers and handlers as they recover from the loss. Another alternative considered was to reduce the minimum maturity requirements. However, Committee members thought it was important to maintain the maturity requirements to ensure overall quality. Therefore, this alternative was rejected.

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

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

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

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

Further, the Committee's meetings were widely publicized throughout the Florida citrus industry and all interested persons were invited to attend the meetings and participate in Committee deliberations. Like all Committee meetings, the June 29, 2017, and September 28, 2017, meetings were public meetings and all entities, both large and small, were able to express their views on this issue. Finally, interested persons are invited to submit comments on this interim rule, including the regulatory and informational impacts of this action on small businesses.

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

This rule invites comments on the change to the size requirements for oranges currently prescribed under the Marketing Order for oranges, grapefruit, tangerines, and pummelos grown in Florida. Any comments received will be considered prior to finalization of this rule.

After consideration of all relevant material presented, including the Committee's recommendation, and other information, it is found that this interim rule, as hereinafter set forth, will tend to effectuate the declared policy of the Act.

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, it is also found and determined upon good cause that it is impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to the public interest to give preliminary notice prior to putting this rule into effect and that good cause exists for not postponing the effective date of this rule until 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. The Florida citrus industry has been dealing with the devastating effects of citrus greening for more than 10 years, resulting in ever smaller harvests, and escalating production costs. The September 2017 hurricane caused significant additional damage and crop loss to the industry, with losses running into the millions of dollars. This rule, in conjunction with a companion rule for grapefruit, will bring some much-needed relief by providing additional fruit for shipment to the fresh market and to increase returns to growers and handlers. Based on the size frequency measurements provided by NASS as part of grapefruit and orange crop estimates, the recommended relaxation in size for both grapefruit and oranges could make an additional 20 to 25 percent of the crop available for shipment to the fresh market. Based on estimates, this could mean an additional volume of about 700,000 boxes of citrus available for shipment. Using an average fresh price per box of around $30, this could provide the industry with an additional $20 million in returns for the 2017-18 season. This rule relieves a restriction on the size of oranges that can be shipped to the fresh market. Therefore, good cause exists for this rule becoming effective one day after publication in the Federal Register. In addition, the Committee unanimously recommended these changes at public meetings, and interested parties had an opportunity to provide input. Further, this rule provides a 60-day comment period and any comments received will be considered prior to finalization of this rule. This rule also contains a formatting change to subpart references to bring the Order language into conformance with Office of Federal Register's guidelines.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 905

Grapefruit, Marketing agreements, Oranges, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Tangelos, Tangerines.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 905 is amended as follows:

PART 905—ORANGES, GRAPEFRUIT, TANGERINES, AND PUMMELOS GROWN IN FLORIDA 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 905 continues to read as follows: Authority:

7 U.S.C. 601-604.

[Subpart Redesignated as Subpart A] 2. Redesignate “Subpart—Order Regulating Handling” as “Subpart A—Order Regulating Handling”. [Subpart Redesignated as Subpart B and Amended] 3. Redesignate “Subpart—Rules and Regulations” as subpart B and revise the heading to read as follows: Subpart B—Administrative Requirements [Subpart Redesignated as Subpart C] 4. Redesignate “Subpart—Assessment Rates” as “Subpart C—Assessment Rate”. [Subpart Redesignated as Subpart D] 5. Redesignate “Subpart—Grade and Size Requirements” as “Subpart D—Grade and Size Requirements”. 6. In § 905.306, Table I in paragraph (a) and Table II in paragraph (b) are amended by revising the entries for “Early and midseason,” “Navel,” “Temple,” and “Valencia and other late type” under “Oranges,” to read as follows:
§ 905.306 Orange, Grapefruit, Tangerine and Tangelo Regulation.

(a) * * *

Table I Variety Regulation period Minimum grade Minimum
  • diameter
  • (inches)
  • (1) (2) (3) (4) Oranges Early and midseason 01/29/90-08/19/90 U.S. No. 1 Golden 24/16 On and after 08/20/90 U.S. No. 1 24/16 Navel On and after 12/7/81 U.S. No. 1 24/16 Temple On and after 12/7/81 U.S. No. 1 24/16 Valencia and other late type September 1-May 14, May 15-June 14 U.S. No. 1
  • U.S. No. 1 Golden
  • 24/16
  • 24/16
  • June 15-August 31 U.S. No. 2, External/U.S. No. 1, Internal 24/16 *         *         *         *         *         *         *

    (b) * * *

    Table II Variety Regulation period Minimum grade Minimum
  • diameter
  • (inches)
  • (1) (2) (3) (4) Oranges Early and midseason 01/29/90-08/19/90 U.S. No. 1 Golden 24/16 On and after 08/20/90 U.S. No. 1 24/16 Navel On and after 11/24/89 U.S. No. 1 Golden 24/16 Temple On and after 11/24/89 U.S. No. 1 24/16 Valencia and other late type March 23, 1992-9/27/92 U.S. No. 1 24/16 On and after 9/28/92 U.S. No. 1 24/16 *         *         *         *         *         *         *
    [Subpart Redesignated as Subpart E and Amended] 7. Redesignate “Subpart—Interpretive Rule” as subpart E and revise the heading to read as follows: Subpart E—Interpretations Dated: November 9, 2017. Bruce Summers, Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24701 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 33 [Docket No. FAA-2017-0537; Notice No. 33-17-02-SC] Special Conditions: General Electric Company, GE9X Engine Models; Endurance Test Special Conditions AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final special conditions.

    SUMMARY:

    These special conditions are issued for the General Electric Company turbofan engine models GE9X-105B1A, -105B1A1, -105B1A2, -105B1A3, -102B1A, -102B1A1, -102B1A2, -102B1A3, and -93B1A. In these special conditions, the engine models will be referred to as “GE9X.” The engines will have novel or unusual design features associated with the engine design. The applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for these design features. These special conditions contain the additional safety standards that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness standards.

    DATES:

    Effective December 18, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Diane Cook, AIR-6A1, Engine and Propeller Standards Branch, Aircraft Certification Service, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, Massachusetts 01803-5213; telephone (781) 238-7111; facsimile (781) 238-7199; email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    On January 29, 2016, General Electric Company (GE) applied for a type certificate for their new GE9X turbofan engine models. The GE9X engine models are high-bypass-ratio engines that incorporate novel or unusual design features. The GE9X engine models incorporate new technologies such that the company cannot run the endurance test conditions prescribed in § 33.87 without significant modifications making the test vehicle non-representative of the type design.

    Discussion

    An alternative endurance test cycle has been developed that provides a level of safety equivalent with that intended by § 33.87. The alternate endurance test provides the test conditions that allow the engine to be run in type design configuration and demonstrate engine operability and durability as well as systems functionality to a level intended by the current § 33.87 rule.

    These special conditions provide the necessary conditions for verification of engine-level and component-level effects as intended by the current § 33.87 Endurance test. The test is run in engine type design configuration, with only limited test enabling modifications as needed. The special conditions include a demonstration for the oil, fuel, air bleed, and accessory drive systems as required in the current § 33.87 Endurance test.

    The equivalent level of severity intended by the § 33.87 Endurance test is provided by an engine test demonstration at the gas path limiting temperature and at shaft speed redlines and at the most extreme shaft speeds as determined through a critical point analysis (CPA). In addition, times on condition and cycle counts were developed to allow additional challenges to the novel or unusual design features that would not have been as challenged by the current § 33.87 test schedule.

    The level of durability is equivalent with that intended by the rule, which considers the damage accumulated during the test for the limiting damage mechanisms for components and engine systems, up to and including the applicable limitations declared in the Type Certificate Data Sheets (TCDS). The alternate test schedule provides conditions in the engine for a sufficient amount of time to demonstrate that no potential safety issue will develop from the limiting damage mechanisms while operating in service.

    The special conditions for §§ 33.4 and 33.29 are added to support an equivalent compliance by means of mandatory inspections prescribed in paragraph (b)(3) of the § 33.87 special conditions. These special condition requirements maintain a level of safety equivalent to the level intended by the applicable airworthiness standards in effect on the date of application.

    Type Certification Basis

    Under the provisions of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 21.17, GE must show that the GE9X engine models meet the applicable provisions of part 33, as amended by Amendments 33-1 through 33-34. The FAA has determined that the applicable airworthiness regulations in part 33 do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for the GE9X engine models because of their novel or unusual engine design features. Therefore, these special conditions are prescribed under the provisions of 14 CFR 11.19 and 21.16, and will become part of the type certification basis for GE9X engine models in accordance with § 21.17(a)(2).

    Novel or Unusual Design Features

    The GE9X engine models will incorporate the following novel or unusual design features: Technological advances that reduce noise and emissions while improving fuel efficiency and increasing thrust, when compared to previous similarly certificated GE engine models. The technological advances are incorporated into hardware design, materials, and engine operating characteristics. Introduction of complex cooling systems and film-cooled components cause metal temperatures to be significantly influenced by cooling air temperatures and air flows and are no longer in direct proportion to the gas path temperature which is a target of the current endurance test. Introduction of new materials, new design features, and operating conditions also introduced new failure modes that are not targeted by the current endurance test cycle. Some of the technological advancements were introduced in prior GE engine models and mitigated by modifications to the test engine.

    For past certifications, GE has shown that the engine design, as modified, still represented the durability and operating characteristics of the intended type design but the modifications needed to the GE9X engine model to run the § 33.87 Endurance test cannot be reconciled and would affect the test outcome.

    Discussion of Comments

    Notice of proposed special conditions No. 33-17-02-SC for the GE9X engine models was published in the Federal Register on 82 FR 28790. We received one comment from an anonymous commenter that acknowledged the need for special conditions as it concerns the GE9X engines models. We understand and acknowledge the comment we received, which is supportive of a special condition for the GE9X engine model. No further response is required.

    Applicability

    As discussed above, the special conditions are applicable to the GE9X engine model(s). Should GE apply at a later date for a change to the type certificate to include another model on the same type certificate incorporating the same novel or unusual design feature, the special conditions would apply to that model as well.

    Conclusion

    This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features on the GE9X turbofan engine models. It is not a rule of general applicability and applies only to GE, who requested FAA approval of this engine feature.

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 33

    Aircraft, Engines, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

    Authority:

    49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44704.

    The Special Conditions Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of the type certification basis for the GE9X engine models: GE9X-105B1A, -105B1A1, -105B1A2, -105B1A3, -102B1A, -102B1A1, 102B1A2, -102B1A3, and -93B1A. PART 33—REQUIREMENTS
    § 33.4 Instructions for Continued Airworthiness

    The Airworthiness Limitations section must prescribe the mandatory post-flight inspections and maintenance actions associated with any exceedance required by the endurance test, paragraph (b)(3), of these special conditions.

    § 33.29 Instrument Connection

    The engine must have means, or provisions for means, to automatically record and alert maintenance personnel of each occurrence of any exceedance required by the endurance test paragraph (b)(3), of these special conditions.

    § 33.87 Endurance Test

    (a) General: The applicant must show that the endurance test schedule in combination with any prescribed mandatory actions provide an equivalent level of severity and demonstration of durability and operability as that intended by § 33.87(a) and (b). When showing that the level of durability is equivalent with that intended by the rule, the applicant must consider the damage accumulated during the test for the limiting damage mechanisms for components and engine systems, up to and including the applicable limitations declared in the type certificate data sheets (TCDS). The test cycle content must create conditions in the engine for a sufficient amount of time to demonstrate no potential safety issue will develop from the limiting damage mechanisms while operating in service. The following minimum requirements apply:

    (1) Conduct the tests in paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) of these special conditions, for total cumulative and dwell time duration between ground idle and the takeoff thrust prescribed in these special conditions. The test cycle durations must include all maximums allowed in the TCDS and expected service operation.

    (2) Requirements of § 33.87(a)(1), (2), (4), and (6).

    (3) Requirements of § 33.87(a)(3) applicable to the temperature of external surfaces of the engine.

    (4) Testing for maximum air bleed must be at least equal with the prescribed test required in § 33.87(a)(5). However, for these cycles, the thrust or the rotor shaft rotational speed may be less than 100 percent of the value associated with the particular operation being tested if the FAA finds that the validity of the endurance test is not compromised.

    (5) Testing for engine fuel, oil, and hydraulic fluid pressure and oil temperature must be at least equal with the prescribed test required in § 33.87(a)(7).

    (6) If the number of occurrences of either transient rotor shaft overspeed or transient gas over temperature is not limited, at least 155 accelerations must be made at the limiting overspeed or over temperature. If the number of occurrences is limited, that number of accelerations must be made at the limiting overspeed or over temperature.

    (7) One hundred starts must be made, of which:

    (i) Twenty-five starts must be preceded by at least a two-hour engine shutdown.

    (ii) Ten false engine starts must be accomplished, pausing for the applicant's specified minimum fuel drainage time, before attempting a normal start.

    (iii) Ten normal restarts must be accomplished with not longer than 15 minutes since engine shutdown.

    The remaining starts may be made after completing the endurance testing prescribed by these special conditions.

    (8) Unless otherwise specified (i.e. (d)(2) of these special conditions), for accelerations from ground idle to takeoff, the throttle must be moved in not more than one second, except that, if different regimes of control operations are incorporated necessitating scheduling of the thrust-control lever motion in going from one extreme position to the other, a longer period of time is acceptable, but not more than two seconds.

    (i) When operating with max oil temperatures the throttle movement may be `stair-stepped' to allow for oil temperature stabilization for durations greater than two seconds.

    (9) The applicant must validate any analytical methods used for compliance with these special conditions. Validation includes the ability to accurately predict an outcome applicable to the engine being tested.

    (10) The applicant must perform the endurance test on an engine that substantially conforms to its type design. Modifications may be made as needed to achieve test conditions and/or engine operating conditions representative of the type design.

    (b) Conduct the endurance test at or above the declared shaft speeds and gas temperatures limits, and at or above conditions representative of critical points (speeds, temperatures, rated thrust) in the operating envelope.

    (1) Conduct the endurance test at or above the rated takeoff thrust and rated maximum continuous thrust and with the associated limits for rotor speeds and gas temperature (redlines), as follows:

    (i) Either rotor speed or gas temperature, or concurrent rotor speed and gas temperature, if analysis indicates a combination of redline operational conditions is possible to occur in service, must be at least 100 percent of the values associated with the engine rating being tested.

    (ii) The cumulative test time duration and number of cycles must be representative of the rotor speed and gas temperature excursions to redlines that can be expected to occur in between overhauls.

    (iii) The time durations for each takeoff or maximum continuous segment must include all maximums allowed in the TCDS and expected service operation and must include the following cycles:

    (A) At least one (1) takeoff cycle of 5-minutes time duration at the low pressure rotor speed limit and gas temperature limit (redlines).

    (B) At least one (1) takeoff cycle of 5-minutes time duration at the high pressure rotor speed limit and gas temperature limit (redlines).

    (C) In lieu of the separate cycles specified in paragraphs (A) and (B) of this section, the applicant may run the low pressure and high pressure rotor speeds and gas temperature limits (redlines) in the same cycle. However, in this case, the applicant must run at least 2 cycles of 5 minutes' time duration each.

    (2) Conduct the endurance test at or above the rated takeoff thrust and the rated maximum continuous thrust with rotor speeds at or above those determined by a critical point analysis (CPA) and with gas temperature redline conditions as follows:

    (i) The applicant must determine through a CPA the highest rotor shaft rotational speeds (CPA speeds) expected to occur for each rotor shaft system within the declared operating envelope. The CPA must be conducted for the takeoff and maximum continuous rated thrust and must consider the declared operating envelope, engine deterioration, engine-to-engine variability, and any other applicable variables that can cause the engine to operate at the extremes of its performance ratings.

    (ii) Except as provided in paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of these special conditions, conduct a cyclic test between ground idle and combined takeoff and maximum continuous thrust ratings, as follows:

    (A) Eighteen hours and forty-five minutes (18.75 hours) cumulated time duration at or above the rated takeoff thrust, the gas temperature limit for takeoff (redline), and the CPA rotor speeds for takeoff determined per paragraph (b)(2)(i) of these special conditions.

    (B) Forty-five (45) hours cumulated time duration at or above the rated maximum continuous thrust, the gas temperature limit for maximum continuous (redline), and the CPA rotor speeds for maximum continuous determined per paragraph (b)(2)(i) of these special conditions.

    (C) The time durations for each takeoff or maximum continuous segments must include all maximums allowed in the TCDS and expected service operation, and must include at least one maximum continuous cycle of 30 minutes run continuously.

    (3) If the cyclic shaft speed excursions specified in paragraphs (b)(1) or (b)(2) of these special conditions cannot be demonstrated in the test, then an alternative equivalent with the rule intent must be provided. Alternatives may include alternate means of test demonstration, mandatory actions, or other means found acceptable to the FAA. The applicant must prescribe a mandatory action plan for engine operation between the shaft speeds demonstrated for a minimum of cumulated 18.75 hours at or above rated takeoff and 45 hours at or above rated maximum continuous, respectively, and the declared speed limits (redlines), as follows:

    (i) Prescribe post-event actions or operating limitations acceptable to the FAA for operation below the declared speed limits (redlines) and above the CPA speeds.

    (ii) If the test required by (b)(2)(ii) of these special conditions can only be accomplished at a rotor shaft speed lower than the CPA speed, prescribe post-event actions or operating limitations acceptable to the FAA for operation below that CPA speed and above the value demonstrated during the test.

    (c) Conduct the endurance test at the incremental cruise thrust that must be at least equal with the prescribed test required in § 33.87(b)(4). The 25 incremental test cycles must be uniformly distributed throughout the entire endurance test.

    (d) Conduct at least 300 cycles between ground idle and combined rated takeoff and rated maximum continuous thrust, as follows:

    (1) Each cycle to include acceleration to or above rated takeoff thrust, deceleration from takeoff to ground idle, followed by 5 to 15 seconds at ground idle, acceleration to or above rated maximum continuous thrust, and deceleration to ground idle.

    (2) The throttle movement from ground idle to rated takeoff or maximum continuous thrust and from rated takeoff thrust to ground idle should be not more than one (1) second, except that, if different regimes of control operations are incorporated necessitating scheduling of the thrust-control lever motion in going from one extreme position to the other, a longer period of time is acceptable, but not more than two (2) seconds. The throttle movement from rated maximum continuous thrust to ground idle should not be more than five (5) seconds.

    (3) The time durations for each cycle associated with either takeoff or maximum continuous thrust segments must include all maximums allowed in the TCDS and expected service operation, and must include the following cycles:

    (i) Three (3) cycles of 5 minutes each and one (1) cycle of 10 minutes at the takeoff thrust.

    (ii) Three (3) cycles of 30 minutes each at the maximum continuous thrust.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on November 8, 2017. Robert J. Ganley, Manager, Engine and Propeller Standards Branch, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24812 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 18 CFR Part 35 [Docket No. RM16-5-001; Order No. 831-A] Offer Caps in Markets Operated by Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent System Operators AGENCY:

    Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Order on rehearing and clarification.

    SUMMARY:

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is granting in part and denying in part requests for rehearing and clarification of its determinations in Order No. 831, which amended its regulations to address incremental energy offer caps in markets operated by regional transmission organizations and independent system operators.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective January 16, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Emma Nicholson (Technical Information), Office of Energy Policy and Innovation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-8846, [email protected] Pamela Quinlan (Technical Information), Office of Energy Market Regulation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-6179, [email protected] Anne Marie Hirschberger (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-8387, [email protected]
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents Paragraph Nos. I. Introduction 1 II. Discussion 5 A. Offer Cap Structure 5 1. Hard Cap Level 6 2. Implementation of the Hard Cap 13 B. Verification Requirement 18 1. Expected Costs 19 2. Verification of Imports 30 C. Costs Included in Cost-Based Incremental Energy Offers 34 1. Requests for Rehearing/Clarification 34 2. Determination 37 III. Information Collection Statement 41 IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification 44 V. Document Availability 45 VI. Effective Date 48 I. Introduction

    1. On November 17, 2016, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) issued Order No. 831.1 Order No. 831 addresses the incremental energy offer component of a resource's supply offer, which is a financial component consisting of costs that vary with a resource's output or level of demand reduction. Incremental energy offers are one of the components used to calculate locational marginal prices (LMPs). California Independent System Operator Corporation (CAISO), ISO New England Inc. (ISO-NE), Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (MISO), New York Independent System Operator, Inc. (NYISO), and Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (SPP) currently have a $1,000/MWh cap on incremental energy offers (offer cap), and PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM) currently has an offer cap of $2,000/MWh on cost-based offers.2

    1Offer Caps in Markets Operated by Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent System Operators, 81 FR 87,770 (Dec. 5, 2016), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,387 (2016) (Order No. 831).

    2 Order No. 831, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,387 at PP 11-13.

    2. In Order No. 831, the Commission amended its regulations to require that each regional transmission organization and independent system operator (RTO/ISO): (1) Cap each resource's incremental energy offer at the higher of $1,000/MWh or that resource's verified cost-based incremental energy offer; and (2) cap verified cost-based incremental energy offers at $2,000/MWh when calculating LMPs (hard cap).3 Resources with verified cost-based incremental energy offers above $2,000/MWh will be eligible to receive uplift.4 In response to comments on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,5 the Commission clarified that each RTO/ISO or Market Monitoring Unit must verify that any incremental energy offer above $1,000/MWh reasonably reflects the associated resource's actual or expected costs, as opposed to only the resource's actual costs, prior to using that offer to calculate LMP.6

    3Id. P 1.

    4Id. P 78.

    5Offer Caps in Markets Operated by Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent System Operators, 81 FR 5951 (Feb. 4, 2016), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 32,714, at PP 3 (2016) (NOPR).

    6 Order No. 831, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,387 at P 139.

    3. With respect to treatment of cost-based incremental energy offers above $2,000/MWh, the Commission stated that it expects RTOs/ISOs to use such offers to determine merit-order dispatch, and it cited PJM as an example of an RTO/ISO that uses cost-based incremental energy offers above $2,000/MWh to determine merit-order dispatch, but limits cost-based incremental energy offers to $2,000/MWh for purposes of calculating LMP.7 The Commission found that imports should be permitted to offer above $1,000/MWh, but will not be subject to verification.8 Finally, while Order No. 831 did not require RTOs/ISOs to include an adder above cost in cost-based incremental energy offers above $1,000/MWh, the Commission stated that if an RTO/ISO chooses to retain existing rules that allow for an adder above cost or proposes any new adders above cost, such adders may not exceed $100/MWh.9 However, in Order No. 831, the Commission did not require RTOs/ISOs to change the costs they currently include in cost-based incremental energy offers, and it did not address whether verifiable opportunity costs are subject to the $100/MWh limit on adders.

    7Id. P 90.

    8Id. P 192.

    9Id. P 207.

    4. On December 19, 2016, the Commission received four requests for rehearing and/or clarification of Order No. 831 which raise issues related to the structure of the offer cap, the verification requirement, and the costs included in cost-based incremental energy offers. TAPS filed a request for rehearing and clarification. NYISO filed a request for clarification and, alternatively, request for rehearing. AMP/APPA filed a request for rehearing. Exelon filed a motion for clarification and request for rehearing.10 For the reasons discussed below, we grant in part and deny in part the requests for rehearing and clarification.

    10 The Independent Market Monitor for PJM (PJM Market Monitor) filed an answer to Exelon's motion for clarification and request for rehearing. MISO filed comments in support of NYISO's request for clarification and, alternatively, request for rehearing. Rule 713(d)(1) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure prohibits answers to requests for rehearing. 18 CFR 385.713(d)(2) (2017). We therefore reject the answer of the PJM Market Monitor. We will treat MISO's comments as an answer and as a result reject them.

    II. Discussion A. Offer Cap Structure

    5. The requests for rehearing and clarification regarding the offer cap structure focus on the level of the hard cap and the implementation of the hard cap.

    1. Hard Cap Level a. Request for Rehearing

    6. TAPS seeks rehearing and argues both that the $2,000/MWh hard cap level established by the Commission is not supported by substantial evidence, and that the $1,724/MWh offer cited in Order No. 831 was not a legitimate cost-based incremental energy offer.11 Rather, TAPS states, the $1,724/MWh offer was the estimated cost of a resource calculated according to PJM's Cost Development Guidelines, but the actual cost of that resource was less than $1,500/MWh. TAPS argues that, given the large discrepancy between estimated and actual costs, it was inappropriate for the Commission to rely on an estimated $1,724/MWh offer as the basis for the $2,000/MWh hard cap level. TAPS asserts that, even if it was appropriate for the Commission to rely upon estimated costs, the Commission should not have used the $1,724/MWh level, since it was estimated using a methodology that is not compliant with Order No. 831. TAPS contends that the Commission should instead set the hard cap level at $1,500/MWh or, alternatively, at $1,800/MWh if the Commission determines that there was a legitimate cost-based incremental energy offer of $1,724/MWh.12 TAPS also argues that the Commission failed to meaningfully address the analytical evidence TAPS presented in its comments supporting a $1,500/MWh hard cap.13

    11 TAPS Request for Clarification/Rehearing at 2 (citing Pac. Gas & Elec. Co. v. FERC, 373 F.3d 1315 (D.C. Cir. 2004); Canadian Ass'n of Petroleum Producers v. FERC, 254 F.3d 289 (D.C. Cir. 2001) (Canadian Ass'n of Petroleum Producers)).

    12Id. at 5-11.

    13Id. at 10 (citing Canadian Ass'n of Petroleum Producers, 254 F.3d at 299 (an agency's “failure to respond meaningfully” to objections raised by a party renders its decision arbitrary and capricious)).

    b. Determination

    7. We deny TAPS' request for rehearing of the $2,000/MWh level of the hard cap. In Order No. 831, the Commission determined that a hard cap was necessary to limit any adverse impact on LMPs due to imperfect information about a resource's short-run marginal costs that might arise during the verification process.14 The Commission also recognized that a hard cap that is too low might suppress LMPs below the marginal cost of production.15 In determining the $2,000/MWh level of the hard cap, the Commission therefore struck a balance between competing goals: (1) Limiting any adverse impacts on LMPs due to imperfect information during the verification process and (2) reducing the likelihood of suppressing LMPs below the marginal cost of production.

    14 Order No. 831, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,387 at P 87.

    15Id. P 91.

    8. The overall offer cap structure set forth in Order No. 831 and the overall market structure of RTOs/ISOs in which the offers arise affected the balance struck by the Commission in setting the level of the hard cap. The hard cap does not stand alone, meaning that it is not the only way of ensuring that an offer does not reflect the exercise of market power and that the price resulting from an incremental energy offer is just and reasonable. In balancing the competing goals, the Commission effectively recognized that the hard cap serves as a backstop to the mitigation established through both the cost-based requirement and the verification process—the other elements of the offer cap structure. The cost-based offer requirement serves a “mitigation function” 16 by requiring incremental energy offers above $1,000/MWh be cost-based. The verification requirement also addresses market power concerns.17 The hard cap “limit[s] the adverse impact that any imperfect information about resources' short-run marginal costs during the verification process could have on LMPs.” 18 The Commission factored in these two other elements of the offer-cap structure in balancing the competing goals to set the level of the hard cap.

    16Id. P 83.

    17Id. P 139.

    18Id. P 87.

    9. In setting that level, the Commission also considered the overall market structure of RTOs/ISOs—a structure designed to ensure that markets are competitive and not subject to the exercise of market power, through for instance, existing market power mitigation processes.19 The hard cap also serves as backstop to those existing market mitigation processes.20

    19Cf. id. PP 85-90. Additionally, all six RTOs/ISOs have market power mitigation rules designed to prevent market participants from exercising market power. See, e.g., California Independent System Operator Corporation, eTariff, 39; ISO New England Inc., Markets and Services Tariff, Market Rule 1, Appendix A; Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc., FERC Electric Tariff, Module D; New York Independent System Operator, Inc., Market Administration and Control Area Services Tariff, Attachment H; PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., Intra-PJM Tariffs, OATT, Tariff Operating Agreement, Attachment M; and Southwest Power Pool, Inc., OATT, Sixth Revised Volume No. 1, Attachment AF.

    20Cf. id. P 89.

    10. Based on the record, the Commission set the level of the hard cap to $2,000/MWh. The Commission determined that $2,000/MWh was the level that short-run marginal costs would rarely exceed.21 The cost-based incremental energy offer of $1,724/MWh referenced in Order No. 831, and which TAPS questions, regardless of the methodology by which it was derived, was only one point of reference for the Commission within the context of the broader record. Specifically, the Commission also examined the evidence in the record regarding high natural gas prices that occurred during the Polar Vortex when some resources experienced short-run marginal costs above $1,000/MWh.22

    21See id. n.200 (citing Envtl. Action, Inc. v. FERC, 939 F.2d 1057, 1064 (D.C. Cir. 1991) (“it is within the scope of the agency's expertise to make such a prediction about the market it regulates, and a reasonable prediction deserves our deference notwithstanding that there might also be another reasonable view.”). See also Michigan Consol. Gas Co. v. FERC, 883 F.2d 117, 124 (1989) (“It is also quite clear FERC may make predictions—“[m]aking . . . predictions is clearly within the Commission's expertise” and will be upheld if “rationally based on record evidence.”) (citing East Tennessee Natural Gas Co. v. FERC, 863 F.2d 932, 938-39 (1988) (citing Associated Gas Distributors v. FERC, 824 F.2d 981, 1008 (1987)))).

    22Id. P 92.

    11. The alternative $1,500/MWh and $1,800/MWh hard cap levels that TAPS proposed would result in a balance different than the one chosen by the Commission. Lower hard cap levels such as these would increase the likelihood of suppressing prices below the marginal cost of production and would thereby run contrary to the Commission's price formation efforts to ensure that LMPs reflect the short-run marginal cost of the marginal resource. We therefore reject TAPS' request for rehearing and the alternative hard cap levels proposed. As stated above, we continue to find that the $2,000/MWh hard cap reasonably balances reducing the likelihood of suppressing LMPs while limiting any adverse impact on LMPs from imperfect information about resources' short-run marginal costs during the verification process.

    12. Further, we reject TAPS' argument that the Commission failed to meaningfully address its $1,500/MWh alternative proposal. The Commission addressed this alternative in adopting the $2,000/MWh hard cap.23 In any event, in a rulemaking, the Commission need not respond to every comment or analyze every alternative. Rather, the Commission must respond to “comments which, if true. . .would require a change in an agency's proposed rule.” 24 The Commission's determination regarding the $2,000/MWh hard cap is not invalidated merely because there may be a reasonable alternative.25

    23Id.

    24American Min. Congress v. EPA, 907 F.2d 1179, 1187-88 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (American Min. Congress) (citing Thompson v. Clark, 741 F.2d 401, 408 (D.C. Cir. 1984) (Thompson); ACLU v. FCC, 823 F.2d 1554, 1581 (D.C. Cir.1987) (ACLU)).

    25See United Distribution Cos. v. FERC, 88 F.3d 1105, 1169-70 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (United Distribution Cos.) (“FERC correctly counters that the fact that AEPCO may have proposed a reasonable alternative . . . is not compelling. The existence of a second reasonable course of action does not invalidate an agency's determination.”).

    2. Implementation of the Hard Cap a. Requests for Rehearing/Clarification

    13. NYISO seeks clarification that Order No. 831 does not require that incremental energy offers above $2,000/MWh be used to determine merit-order dispatch in all RTOs/ISOs, and, in the alternative, seeks rehearing on this issue.26 NYISO states that, to the extent the Commission intended to establish a requirement, the Commission did not seek comment on the requirement in the NOPR, did not demonstrate that the requirement must be imposed on all RTOs/ISOs in order to ensure just and reasonable rates, and did not consider the burdens the requirement would impose on NYISO.27

    26See Order No. 831, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,387 at P 90 (“With respect to the treatment of cost-based incremental energy offers above $2,000/MWh, we expect RTOs/ISOs to use such offers to determine merit-order dispatch. We note that the Commission allowed this approach when accepting PJM's current offer cap structure. . . .” ”).

    27 NYISO Request for Clarification/Rehearing at 5, 11-13.

    14. NYISO asserts that such a requirement would introduce foreign market design elements into NYISO that were developed by PJM to be compatible with its own pricing method, market rules, and software.28 Specifically, NYISO explains that PJM's design accommodates discrepancies between schedules and price, using a secondary ex post process to determine LMPs that is separate from the process for determining resource schedules. However, NYISO states that it uses a common ex ante process to determine both locational based marginal prices (LBMPs) and resource schedules. NYISO asserts that, because its process utilizes the same offers for scheduling and pricing, it would be challenging to allow resources to be committed and scheduled based on validated incremental energy offers above $2,000/MWh, but then cap the offers for purposes of calculating LBMPs and ancillary services prices. According to NYISO, this would require resource-intensive and potentially costly software changes, make validation of prices and schedules more complex, and require NYISO to redirect resources from other efforts that are more certain to benefit consumers and markets. Additionally, NYISO contends that implementing an offer cap that only limits the offer prices used to determine LBMPs can lead to a divergence between resource schedules and prices that can harm market participants.29

    28 NYISO also maintains that RTOs/ISOs do not need to have identical software or market rules, and that the practical ability to implement software changes justifies accommodating regional circumstances. Id. at 6 (citing N.Y. Indep. Sys. Operator, Inc., 142 FERC ¶ 61,202, at PP 24-26 (2013); N.Y. Indep. Sys. Operator, Inc., 133 FERC ¶ 61,246, at P 25 (2010)).

    29Id. at 7-11.

    15. In addition, NYISO requests clarification that RTOs/ISOs are permitted to apply the same offer cap to both incremental energy and minimum generation offers,30 and in the alternative seeks rehearing on this issue. Currently, NYISO's tariff applies a $1,000/MWh offer cap to all day-ahead and real-time energy offers, including minimum generation offers. NYISO argues that applying different offer caps to incremental energy offers and minimum generation offers could incentivize suppliers to artificially shape their offers to conform to the different offer caps rather than offer in a manner that accurately reflects a resource's costs, which would result in less optimal commitment, dispatch, and pricing. Furthermore, NYISO states that if minimum generation offer caps are lower than incremental energy offer caps, generators may not offer to supply energy if they do not expect to be able to recoup their costs.31 NYISO also states that the Commission previously granted waiver of the $1,000/MWh offer cap on both incremental energy offers and minimum generation offers in response to spikes in natural gas costs caused by the Polar Vortex.32

    30 In NYISO, the first block in a resource's incremental energy offer is called a “minimum generation bid” and includes the costs a resource incurs to operate at its economic minimum operating level. NYISO, Manual 11—Day-Ahead Scheduling Manual, Sec. 4.3.3. (October 2016) http://www.nyiso.com/public/webdocs/markets_operations/documents/Manuals_and_Guides/Manuals/Operations/dayahd_schd_mnl.pdf.

    31 NYISO Request for Clarification/Rehearing at 13-15.

    32Id. at 13 (citing N.Y. Indep. Sys. Operator, Inc., 146 FERC ¶ 61,061, at PP 2-4, 20 (2014)).

    b. Determination

    16. Regarding NYISO's concerns on economic merit-order dispatch, we clarify that Order No. 831 did not require cost-based incremental energy offers above $2,000/MWh to be used to determine economic merit-order dispatch. We recognize that some RTO's/ISO's existing commitment, dispatch, and pricing algorithms are structured differently, and the Commission in Order No. 831 did not require RTOs/ISOs to change their current practices or software to use cost-based incremental energy offers above $2,000/MWh for determining economic merit-order dispatch. However, in the event that RTOs/ISOs must select from several offers above $2,000/MWh, we encourage RTOs/ISOs to make those selections on a least-cost basis when possible, in order to minimize the cost to serve load.

    17. We also clarify that application of the offer cap and verification requirement adopted in Order No. 831 to minimum generation offers, as NYISO requests, is appropriate. Applying different offer caps to minimum generation and incremental energy offers could give resources the incentive to shape their offers in a manner that does not reflect their costs.33 Furthermore, this application is consistent with prior Commission orders regarding NYISO's offer cap discussed above.34

    33See id. at 14.

    34See supra P 15.

    B. Verification Requirement

    18. The requests for rehearing regarding the verification requirement focus on the use of expected costs in the verification requirement and whether to subject imports to the verification requirement.

    1. Expected Costs

    19. The requests for rehearing regarding expected costs include the definition of expected costs and whether they should be included in the regulatory text as well as market power concerns related to the use of expected costs in the verification process.

    a. Definition and Regulatory Text i. Requests for Rehearing

    20. AMP/APPA seek rehearing of Order No. 831, arguing that the Commission was arbitrary and capricious because it failed to provide a reasonable justification for allowing sellers' expected costs to set LMP, and that the Commission also unjustifiably expanded the definition of cost-based offers to include “expected” costs. According to AMP/APPA, in order for LMPs to send accurate signals regarding the actual cost of producing energy, LMPs should be based on actual costs. AMP/APPA argue that, since some commenters stated that pre-verification of actual costs would not be possible, the Commission should have concluded that offers above $1,000/MWh should not set LMP, and instead, required such costs to be recovered via uplift.35

    35 AMP/APPA Request for Rehearing at 9-13 (citing Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass'n v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 463 U.S. 29, 43 (1983) (Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass'n); United Distrib. Cos., 88 F.3d at 1169).

    21. Exelon requests rehearing of the fact that the regulatory text does not include the “actual or expected” phrase when it describes the costs to be verified. Exelon argues that the current regulatory text fails to adequately capture the Commission's intent described in the preamble, specifically that costs may be either actual or expected. Exelon asserts that, in order to avoid confusion and also satisfy due process and regulatory notice requirements, the Commission should amend the regulatory text to specify that the verified costs can be “actual or expected.” 36

    36 Exelon Request for Clarification/Rehearing at 6-8 (citing U.S. v. Chrysler Corp., 158 F.3d 1350 (D.C. Cir. 1998); Upton v. SEC, 75 F.3d 92 (2d Cir. 1996); General Electric Co. v. EPA, 53 F.3d 1324 (D.C. Cir. 1995)).

    ii. Determination

    22. We disagree with AMP/APPA's argument that the use of expected costs in the verification process to set LMPs was arbitrary and capricious, and thus deny its request for rehearing. The record demonstrates that certain natural gas resources do not know their actual short-run marginal costs at the time they submit their incremental energy offers, and thus it is just and reasonable, and consistent with current practice, for such resources to offer based on their expected costs.37 Given this record, the Commission appropriately responded to the many comments filed by clarifying in Order No. 831 that market participants could offer based on expected costs. In circumstances when actual costs are not known, a resource offer based on expected short-run marginal cost constitutes a competitive offer. Further, contrary to AMP/APPA's assertion, in Order No. 831 the Commission did not expand the definition of the specific types of short-run marginal costs that a resource could include in its cost-based incremental energy offer above $1,000/MWh, but rather, the Commission stated that it expected that the RTO/ISO would build on its existing mitigation processes for calculating or updating cost-based incremental energy offers. Further, in Order No. 831, the Commission required an RTO/ISO to explain in its compliance filing what factors it will consider in the verification process for cost-based incremental energy offers above $1,000/MWh and whether such factors are currently considered in existing market power mitigation provisions. Thus, the Commission was not arbitrary and capricious because its decision to permit verified expected costs above $1,000/MWh to set LMP is consistent with current RTO/ISO practices that allow cost-based incremental energy offers to be based on expected, rather than actual costs, as demonstrated in the record.38

    37See Order No. 831, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,387 at PP 104-108.

    38See id. PP 106-107.

    23. We grant Exelon's request to amend the regulatory text by adding the words “actual or expected” as suggested by Exelon. We agree that these revisions will provide more certainty to market participants and more clearly state the Commission's intention that both actual and expected costs over $1,000/MWh may be submitted for verification.

    b. Market Power Concerns i. Requests for Rehearing

    24. AMP/APPA seek rehearing contending that Order No. 831 is arbitrary and capricious because it fails to address market power concerns that may arise if resources exaggerate expected costs included in cost-based incremental energy offers above $1,000/MWh.39 According to AMP/APPA, there are strong incentives for an owner of a fleet of resources, for example, to inflate expected costs of one resource during a constrained period in order to increase earnings for all of its resources. AMP/APPA further argue that there is an opportunity to inflate costs because natural gas prices are higher during constrained periods, and this is also when the price of natural gas is less transparent because the price paid by a market seller for gas on the bilateral market is farthest away from index prices.40

    39 AMP/APPA Request for Rehearing at 13-16 (citing Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass'n, 463 U.S. at 43).

    40Id. at 13-15 (citing Joint Comments of PJM and SPP, Docket No. RM16-5-000, at 10-11 (filed Apr. 4, 2016); Comments of ISO-NE Market Monitor, Docket No. RM16-5-000, at 7 (filed Apr. 4, 2016)).

    25. AMP/APPA further assert that Order No. 831 failed to address whether allowing offers above $1,000/MWh to set LMP could lead to market power concerns in the natural gas market.41 In support of this position, AMP/APPA reference the PJM Market Monitor's comments in the Order No. 831 proceeding stating that removing the offer cap entirely could exacerbate market power in the natural gas markets and also impact electricity markets.42 AMP/APPA further note that the Internal Market Monitor for ISO-NE (ISO-NE Market Monitor) stated that, in ISO-NE., raising the offer cap could expose the energy markets to uncompetitive conditions in the natural gas markets.43 AMP/APPA therefore propose that offers above $1,000/MWh should be based upon actual costs in order to be used to set LMP, since the use of expected costs can exacerbate market power concerns, but offers above $1,000/MWh based on expected costs should be recovered via uplift.44

    41Id. at 15-16.

    42Id. at 15 (citing PJM Market Monitor, Comments, Docket No. RM16-5-000, at 4 (filed Apr. 4, 2016)).

    43Id. (citing ISO-NE Market Monitor, Comments, Docket No. RM16-5-000, at 3 (filed Apr. 4, 2016)).

    44Id. at 17.

    26. AMP/APPA seek rehearing of Order No. 831, arguing that the Commission's use of expected costs in setting LMP was arbitrary and capricious, and that the Commission did not explain its departure from relevant precedent.45 Specifically, AMP/APPA argue that allowing expected costs to be used to verify cost-based incremental energy offers above $1,000/MWh contravenes the Federal Power Act (FPA) and is inconsistent with precedent requiring certain safeguards when granting market-based rates. AMP/APPA maintain that the Commission's authority under the FPA to grant market-based rate authority has been upheld in court because the Commission periodically conducts ex ante examinations of a public utility's market power as well as enforceable ex post reporting.46 According to AMP/APPA, however, Order No. 831 never requires RTOs/ISOs or Market Monitors to ensure that the market-clearing LMPs resulting from a seller's offer exceeding $1,000/MWh are actually cost-based. AMP/APPA assert that permitting verification based on expected costs does not meet the ex post reporting requirement that would allow the Commission to determine whether these expected costs and resulting market-clearing prices are just and reasonable. AMP/APPA therefore conclude that Order No. 831 is unlawful because the Commission cannot rely on market forces to regulate rates in lieu of imposing reporting requirements on generators.47

    45Id. at 8 (citing PSEG Energy Res. & Trade LLC v. FERC, 665 F.3d 203, 208 (D.C. Cir. 2011); Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass'n, 463 U.S. at 43; FCC v. Fox Television Stations, 556 U.S. 502, 515 (2009)).

    46Id. at 5 (citing California ex rel. Lockyer v. FERC, 383 F.3d 1006, 1013-14 (9th Cir. 2004)).

    47Id. at 6-8 (citing Blumenthal v. FERC, 552 F.3d 875, 882-83 (D.C. Cir. 2009); FPC v. Texaco, 417 U.S. 380, 399 (1974)).

    ii. Determination

    27. We deny AMP/APPA's request for rehearing and alternative proposal regarding market power concerns and the use of expected costs. We disagree with AMP/APPA that incremental energy offers above $1,000/MWh based on expected costs present market power concerns; the verification requirement in Order No. 831 was specifically designed to address market power concerns and ensure that all incremental energy offers above $1,000/MWh are indeed cost-based. Pursuant to the verification requirement, resources may only submit incremental energy offers above $1,000/MWh if they are cost-based, and the RTO/ISO or Market Monitoring Unit must verify that any such offer reasonably reflects that resource's actual or expected short-run marginal costs. Incremental energy offers above $1,000/MWh may not be used to calculate LMPs if such offers cannot be verified by the RTO/ISO or Market Monitoring Unit prior to the market clearing process. In Order No. 831, the Commission specifically found that “the verification requirement reasonably addresses market power concerns associated with incremental energy offers above $1,000/MWh because such offers will be required to be cost-based, which should deter attempts by resources to exercise market power.” 48 The verification requirement in Order No. 831 is therefore designed to prevent the concerns AMP/APPA raise about resources including “inflated” or “exaggerated” expected costs in cost-based incremental energy offers above $1,000/MWh.

    48See Order No. 831, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,387 at P 144.

    28. We reject as unsupported AMP/APPA's claim that the Final Rule did not address concerns about market power in the natural gas market. The excerpts from the PJM Market Monitor's and ISO-NE Market Monitor's comments that AMP/APPA included in its request for rehearing expressed general concern about removing a hard cap in energy markets given potential concerns about market power in natural gas markets. However, Order No. 831 did not remove a hard cap in energy markets—it adopted a $2,000/MWh hard cap. As discussed above, we balanced several considerations in adopting a $2,000/MWh but the fact that a hard cap continues to remain in place addresses the comments AMP/APPA cites, to the extent there is market power in the natural gas markets. Additionally, the excerpt from the ISO-NE Market Monitor's comments cited by AMP/APPA discusses the relationship between natural gas markets and energy markets and expresses general concerns about limited transparency into the competitive conditions in natural gas spot markets. Again, the $2,000/MWh hard cap addresses this concern as it recognizes that the verification process required by Order No. 831 may be less effective during extreme conditions in the natural gas market.49

    49See id. P 87.

    29. We deny AMP/APPA's request for rehearing regarding market-based rates because Order No. 831 does not depart from Commission precedent, and the Commission's action was not arbitrary and capricious. Contrary to AMP/APPA's claims, a market participant with market-based rate authority that submits a cost-based incremental offer above $1,000/MWh for a resource would continue to be subject to the existing reporting and other requirements that are imposed on entities with market-based rate authority,50 consistent with the precedent cited by AMP/APPA. Further, contrary to AMP/APPA's assertions, the verification process specifically requires that the RTO/ISO or Market Monitoring Unit ensure that incremental energy offers are in fact cost-based, meaning that the offer must reasonably reflect that resource's actual or expected short-run marginal costs.51 As discussed above, the record demonstrates that it is appropriate to use expected costs in the verification of cost-based incremental energy offers because when actual costs are not known, a resource offer based on expected short-run marginal cost constitutes a competitive offer.52 In Order No. 831, the Commission stated that “[a] cost-based incremental energy offer is based on the associated resource's short-run marginal cost, which constitutes a competitive offer free from the exercise of market power.” 53 Therefore, the use of expected costs in the verification process does in fact allow the Commission to determine whether the resulting market clearing prices would be just and reasonable.

    50 For example, entities with market-based rate authority must file Electric Quarterly Reports with the Commission, consistent with Order Nos. 2001 and 768. Revised Public Utility Filing Requirements, Order No. 2001, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,127, reh'g denied, Order No. 2001-A, 100 FERC ¶ 61,074, reh'g denied, Order No. 2001-B, 100 FERC ¶ 61,342, order directing filing, Order No. 2001-C, 101 FERC ¶ 61,314 (2002), order directing filing, Order No. 2001-D, 102 FERC ¶ 61,334, order refining filing requirements, Order No. 2001-E, 105 FERC ¶ 61,352 (2003), order on clarification, Order No. 2001-F, 106 FERC ¶ 61,060 (2004), order revising filing requirements, Order No. 2001-G, 120 FERC ¶ 61,270, order on reh'g and clarification, Order No. 2001-H, 121 FERC ¶ 61,289 (2007), order revising filing requirements, Order No. 2001-I, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,282 (2008); Elec. Mkt. Transparency Provisions of Section 220 of the Fed. Power Act, Order No. 768, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,336 (2012), order on reh'g, Order No. 768-A, 143 FERC ¶ 61,054 (2013). They must also timely report to the Commission any change in status that would reflect a departure from the characteristics the Commission relied upon in granting their market-based rate authority. 18 CFR 35.42 (2017).

    51See Order No. 831, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,387 at P 140 (“[A]n RTO/ISO or a Market Monitoring Unit must verify that cost-based incremental energy offers above $1,000/MWh reasonably reflect a resource's actual or expected costs.”).

    52See supra P 22.

    53 Order No. 831, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,387 at P 83.

    2. Verification of Imports a. Request for Rehearing

    30. TAPS seeks rehearing of Order No. 831's exemption of all imports from the verification requirement for incremental energy offers above $1,000/MWh and asserts that it is unjust and unreasonable and arbitrary, and that it puts internal and external resources on unequal footing.54 According to TAPS, the Commission's finding that some imports are not resource-specific and therefore cannot have their costs verified does not support exempting all imports from the verification requirement. Therefore, TAPS proposes that only resource-specific imports whose costs are verified by the receiving RTO/ISO should be able to set LMP, while other imports with offers above $1,000/MWh that are not verified should receive uplift payments if their costs are verified after-the-fact. TAPS further argues that failing to verify the costs of imports presents a greater opportunity and incentive for generators to exercise market power. TAPS presents a hypothetical example of a market participant that owns generators both inside and outside of an RTO/ISO and asserts that such a market participant could use its external generators to make import offers above $1,000/MWh that its internal generators would not be permitted to make. TAPS states that, if the market participant's external resource sets the LMP in the RTO/ISO (i.e., as an import), all of that market participant's internal resources would receive infra-marginal rents. According to TAPS, such behavior would be difficult to monitor because Order No. 831 does not require cost information from external resources. TAPS therefore argues that, on rehearing, the Commission should prevent import offers above $1,000/MWh from setting LMP in the importing RTO/ISO unless the import offer costs are verified in advance, and that the Commission should only permit uplift payments to imports that have been cost-verified after-the-fact.55

    54 TAPS Request for Clarification/Rehearing at 12-15.

    55Id. at 12-16.

    b. Determination

    31. We deny TAPS' request for rehearing regarding the treatment of imports. In Order No. 831, the Commission found that exempting incremental energy offers from imports above $1,000/MWh from the verification requirement was justified because imports are not similarly situated to internal resources.56 Because they are not similarly situated, it was not arbitrary or capricious to treat import offers from external resources differently than offers from internal resources. Specifically, the Commission found that internal resources and imports are not similarly situated because, based on the record,57 it may be impossible to identify the costs underlying an import offer because they are not resource-specific. Further, Order No. 831 remains consistent with current market power mitigation measures in RTOs/ISOs that generally apply to internal resources but not to imports.

    56 Order No. 831, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,387 at P 195.

    57See, e.g., id. PP 180, 183, 185.

    32. With respect to TAPS' proposed alternative which would prevent import offers above $1,000/MWh from setting LMP if the costs cannot be verified, we reject it because, as supported in the record,58 we continue to find that such a prohibition could discourage imports at times when they are most needed to provide additional supply and increased competition.59 Further, as the Commission explained in Order No. 831, such a prohibition could also result in uneconomic flows between RTOs/ISOs.60

    58See, e.g., id. PP 179, 181, 188-189.

    59Id. P 193.

    60Id. P 194.

    33. In Order No. 831, the Commission also considered market power concerns similar to those raised by TAPS in its rehearing request, but did not find that they warranted requiring cost-verification for import offers above $1,000/MWh. The Commission explained that because “market participants can import energy from adjacent markets and sell that energy in the RTO/ISO energy market . . . it is difficult for external resources in an adjacent market to withhold.” 61 The hypothetical example TAPS presents in its request for rehearing does not persuade us otherwise. First, and as the Commission explained in Order No. 831, it is unlikely that a resource-specific import transaction can successfully withhold energy from the destination market because any resource-specific import transaction is also competing against an import transaction that simply buys from the export market at the prevailing export market price. Second, the import offer in that example would only benefit a market participant that owns a fleet of internal and external generation (which is online and being compensated at the LMP in TAPS' hypothetical example) if the import offer actually cleared the importing RTO/ISO's energy market. However, such an import offer would only clear this market at a price above $1,000/MWh if it were below the verified cost-based incremental energy offers of other internal resources and below other import offers. Thus, such an import would be beneficial to the importing RTO/ISO market as it would lower the clearing price compared to a situation without it. Therefore, TAPS' example demonstrates that imports can lower an importing RTO/ISO's LMP, which supports the Commission's rationale for allowing import offers above $1,000/MWh to set LMP.62 For these additional reasons, we find that the regulations regarding the treatment of imports in Order No. 831 are just and reasonable and not arbitrary and capricious and reject TAPS' proposal to prevent import offers above $1,000/MWh from setting LMP in the importing RTO/ISO unless the import offer's costs have been verified. For similar reasons, we deny TAPS' proposal regarding uplift payments to imports. Finally, we note that in Order No. 831, the Commission stated it would consider RTO/ISO proposals under FPA section 205 to verify or otherwise review the costs of imports or exports and/or develop additional mitigation provisions for import and export transactions with offers above $1,000/MWh.63

    61Id. P 196.

    62 Order No. 831 does not apply to emergency purchases, such as emergency import purchases. See id. P 198.

    63Id. P 197.

    C. Costs Included in Cost-Based Incremental Energy Offers 1. Requests for Rehearing/Clarification

    34. Exelon requests clarification, and alternatively rehearing, that the Commission did not intend to exclude any particular categories of variable costs, particularly those not tied to the price of the commodity associated with the resource's fuel supply. Exelon asserts that a resource's cost-based incremental energy offer is comprised not only of those costs linked to the price of fuel, but also of other variable costs, including but not limited to balancing costs and transportation costs. Exelon states that if the Commission does not grant its requested clarification, then it seeks rehearing on the basis that exclusion of other variable costs from cost-based incremental energy offers would lead to an unjust and unreasonable result.64

    64 Exelon Request for Clarification/Rehearing at 4-6, 7-8 (citing Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass'n, 463 U.S. at 43; NorAm Gas Transmission Co. v. FERC, 148 F.3d 1158, 1165 (D.C. Cir. 1998); PPL Wallingford Energy LLC v. FERC, 419 F.3d 1194, 1198 (D.C. Cir. 2005)).

    35. TAPS requests clarification, and alternatively rehearing, regarding whether opportunity costs may be recovered in addition to the $100/MWh adder.65 TAPS asserts that in Order No. 831, the Commission did not respond to the arguments it raised in response to the NOPR, did not explicitly state whether the $100/MWh adder includes opportunity costs, and did not state whether RTOs/ISOs can allow opportunity costs when developing their verification methodologies. TAPS asks the Commission to clarify that if an RTO/ISO allows adders, the maximum total amount of such adders, including both opportunity costs and any other difficult-to-quantify costs, cannot exceed $100/MWh. TAPS asserts that, if the Commission intended to permit RTOs/ISOs to propose verification methodologies that allow for the recovery of opportunity costs in addition to the $100/MWh adder, the Commission should grant rehearing because opportunity costs should not be allowed under the “extreme” price levels at issue in this proceeding.66

    65 TAPS Request for Clarification/Rehearing at 2 (citing Canadian Ass'n of Petroleum Producers, 254 F.3d 289).

    66Id. at 16-18 (citing PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., 126 FERC ¶ 61,145, at P 28 n.34 (2009) (“The opportunity cost associated with providing `must run' output is the value associated with the lost opportunity to produce energy during a higher valued time period within the year.”)).

    36. NYISO requests that the Commission clarify that, when calculating uplift payments for the recovery of verified costs, only actual, documented out-of-pocket costs should be paid after-the-fact and that no risk-related adders or opportunity costs be allowed when cost information is not submitted in a sufficiently timely manner to permit review and verification. NYISO states that it is concerned that the submission of legitimate, verifiable costs that exceed the $1,000/MWh offer cap close in time to the day-ahead or real-time market close could deny NYISO sufficient time to perform cost verification. NYISO states that this could cause the resource's offer to be mitigated to a level that does not include the unverified, additional costs and could cause the resource to be committed when it would not have otherwise been or receive a larger schedule than it otherwise would have. NYISO asserts that its requested clarification would ensure all resources have an incentive to submit timely information to the RTO/ISO.67

    67 NYISO Request for Clarification/Rehearing at 15-16.

    2. Determination

    37. We deny Exelon's request for clarification, and alternatively rehearing, regarding whether the verification requirement intended to exclude particular categories of actual or expected costs, particularly variable costs that are non-fuel related costs. In Order No. 831, the Commission neither required RTOs/ISOs to change the methodologies they currently use to develop cost-based offers in order to satisfy the verification requirement nor prescribed the specific types of short-run marginal costs that could be included in cost-based incremental energy offers above $1,000/MWh. We do not prejudge what types of costs RTOs/ISOs may propose as part of their compliance filings.

    38. We deny TAPS' request for clarification, and alternatively rehearing, regarding whether the $100/MWh limit on adders applies to opportunity costs. Opportunity costs are legitimate short-run marginal costs and not adders above cost. Cost-based incremental energy offers based on opportunity costs may currently set LMP in many RTOs/ISOs. Given that, in Order No. 831, the Commission did not require RTOs/ISOs to change the specific costs that they permit resources to include in cost-based incremental energy offers, resources in RTOs/ISOs that permit the use of opportunity costs in this manner may continue to do so after implementing Order No. 831. Because opportunity costs should be considered part of a cost-based incremental energy offer, whether or not the offer exceeds $1,000/MWh, verifiable opportunity costs should not be subject to the $100/MWh limit on adders above cost. We do not prejudge the validity of including verifiable opportunity costs in cost-based incremental offers above $1,000/MWh or the verification methods of such costs that RTOs/ISOs may propose as part of their compliance filings. We also reject TAPS' argument that the Commission failed to meaningfully address its arguments stating that opportunity costs should not be permitted at the “extreme” prices contemplated in this rulemaking.68 As stated above, in a rulemaking, the Commission need not respond to every comment or analyze every alternative.69 As explained here, opportunity costs are legitimate short-run marginal costs that should be considered part of a cost-based incremental energy offer, regardless of whether that offer exceeds $1,000/MWh. Some current RTO/ISO practices permit cost-based incremental energy offers based on opportunity costs to set LMP, and the Commission in Order No. 831 did not require RTOs/ISOs to change which costs they may include in cost-based incremental energy offers. Therefore, TAPS' comments would not have resulted in a change in the rule.

    68 TAPS Request for Clarification/Rehearing at 17-18.

    69See supra P 12 (citing American Min. Congress, 907 F.2d at 1187-88; (citing Thompson, 741 F.2d at 408; ACLU, 823 F.2d at 1581)).

    39. We grant NYISO's request for clarification regarding the calculation of uplift payments. Resources are only eligible to receive uplift payments to make them whole to, at most, their submitted cost-based incremental energy offers if the associated offer and cost information is submitted in a sufficiently timely manner and verified by the RTO/ISO, meaning offers and supporting information must be provided consistent with RTO/ISO offer submission guidelines and approved by the RTO/ISO or Market Monitoring Unit. Consistent with Order No. 831, the after-the-fact uplift payment that a resource would be eligible to receive if its cost-based incremental energy offer above $1,000/MWh is not verified prior to market clearing shall include only actual verifiable costs. We agree with NYISO that opportunity costs, like other costs, must be submitted in a timely manner. However, we clarify that if a resource avails itself of an RTO's/ISO's current rules to allow a resource to include opportunity costs in its cost-based incremental energy offer, then that RTO/ISO must give that resource an opportunity to recover those opportunity costs through an uplift payment, subject to verification. We further clarify that a resource may not receive uplift payments for incremental energy costs in excess of the costs included in its verified incremental energy offer. That is, a resource may not submit a cost-based incremental energy offer based on expected costs prior to the market clearing process and subsequently receive uplift payments to make it whole to an offer above the $/MWh level(s) of its offer(s).70 In this instance, allowing a resource to receive uplift in excess of its verified cost-based incremental energy offer could give that resource the incentive to submit offers that do not reflect its actual short-run marginal costs and could thus result in inefficient resource selection.

    70 For example, a resource may not submit a $2,300/MWh offer based on expected short-run marginal cost that is verified and clears the market and receive uplift associated with incremental energy costs above $2,300/MWh, even if that resource's actual short-run marginal cost, based on an after-the-fact review, is $2,500/MWh.

    40. Further, such after-the-fact uplift payments may not include any adders above cost, including risk related adders, because actual costs are known after-the-fact.71 This finding is consistent with Commission precedent regarding PJM's requests for waivers of certain tariff provisions related to its offer cap.72

    71 Order No. 831, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,387 at P 146.

    72 In the 2015 PJM offer cap order, the Commission found that “the 10 percent adder [above costs] is unjust and unreasonable as applied to ex post review of documented costs, because the cost [sic] are no longer uncertain.” See PJM Interconnection L.L.C., 153 FERC ¶ 61,289, at P 31 (2015). See also PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., 149 FERC ¶ 61,059, at P 13 (2014).

    III. Information Collection Statement

    41. The Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 73 requires each federal agency to seek and obtain Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval before undertaking a collection of information directed to ten or more persons or contained in a rule of general applicability. OMB's regulations,74 in turn, require approval of certain information collection requirements imposed by agency rules.

    73 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.

    74 5 CFR 1320 (2017).

    42. The Commission is amending its regulations to clarify what the Commission already required in Order No. 831—that either actual or expected costs included in incremental energy offers above $1,000/MWh may be submitted for verification. The Commission estimates that there will be no net change to burden.

    43. Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting requirements by contacting: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426 [Attention: Ellen Brown, Office of the Executive Director, email: [email protected], phone: (202) 502-8663, fax: (202) 273-0873]. Comments concerning the requirements of this rule may also be sent to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503 [Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission]. For security reasons, comments should be sent by email to OMB at [email protected] Comments submitted to OMB should refer to FERC-516C and OMB Control Number 1902-0287.

    IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

    44. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) 75 generally requires a description and analysis of rules that will have significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The RFA does not mandate any particular outcome in a rulemaking. It only requires consideration of alternatives that are less burdensome to small entities and an agency explanation of why alternatives were rejected. The Commission has determined that there will not be a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities, therefore these requirements under the RFA do not apply.

    75 5 U.S.C. 601-12.

    V. Document Availability

    45. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the Internet through FERC's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) and in FERC's Public Reference Room during normal business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington DC 20426.

    46. From FERC's Home Page on the Internet, this information is available on eLibrary. The full text of this document is available on eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing, printing, and/or downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type the docket number excluding the last three digits of this document in the docket number field.

    47. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the FERC's Web site during normal business hours from FERC Online Support at 202-502-6652 (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or email at [email protected], or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502-8371, TTY (202)502-8659. Email the Public Reference Room at [email protected]

    VI. Effective Date

    48. These regulations are effective January 16, 2018.

    List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 35

    Electric power rates, Electric utilities, Non-discriminatory open access transmission tariffs.

    By the Commission.

    Issued: November 9, 2017. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    Regulatory Text

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission amends part 35, chapter I, title 18, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:

    PART 35—FILING OF RATE SCHEDULES AND TARIFFS 1. The authority citation for part 35 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 791a-825r, 2601-2645; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 42 U.S.C. 7101-7352.

    2. Revise § 35.28(g)(9) to read as follows:
    § 35.28 Non-discriminatory open access transmission tariff.

    (g) * * *

    (9) A resource's incremental energy offer must be capped at the higher of $1,000/MWh or that resource's cost-based incremental energy offer. For the purpose of calculating Locational Marginal Prices, Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent System Operators must cap cost-based incremental energy offers at $2,000/MWh. The actual or expected costs underlying a resource's cost-based incremental energy offer above $1,000/MWh must be verified before that offer can be used for purposes of calculating Locational Marginal Prices. If a resource submits an incremental energy offer above $1,000/MWh and the actual or expected costs underlying that offer cannot be verified before the market clearing process begins, that offer may not be used to calculate Locational Marginal Prices and the resource would be eligible for a make-whole payment if that resource is dispatched and the resource's actual costs are verified after-the-fact. A resource would also be eligible for a make-whole payment if it is dispatched and its verified cost-based incremental energy offer exceeds $2,000/MWh. All resources, regardless of type, are eligible to submit cost-based incremental energy offers in excess of $1,000/MWh.

    [FR Doc. 2017-24803 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement 30 CFR Part 917 [KY-254-FOR; OSM-2011-0005; S1D1SSS08011000SX064A000189S180110; S2D2SSS08011000SX066A00018XS501520] Kentucky Regulatory Program AGENCY:

    Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE), Interior.

    ACTION:

    Final rule; approval of amendment.

    SUMMARY:

    We are approving an amendment to the Kentucky regulatory program (hereinafter, the “Kentucky program”) under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA or the Act). Kentucky submitted a proposed amendment to OSMRE that includes revisions to the Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) as authorized by House Bill 385 (HB 385), regarding bonding of surface coal mining and reclamation operations.

    DATES:

    The effective date is December 18, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Robert Evans, Telephone: (859) 260-3900. Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background on the Kentucky Program II. Description of the Amendment III. OSMRE's Findings IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments V. OSMRE's Decision VI. Procedural Determinations I. Background on the Kentucky Program

    Section 503(a) of the Act permits a State to assume primacy for the regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations on non-Federal and non-Indian lands within its borders by demonstrating that its program includes, among other things, State laws and regulations that govern surface coal mining and reclamation operations in accordance with the Act and consistent with the Federal regulations. See 30 U.S.C. 1253(a)(1) and (7). On the basis of these criteria, the Secretary of the Interior conditionally approved the Kentucky program on May 18, 1982. You can find background information on the Kentucky program, including the Secretary's findings, the disposition of comments, and conditions of approval of the Kentucky program in the May 18, 1982, Federal Register (47 FR 21404, 21434). You can also find later actions concerning Kentucky's program and program amendments at 30 CFR 917.11, 917.12, 917.13, 917.15, 917.16, and 917.17.

    II. Description of the Proposed Amendment

    On May 10, 2011, Kentucky submitted an amendment to OSMRE for approval that proposed bonding revisions to the KRS as authorized by HB 385, which passed during the State's regular 2011 legislative session. HB 385 was passed in response to OSMRE's findings in its January 5, 2011, National Priority Oversight Evaluation of the Adequacy of Kentucky Reclamation Performance Bond Amounts (National Oversight Study) report. In that report, OSMRE oversight and programmatic reviews identified that current reclamation performance bonds in Kentucky are not sufficient to complete the reclamation required in approved permits. On February 3, 2011, the Kentucky Department for Natural Resources (KYDNR) and OSMRE signed an Action Plan detailing the steps necessary for correcting identified bond calculation deficiencies. The Action Plan required KYDNR to complete revised bonding protocols by April 1, 2011, along with a timetable for implementation for new and existing permits. HB 385 amends Kentucky Revised Statutes 350.060 to provide that:

    Within thirty (30) days of a cabinet determination of a need to change a bond protocol currently in use, the cabinet shall immediately promulgate administrative regulations setting forth bonding requirements including, but not limited to, requirements for the amount, duration, release, and forfeiture of bonds. Bond protocols shall not be exempt from KRS 13A.100 and shall be established by promulgating administrative regulations under KRS Chapter 13A. Failure to include the formula for establishing the amount of the bond in any administrative regulation on bonding requirements shall be deemed a failure to comply with the prescriptions of this section and the administrative regulation shall automatically be declared deficient in accordance with KRS Chapter 13A.

    We announced receipt of the amendment and asked for comments in a Federal Register notice published on August 15, 2011 (76 FR 50436). In the same document, we opened the public comment period and provided an opportunity for a public hearing or meeting. We did not hold a public hearing or meeting because no one requested one. The public comment period ended on September 14, 2011. We received comments from two organizations.

    III. OSMRE's Findings

    The following are the findings we made concerning Kentucky's proposed amendment under SMCRA at Section 509, 30 U.S.C. 1259 and the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 800.14 and 800.15.

    KRS 350.060 (11) Processing Permit Applications

    The new language in KRS 350.060 (11) is intended to ensure that bond protocol regulations include the formula for establishing the amount of the bond. Failure to do so would result in any administrative regulations or bonding requirements to be declared deficient automatically, in accordance with KRS Chapter 13A.

    While these proposed State revisions have no direct Federal counterparts there is no provision in SMCRA or its implementing regulations that prohibits a State from requiring its bond protocols to be implemented solely as regulations. On their face, the proposed revisions are not inconsistent with Section 509 of SMCRA and 30 CFR 800.14, and we are therefore approving them, as noted below.

    While HB 385 could be construed to require the KYDNR to implement all bond adjustments as regulations before the adjustments can be made, to do so would be inconsistent with the literal construction of the language of the bill. Therefore, we do not construe HB 385 to apply to individual bonding adjustments, or other individual bonding decisions.

    Rather, we are approving the proposed amendment, in accordance with its plain language, which will not impede implementation of the requirement in Section 509 of SMCRA that “[t]he amount of the bond shall be sufficient to assure the completion of the reclamation plan if the work had to be performed by the regulatory authority in the event of forfeiture.” Nor will the proposed amendment impede the obligation of the regulatory authority to adjust the amount of bond in accordance with 30 CFR 800.15. Should we find, however, during oversight, that the amendment is being interpreted in a manner that would render it inconsistent with either Section 509 of SMCRA or 30 CFR 800.15 we will initiate proceedings under 30 CFR 730.11(a), to publish a notice in the Federal Register setting forth the text or a summary of that provision and provide 30 days' notice for public comment. Following the public comment period, a final determination will be made and published in the Federal Register.

    Further, we are approving the proposed amendment because, in accordance with its plain language, it will not impede the regulatory authority's ability to address the current bond deficiencies identified in the National Oversight Study and the February 3, 2011, Action Plan detailing the steps necessary for correcting bond calculation deficiencies that were identified in the study. Specifically, OSMRE expects the KYDNR to ensure the adequacy of bonds on all currently issued permits through the adjustment process, and all permits issued pending the formal revision to any existing bonding protocol. Should we find, however, during oversight, that the amendment is being implemented in a manner that would impede the regulatory authority's ability to address current bond deficiencies, we will initiate proceedings under 30 CFR 730.11(a), as appropriate, to have the provisions of the amendment set forth and set aside.

    Finally, we are approving the amendment with the understanding that it would not apply to bond protocols or bonding regulations in existence as of the date that HB 385 became effective. Should we find, however, during oversight, that the amendment is being interpreted in a manner that would render it applicable to bond protocols or regulations in existence as of the date that the amendment became effective, we will initiate proceedings under 30 CFR 730.11(a) to publish a notice in the Federal Register setting forth the text or a summary of that provision and provide 30 days' notice for public comment. Following the public comment period, a final determination will be made and published in the Federal Register.

    IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments Public Comments

    We asked for public comments on the amendment and received responses from Coal Operators & Associates, Inc. (COA) and Kentucky Resources Council (KRC).

    1. COA stated that the language of our August 15, 2011, Federal Register Notice (76 FR 50436) was somewhat misleading, insofar as it would lead one to believe that HB 385 addresses individual bond amounts. To the contrary, according to COA, HB 385 pertains to “bond protocols” and “bonding requirements,” not “a bond amount.” The plural nature of the phrases as well as common usage of the words “protocols” and “requirements” accurately reflect the fact that HB 385 addresses the overall scheme or template that will be used to establish bond amounts and the “formula” to be used.

    Response—OSMRE has interpreted HB 385 to apply to bond protocols and bond formulas and not individual bond amounts. OSMRE's approval of the proposed amendment reflects its understanding that it addresses these protocols and bond formulas used to determine bond amounts and that Kentucky will require all surface coal mining and reclamation permit applications to post a bond amount sufficient to meet the requirement in Section 509 of SMCRA that “[t]he amount of the bond shall be sufficient to assure the completion of the reclamation plan if the work had to be performed by the regulatory authority in the event of forfeiture.”

    2. COA stated that the intent of HB 385 is to prevent Kentucky from arbitrarily changing bond protocols, requirements or formulae without adequate transparency and public comment.

    Response—We believe that our approval of this amendment, with the limitations as set forth in the Findings above, will not diminish any requirements of the Kentucky program regarding the ability of the public to comment on regulations regarding bonding.

    3. According to COA, the purpose of HB 385 is to insure that the Energy and Environment Cabinet (EEC) follows the statutory mandates that have existed since the inception of the Kentucky Permanent Regulatory Program. To accomplish that, HB 385 provides for statutory declarations of deficiency if the bonding formula is not promulgated as a KRS Ch. 13A regulation.

    Response—While we agree that HB 385 provides for statutory declaration of deficiency in the event bonding formulas are not promulgated as regulation, the basis of our decision is based on the understanding that bond adjustments for specific surface coal mining operations are not required to be promulgated as regulations.

    4. The COA stated that the KRS Ch. 13A Administrative Regulation process is one based upon public input, comment and review. Briefly, proposed regulations are not only published in the Administrative Register of Kentucky, but, EEC provides electronic notification to any interested citizen or stakeholder. Oral testimonies at public hearings, written comments that are submitted, as well as testimonies before the Administrative Regulation Review Sub-committee and the appropriate House and Senate Committees provide interested parties adequate notice and input on proposed regulations.

    Response—This is not an issue before OSMRE in its consideration or review of Kentucky's proposed amendment on bonding protocols.

    5. COA explained that some concern has been expressed about the length of time it takes under KRS Ch. 13A to adopt new, ordinary regulations. The Governor of the Commonwealth can issue an emergency regulation which becomes effective upon his signature. (KRS 13A.170 and 190). The ordinary regulation is filed simultaneously and proceeds through the mandatory process. Concurrently, the emergency regulation is in effect.

    Response—OSMRE agrees that the Kentucky Governor can, under appropriate circumstances, issue emergency regulations.

    6. KRC stated its belief that HB 385 was sought by the Kentucky coal industry as a mechanism for delaying the adoption of changes in the bonding calculations and amounts.

    Response—As stated previously, OSMRE's approval of the proposed amendment is based on its conclusion that it applies to bond protocols and formulas, and does not require bond adjustments for specific surface coal mining operations to be promulgated as regulations.

    7. KRC asserted that HB 385 was enacted at a time when Kentucky was in default of its ongoing, enforceable obligation under 30 CFR 733.11 to “implement, administer, enforce and maintain it in accordance with the Act, this chapter and the provisions of the approved State program.” More specifically, Kentucky was, and is, in continuing violation of mandatory obligations outlined in 30 CFR 800.4. KRC also believes that absent a commitment from Kentucky to resolve the bond amount issue, they are in default as required by 30 CFR 733.11. Therefore, KRC urged OSMRE to take steps to promptly remove State regulation approval with respect to bond calculation and adjustment for new and existing permits, and to substitute direct Federal enforcement of the requirements of 30 U.S.C. 1259, unless Kentucky revises the bond calculation protocols to assure adequate bond amounts for new and existing permits, and commits to incorporate those revisions into emergency regulation.

    Response—This comment, which requests that we take action pursuant to 30 CFR part 733 is beyond the scope of this rulemaking.

    8. KRC does not oppose the amendments on their face, since SMCRA is silent as to whether bond calculation methodologies must be implemented in regulatory form, and since requiring these methodologies to be promulgated as regulations will require OSMRE approval and public opportunity to comment. However, KRC states that OSMRE should request that the State clarify that it interprets the amendment to apply to bond calculation formulae and not to individual bond calculation decisions, or revisions thereto.

    Response—As noted in the Findings, above, OSMRE is approving this proposed amendment based on the plain language of the amendment and OSMRE's conclusion that the amendment does not apply to bond calculations for individual permits.

    9. Next, KRC stated that OSMRE should require the State to clarify that the provision declaring deficient any bond calculation formula that is not promulgated as a regulation applies only to changes in such protocols, and not to existing protocols. KRC further stated that clarification should also be sought as to the State's interpretation of the last sentence of the amendment, since, read broadly; it could affect existing, approved bonding regulations that are a necessary component of the state regulatory program.

    Response—As noted above, we are approving the amendment based on our understanding that the proposed amendment would not apply to bond protocols or bonding regulations in existence on the date that HB 385 became effective. Further, approval of this proposed amendment will not affect existing, approved bonding regulations that are a necessary component of the State regulatory program. If OSMRE finds that the promulgation of regulations impedes the implementation of the bond sufficiency requirement, OSMRE will notify Kentucky that the approval of the amendment will be revoked. If this occurs, the State will not be permitted to amend bond protocols via regulation.

    Federal Agency Comments

    Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i) and Section 503(b) of SMCRA, on August 15, 2011, we requested comments on the amendments from various Federal agencies with an actual or potential interest in the Kentucky program (Administrative Record No. KY-1665). No comments were received.

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Concurrence and Comments

    Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii), we are required to get a written concurrence from EPA for those provisions of the program amendment that relate to air or water quality standards issued under the authority of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.). None of the revisions that Kentucky proposed to make in this amendment pertains to air or water quality standards. Therefore, we did not ask EPA to concur on the amendment.

    V. OSMRE's Decision

    Based on our findings, OSMRE approves the amendment Kentucky sent to us on May 10, 2011, revising the Kentucky Revised Statues (KRS) as authorized by HB 385 regarding bonding of surface coal mining and reclamation operations.

    To implement this decision, we are amending the Federal regulations at 30 CFR part 917 which codify decisions concerning the Kentucky program. In accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act, this rule will take effect 30 days after date of publication. Section 503(a) of SMCRA requires that the State's program demonstrate that the State has the capability of carrying out the provisions of the Act and meeting its purposes. SMCRA requires consistency of State and Federal standards.

    VI. Procedural Determinations Executive Order 12630—Takings

    This rule does not have takings implications. This determination is based on the analysis performed for the counterpart Federal regulation.

    Executive Order 12866—Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is exempted from review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under Executive Order 12866.

    Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice Reform

    The Department of the Interior has conducted the reviews required by Section 3 of Executive Order 12988 and has determined that this rule meets the applicable standards of Subsections (a) and (b) of that section. However, these standards are not applicable to the actual language of State regulatory programs and program amendments because each program is drafted and promulgated by a specific State, not by OSMRE. Under Sections 503 and 505 of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1253 and 1255) and the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(10), decisions on proposed State regulatory programs and program amendments submitted by the States must be based solely on a determination of whether the submittal is consistent with SMCRA and its implementing Federal regulations and whether the other requirements of 30 CFR parts 730, 731, and 732 have been met.

    Executive Order 13132—Federalism

    This rule does not have Federalism implications. SMCRA delineates the roles of the Federal and State governments with regard to the regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations. One of the purposes of SMCRA is to “establish a nationwide program to protect society and the environment from the adverse effects of surface coal mining operations.” Section 503(a)(1) of SMCRA requires that State laws regulating surface coal mining and reclamation operations be “in accordance with” the requirements of SMCRA, and Section 503(a)(7) requires that State programs contain rules and regulations “consistent with” regulations issued by the Secretary pursuant to SMCRA.

    Executive Order 13175—Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Government

    In accordance with Executive Order 13175, we have evaluated the potential effects of this rule on Federally recognized Indian tribes and have determined that the rule does not have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. The basis for this determination is that our decision is on a State Regulatory program and does not involve a Federal Regulation involving Indian Lands.

    Executive Order 13211—Regulations That Significantly Affect the Supply, Distribution, or Use of Energy

    Executive Order 13211 of May 18, 2001, requires agencies to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for a rule that is (1) considered significant under Executive Order 12866, and (2) likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Because this rule is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866 and is not expected to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy, a Statement of Energy Effects is not required.

    National Environmental Policy Act

    This rule does not require an environmental impact statement because Section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1292(d)) provides that agency decisions on proposed State regulatory program provisions do not constitute major Federal actions within the meaning of Section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)).

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule does not contain information collection requirements that require approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3507 et seq.).

    Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Department of the Interior certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The State submittal, which is the subject of this rule, is based upon counterpart Federal regulations for which an economic analysis was prepared and certification made that such regulations would not have a significant economic effect upon a substantial number of small entities. In making the determination as to whether this rule would have a significant economic impact, the Department relied upon data and assumptions for the counterpart Federal regulations.

    Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This rule: (a) Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million; (b) will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions; and (c) does not have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises. This determination is based upon the fact that the Kentucky submittal, which is the subject of this rule, is based upon counterpart Federal regulations for which an analysis was prepared and a determination made that the Federal regulation was not considered a major rule.

    Unfunded Mandates

    This rule will not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector of $100 million or more in any given year. This determination is based upon the fact that the Kentucky submittal, which is the subject of this rule, is based upon counterpart Federal regulations for which an analysis was prepared and a determination made that the Federal regulation did not impose an unfunded mandate.

    List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 917

    Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.

    Dated: September 19, 2017. Thomas D. Shope Regional Director, Appalachian Region.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 30 CFR part 917 is amended as set forth below:

    PART 917—KENTUCKY 1. The authority citation for part 917 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.

    2. Section 917.15 is amended by adding a new entry to the table in paragraph (a) in chronological order by “Date of final publication” to read as follows:
    917.15 Approval of Kentucky regulatory program amendments.

    (a) * * *

    Original amendment submission date Date of final publication Citation/description *         *         *         *         *         *         * May 10, 2011 November 16, 2017 KRS 350.060(11).
    [FR Doc. 2017-24707 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-05-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 100 [Docket Number USCG-2015-0427] RIN 1625-AA08 Special Local Regulation; Mavericks Surf Competition, Half Moon Bay, CA AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard is revising a special local regulation in the navigable waters of Half Moon Bay, CA, near Pillar Point in support of the Mavericks Surf Competition, an annual invitational surf competition held at the Mavericks Break. This revision is necessary to improve the regulation by making it clearer and to have it better reflect the natural conditions that must be met for this surf competition to take place. This regulation is necessary to provide for the safety of life on the navigable waters immediately prior to, during, and immediately after the surfing competition, which is held only one day between November 1 of each year and March 31 of the following year. This revision temporarily restricts vessel traffic in the vicinity of Pillar Point and prohibits vessels and persons not participating in or directly supporting the surfing event from entering the dedicated surfing area and a designated no-entry area.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective December 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type the docket number USCG-2015-0427 in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions about this rulemaking, call or email Lieutenant Junior Grade Christina Ramirez, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Francisco; telephone (415) 399-2001, email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Table of Abbreviations CFR Code of Federal Regulations DHS Department of Homeland Security FR Federal Register NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking § Section COTP Captain of the Port PATCOM Patrol Commander OCMI Officer in Charge of Marine Inspections NRPM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking U.S.C. United States Code II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Mavericks Surf Competition has grown in popularity within the past several years. Due to the inherent dangers of the competition and the disruption to the normal uses of the waterways in the vicinity of Pillar Point, the Coast Guard issues a Marine Event Permit to the event sponsor. Following the collapse of the Cliffside viewing area in 2011, the Coast Guard became concerned that the loss of shore-side viewing area would result in a larger than expected number of spectator vessels in the vicinity of the event.

    This final rule formalizes the scheme employed during the 2013 and 2014 competitions, which proved to be an effective means of separating competitors from spectators. The two zones and associated regulations contained in this final rule are intended to ensure the safety of competitors from spectator vessels, and enhances the safety of spectator vessels by creating a designated area in which the Coast Guard may direct the movement of such vessels. Because of the dangers posed by the surf conditions during the Mavericks Surf Competition, the special local regulation is necessary to provide for the safety of event participants, spectators, and other vessels transiting the event area. For the safety concerns noted, it is in the public interest to have these regulations in effect during the event.

    On October 15, 2014, the Coast Guard published an interim rule and request for comments in the Federal Register (79 FR 61762) establishing the special local regulation 33 CFR 100.1106. We received no comments during the comment period on the interim rule. Although the event was not held during the 2014-2015 season, the planning process proved to be vital in identifying updates to the rule as proposed here. This final rule finalizes the Interim Rule updates proposed in the Notice of Proposed Rule Making.

    On November 3, 2015 and November 23, 2016, we promulgated temporary final rules for the Mavericks Surf Competition, which was most recently held on February 12, 2016, and subsequently not held in the 2016-2017 season after the sponsoring organization filed for bankruptcy. The temporary rules were needed to incorporate the updates noted in this Final Rule which include: Requiring buoy position maintenance by the event sponsors, expanding the definition of “spectator vessel” to include human powered craft and expanding the definition of “support vessel” to include jet skis. The Coast Guard determined a NPRM was necessary to afford the public the opportunity to comment on the aforementioned updates to the Interim Rule and because the Mavericks Surf Competition would occur before NPRM process was complete. Therefore to meet the event season deadline, a temporary final rule was published in lieu of a final rule. Past competitions have demonstrated the importance of restricting access to the competition area to only vessels in direct support of the competitors. In the Coast Guard's assessment, that temporary final rule provided an effective scheme to incorporate the Interim Rule updates and ensure the safety of life during the Mavericks Surf Competition.

    On January 10, 2017, we published an NPRM titled Special Local Regulation; Mavericks Surf Competition, Half Moon Bay, CA (82 FR 2930). During the comment period which ended on February 9, 2017, three comments were received.

    We are implementing the following changes to the Interim Rule based on comments received as well as lessons learned during the multi-agency planning process. The name of this event has changed over the years based on the sponsoring organization. The Coast Guard is promulgating this rule using the event name “Mavericks Surf Competition” to remove any affiliation with past or future sponsors and to keep the name of the event generic and applicable to any future sponsoring organizations. In addition to initially placing the buoys to outline Zones 1 and 2, this rule expands the event sponsor's designation of responsibility, outlined in the Interim Rule, to include buoy position maintenance throughout the course of the event. The definition of “support vessels” has been updated to specifically include jet skis and to clarify that they must be pre-designated and approved to serve as such for this event by the Officer in Charge of Marine Inspections (OCMI) prior to the competition. Finally, the definition of “spectator vessel” was expanded to specifically include human-powered craft.

    III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    Under 33 CFR 100.35, the Coast Guard District Commander has authority to promulgate certain special local regulations deemed necessary to ensure the safety of life on the navigable waters immediately before, during, and immediately after an approved regatta or marine parade. The Commander of Coast Guard District 11 has delegated to the Captain of the Port (COTP) San Francisco the responsibility of issuing such regulations.

    The Mavericks Surf Competition is a one-day “Big Wave” surfing competition between big wave surfers specifically invited to participate by the event sponsor. The competition only occurs when 15-20 foot waves are sustained for over 24 hours and are combined with mild easterly winds of no more than 5-10 knots. The rock and reef ridges that make up the sea floor of the Pillar Point area, combined with optimal weather conditions, create the large waves for which Mavericks is known. Due to the hazardous waters surrounding Pillar Point at the time of the surfing competition, the Coast Guard is modifying and finalizing the interim rule which establishes a special local regulation in the vicinity of Pillar Point that restricts navigation in the area of the surf competition and in neighboring hazardous areas. This final rule is intended to ensure the safety of competitors by delineating a specific competition area, and to provide for the safety of spectators by imposing operating restrictions on those vessels.

    IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Rule

    As noted above, the Coast Guard received three respondent comments, noting several concerns, to the NPRM published on January 10, 2017. One comment recommends a more stringent specificity of swell conditions on the day of the event to promote the safe operation of vessels in the area. The environmental parameters outlined in this regulation are determining factors which are necessary precursors to optimal conditions for holding the big wave surfing event; conditions which typically are not optimal for vessel operations. In order to mitigate the risk to safe operation of vessels on the day of the surfing event, the Coast Guard promulgated the Interim Rule which defines an operating area for spectator vessels. The operating area provides an area for spectator vessels that is minimally influenced by the breaking surf. The Coast Guard determined that, the introduction of specific swell periodicity as a Coast Guard required condition to hold the competition would unnecessarily limit favorable days in which the surfing event could take place without further mitigating the risk to vessel operations on the day of the event.

    One comment notes the economic determination in the NPRM to be erroneous, as the rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The Coast Guard disagrees with this comment. The amendments within this rule do not unduly restrict spectator vessel traffic within Zone 2, the spectator viewing area. In contrast, the Coast Guard aims to facilitate the safe viewing of this surf competition by establishing and assigning maintenance responsibility of a clearly delineated region for spectators to safely maneuver while viewing the competition.

    One comment recommends defining specific parameters that must be met by support vessels. The Coast Guard finds that mandating specific vessel parameters for “supporting vessels” unduly limits the event sponsor from considering all available assets capable of providing support to the event. Under the current proposal, all vessels proposed by the sponsor as “support vessels” must be vetted and approved for operation, in their capacity, as a “support vessel” prior to the day of the event. The vetting and approval of “support vessels” is conducted as a necessary precursor to the issuance of the annual Marine Event Permit. In this process, it is incumbent upon the event sponsor to propose only vessels necessary and capable of safely providing direct support to event competitors. Each proposed vessel is thoroughly evaluated by the OCMI and assessed in regards to the Coast Guard's ability to safely render assistance if needed on the day of the event. Proposed “support vessels” whose maneuverability, crew manning, or scope of support is found to be insufficient to safely operate within Zone 1, will be limited in the range of their operation in support of the event or denied approval to serve as a supporting vessel entirely, as stipulated in the documentation associated with the annual Marine Event Permit issued to the event sponsor.

    One comment argued that the definition of “spectator vessel” was too vague. The Coast Guard finds that the definition of a “spectator vessel” as “any vessel or person, including human-powered craft, which is not designated by the sponsor as a support vessel” serves to differentiate between conspicuously marked “support vessels” which have previously been vetted and approved by the OCMI as part of the Marine Event Permit approval to provide direct support to the competitors, and all other vessels in the area on the day of the event.

    No changes were made to the rule based upon the received comments; however the Coast Guard recognizes the importance of imposing appropriate controls on vessels attempting to gain access to the area encompassed by Zone 1 on the day of the competition.

    The Coast Guard is finalizing the regulations governing the Mavericks Surf Competition. The Mavericks Surf Competition will take place on a day that presents favorable surf conditions between November 1 of each year and March 31 of the following year, from 6 a.m. until 6 p.m. The Mavericks Surf Competition can only occur when 15-20 foot waves are sustained for over 24 hours and are combined with mild easterly winds of no more than 5-10 knots. Unpredictable weather patterns and the event's narrow operating window limit the Coast Guard's ability to notify the public of the event. The Coast Guard would issue notice of the event as soon as practicable, but no later than 24 hours before Competition day via the Broadcast Notice to Mariners and issue a written Boating Public Safety Notice at least 24 hours in advance of Competition day. Also, the zones that are established by this final rule will be prominently marked by at least 8 buoys throughout the course of the event.

    The Mavericks Surf Competition will occur in the navigable waters of Half Moon Bay, CA, in the vicinity of Pillar Point as depicted in National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Chart 18682. The Coast Guard will enforce a regulated area defined by an arc extending 1,000 yards from Sail Rock (37°29′34″ N., 122°30′02″ W.) excluding the waters within Pillar Point Harbor. All restrictions apply only between 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. on the day of the actual competition.

    The effect of this regulation is to restrict navigation in the vicinity of Pillar Point during the Mavericks Surf Competition. During the enforcement period, the Coast Guard will direct the movement and access of all vessels within the regulated area. The regulated area will be divided into two zones. Zone 1 is designated as the competition area, and the movement of vessels within Zone 2 is controlled by the Patrol Commander (PATCOM).

    This regulation is needed to keep spectators and vessels a safe distance away from the event participants and the hazardous waters surrounding Pillar Point. Past competitions have demonstrated the importance of restricting access to the competition area to only vessels in direct support of the competitors. Failure to comply with the lawful directions of the Coast Guard could result in additional vessel movement restrictions, citation, or both.

    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 (“Regulatory Planning and Review”) and 13563 (“Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review”) 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 (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, disruptive 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. Executive Order 13771 (“Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs”), directs agencies to reduce regulation and control regulatory costs and provides that “for every one new regulation issued, at least two prior regulations be identified for elimination, and that the cost of planned regulations be prudently managed and controlled through a budgeting process.”

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not designated this rule a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, OMB has not reviewed it. As this rule is not a significant regulatory action, this rule 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).

    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 did not receive any comments from the Small Business Administration on the Interim rule published on October 15, 2014. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

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

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

    C. Collection of Information

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

    D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

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

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

    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule would 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 made a preliminary determination 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 regulated area of limited size and duration. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(h) of Figure 2-1 of Commandant Instruction M16475.lD. A Record of Environmental Consideration is available in the docket for this rulemaking. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.

    G. Protest Activities

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

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100

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

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

    PART 100—REGATTAS AND MARINE PARADES 1. The authority citation for part 100 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

    33 U.S.C. 1233; 33 CFR 1.05-1.

    2. Revise § 100.1106 to read as follows:
    § 100.1106 Special Local Regulation; Mavericks Surf Competition.

    (a) Location. This special local regulation establishes a regulated area on the waters of Half Moon Bay, located in the vicinity of Pillar Point, excluding the waters within Pillar Point Harbor. This regulated area is defined in paragraph (c) of this section.

    (b) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced between 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. on Competition day, which if defined wave and wind conditions are met, will occur for one day between November 1 of each year and March 31 of the following year. Notice of the specific enforcement date of this section will be announced via Broadcast Notice to Mariners and issued in writing by the Coast Guard in a Boating Public Safety Notice at least 24 hours in advance of Competition day.

    (c) Definitions. As used in this section—

    Competition day means the one day between November 1 of each year and March 31 of the following year that Mavericks Surf Competition will be held. The Mavericks Surf Competition will only be held if 15 to 20 foot waves are sustained for over 24 hours and are combined with mild easterly winds of no more than 5 to10 knots.

    Competitor means a surfer enrolled in the Maverick's Surf Competition.

    Patrol Commander or PATCOM means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer, or a Federal, State, or local officer designated by the Captain of the Port San Francisco (COTP), to assist in the enforcement of the special local regulation.

    Regulated area means the area in which the Maverick's Surf Competition will take place. This area is bounded by an arc extending 1000 yards from Sail Rock (37°29′34″ N., 122°30′02″ W.) excluding the waters within Pillar Point Harbor. All coordinates are North American Datum 1983. Within the regulated area, at least two zones will be established and marked by buoys on the day of the competition. Due to the dynamic and changing nature of the surf, the exact size and location of the zones will not be made public until the competition day. The zones will be prominently marked by at least 8 buoys, placed and maintained in place throughout the course of the event by the event sponsor in a pattern approved by the PATCOM. In addition, the USCG will notify the public of the zone locations via Broadcast Notice to Mariners on the day of the event.

    Spectator vessel means any vessel or person, including human-powered craft, which is not designated by the sponsor as a support vessel.

    Support vessel means a vessel, including jet skis, which is designated and conspicuously marked by the sponsor to provide direct support to the competitors. Support vessels must be pre-designated and approved to serve as such for this event by the OCMI prior to the competition.

    Zone 1 means the competition area within the regulated area. Zone 1 will generally be located to the northwest of a line drawn between Sail Rock (37°29′34″ N., 122°30′02″ W.) and Pillar Point Entrance Lighted Gong Buoy 1 (37°29′10.410″ N., 122°30′21.904″ W.).

    Zone 2 means the area within the regulated area where the Coast Guard may direct the movement of all vessels, including restricting vessels from this area. Zone 2 will generally be located to the southeast of a line drawn between Sail Rock (37°29′34″ N., 122°30′02″ W.) and Pillar Point Entrance Lighted Gong Buoy 1 (37°29′10.410″ N., 122°30′21.904″ W.).

    (d) Special Local Regulations. The following regulations apply between 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. on the competition day.

    (1) Only support vessels may be authorized by the Patrol Commander (PATCOM) to enter Zone 1 during the competition.

    (2) Entering the water in Zone 1 by any person other than the competitors is prohibited. Competitors may enter the water in Zone 1 from authorized support vessels only.

    (3) Spectator vessels and support vessels within Zone 2 must maneuver as directed by PATCOM. Given the changing nature of the surf in the vicinity of the competition, PATCOM may close Zone 2 to all vessels due to hazardous conditions. Due to weather and sea conditions, the Captain of the Port may deny access to Zone 2 and the remainder of the regulated area to all vessels other than competitors and support vessels on the day of the event

    (4) Entering the water in Zone 2 by any person is prohibited.

    (5) Rafting and anchoring of vessels are prohibited within the regulated area.

    (6) Only vessels authorized by the PATCOM will be permitted to tow other watercraft within the regulated area.

    (7) Spectator and support vessels in Zones 1 and 2 must operate at speeds which will create minimum wake, in general, 7 miles per hour or less.

    (8) When hailed or signaled by the PATCOM by a succession of sharp, short signals by whistle or horn, the hailed vessel must come to an immediate stop and comply with the lawful directions issued. Failure to comply with a lawful direction may result in additional operating restrictions, citation for failure to comply, or both.

    (9) During the events, vessel operators may contact the PATCOM on VHF-FM channel 23A.

    Dated: October 16, 2017. Patrick S. Nelson, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Alternate Captain of the Port San Francisco.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24840 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG-2017-0042] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zones; Humboldt Bay Bar, Eureka, CA, Noyo River Entrance, Ft. Bragg, CA, and Crescent City Harbor Entrance Channel, Crescent City, CA AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Temporary Interim rule and request for comments

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard is establishing temporary safety zones in the navigable waters of the Humboldt Bay Entrance Channel, of Eureka, CA, Noyo River Entrance Channel, of Fort Bragg, CA, and Crescent City Harbor Entrance Channel, of Crescent City, CA to safeguard navigation safety during extreme environmental conditions. These safety zones are established to protect the safety of vessels transiting the areas from the dangers associated with extreme breaking surf and high wind conditions occurring in the Humboldt Bay Bar Channel, Noyo River Entrance Channel, and Crescent City Harbor Entrance Channels. When enforced, entry of persons or vessels into this temporary safety zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP), San Francisco or his designated representative.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective without actual notice from November 16, 2017 until 11:59 p.m. on March 31, 2018. For the purposes of enforcement, actual notice will be used from October 27, 2017 until November 16, 2017. This rule will be enforced when the COTP determines that the on scene conditions are hazardous and unsafe for vessel transits, typically expected to be 20 foot breaking seas at each location. Enforcement will be announced via local Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type [USCG-2017-0042] in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking.

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this interim rule, call or email Lieutenant Commander Rebecca Deakin, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Francisco; telephone (415) 399-7401 or email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Table of Abbreviations APA Administrative Procedures Act COTP Captain of the Port DHS Department of Homeland Security E.O. Executive Order FR Federal Register NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary interim rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.”

    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule. Publishing an NPRM would be impracticable in this case due to having received initial notice of the extreme environmental and weather conditions substantiating this rule on October 19, 2017.

    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register, as delaying the effective date of this rule would be impracticable due to the timing of the forecast environmental and weather conditions.

    III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231. The Captain of the Port (COTP), San Francisco has determined that this rule is necessary to provide for the safety of Coast Guard members, mariners, and other vessels transiting the area where notable hazards associated with the extreme environmental conditions have been observed in the Humboldt Bay Entrance Channel near Eureka, CA, the Noyo River Entrance Channel, near Fort Bragg, CA, and the Crescent City Harbor Entrance Channel, of Crescent City, CA.

    IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes three safety zones, respectively in the navigable waters of the Humboldt Bay Entrance Channel near Eureka, CA, the Noyo River Entrance Channel, near Fort Bragg, CA, and the Crescent City Harbor Entrance Channel, of Crescent City, CA, when the COTP determines that the on scene conditions are hazardous and unsafe for vessel transits, typically expected to be 20 foot breaking seas at each location. Enforcement will be announced via Broadcast Notice to Mariners between 12:01 a.m. on October 27, 2017 until 11:59 p.m. on March 31, 2018.

    The effect of the temporary safety zones is to restrict navigation in the vicinity of the Humboldt Bay Entrance Channel, Noyo River Entrance Channel, and Crescent City Harbor Entrance Channel while the hazardous conditions associated with extreme environmental conditions exist, and until the Coast Guard deems the safety zone is no longer needed. Except for persons or vessels authorized by the COTP, no person or vessel may enter or remain in the restricted areas during times of enforcement. These regulated areas are needed to keep vessels away from the immediate vicinity of the hazardous conditions associated to ensure the safety of transiting vessels in each respective area.

    V. Regulatory Analyses

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

    A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    E.O.s 12866 (“Regulatory Planning and Review”) and 13563 (“Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review”) 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 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, disruptive 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. Executive Order 13771 (“Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs”), directs agencies to reduce regulation and control regulatory costs and provides that “for every one new regulation issued, at least two prior regulations be identified for elimination, and that the cost of planned regulations be prudently managed and controlled through a budgeting process.”

    We expect the economic impact of this rule will not rise to the level of necessitating a full Regulatory Evaluation. This safety zone is limited in size, duration and location. In addition, although this rule restricts access to the waters encompassed by the safety zone, the effect of this rule will not be significant because the local waterway users will be notified via public Local Notice to Mariners to ensure the safety zone will result in minimum impact. The entities most likely to be affected are waterfront facilities, commercial vessels, and pleasure craft engaged in recreational activities.

    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. This rule may affect the following entities, some of which may be small entities: Owners and operators of waterfront facilities, commercial vessels, and pleasure craft engaged in recreational activities and sightseeing, if these facilities or vessels are in the vicinity of the safety zone at times when this zone is being enforced. This rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: (i) This rule will encompass only a small portion of the waterway for a limited period of time while hazardous conditions exist, and (ii) the maritime public will be advised in advance of this safety zone via Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

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

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

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

    C. Collection of Information

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

    D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under E.O. 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 E.O. 13132.

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

    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

    F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (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 of limited size and duration. This rule is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Record of Environmental Consideration (REC) are available in the docket for this rulemaking. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.

    G. Protest Activities

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

    VI. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, and will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation.

    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate instructions.

    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the docket, visit http://www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice.

    Documents mentioned in this Temporary Interim Rule as being available in this docket and all public comments, will be in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that Web site's instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a final rule is published.

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, and 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, 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1

    2. Add § 165-900 to read as follows:
    § 165-900 Safety zones; Humboldt Bay Bar, Noyo River Entrance, and Crescent City Harbor Entrance Channel Closures, Humboldt Bay, Eureka, CA.

    (a) Location. Temporary safety zones are established in:

    (1) The navigable waters of the Humboldt Bay Bar Channel and the Humboldt Bay Entrance Channel, of Humboldt Bay, CA;

    (2) The navigable waters of the Noyo River Entrance Channel as defined by the Area contained seaward of the Line of Demarcation with northern boundary of the line originating in approx position 39°25′41″ N., 123°48′37″ W. and extending 1200 yards at bearing 290° T & southern boundary of the line originating in approx position 39°25′38″ N., 123°48′36″ W. and extending 1200 yards at 281° T, in Fort Bragg, CA;

    (3) The navigable waters of the Crescent City Harbor Entrance Channel, as defined by the area contained seaward of the line originating in approx position 41°44′36″ N., 124°11′18″ W. bearing 237°T and extending out to 1 NM of the Line of Demarcation in Crescent City, CA.

    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, “designated representative” means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer on a Coast Guard vessel or at a Coast Guard unit or a Federal, State, or local officer designated by or assisting the COTP in the enforcement of the safety zones.

    (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general regulations in 33 CFR part 165, subpart C, entry into, transiting or anchoring within these safety zones are prohibited unless authorized by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative.

    (2) The safety zones are closed to all vessel traffic, except as may be permitted by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the safety zones must comply with all directions given to them by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative.

    (3) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the Humboldt Bay Entrance Channel or Crescent City Harbor Entrance Channel safety zones during times of enforcement shall contact Station Humboldt Bay on VHF-FM channel 16 or at (707) 443-2213 between 6:30 a.m. and 10 p.m., or to Sector Humboldt Bay on VHF-FM channel 16 or at (707) 839-6113 if between 10 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the Noyo River Entrance Channel safety zone during times of enforcement shall contact Station Noyo River on VHF-FM channel 16 or at (707) 964-6611 between 6:30 a.m. and 10 p.m., or to Sector Humboldt Bay on VHF-FM channel 16 or at (707) 839-6113 if between 10 p.m. and 6:30 a.m.

    (d) Enforcement period. The zones described in paragraph (a) of this section will be effective from October 27, 2017 through March 31, 2018. The zones described in paragraph (a) of this section will be enforced when the COTP determines that the on scene conditions are hazardous and unsafe for vessel transits, typically expected to be 20 foot breaking seas at each location. Enforcement will be announced via Broadcast Notice to Mariners. The COTP will notify the maritime community of periods during which these zones will respectively be enforced via Broadcast Notice to Mariners in accordance with 33 CFR 165.7.

    Dated: October 27, 2017. Patrick S. Nelson, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Alternate Captain of the Port of San Francisco.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24842 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG-2017-0985] Safety Zone; Annual Fireworks Display on the Ohio River, Monongahela River, Allegheny River, Pittsburgh, PA AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of enforcement of regulation.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard will enforce the subject safety zone for the annual fireworks display that takes place every November on the Ohio River, Monongahela River and Allegheny River extending the entire width of the rivers. The zone is needed to protect vessels transiting the area and event spectators from the hazards associated with the fireworks display. During the enforcement period, entry into, transiting, or anchoring in the safety zone is prohibited to all vessels not registered with the sponsor as participants or official patrol vessels, unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port Marine Safety Unit Pittsburgh (COTP) or a designated representative.

    DATES:

    The regulations in the Table 1 in 33 CFR 165.801, No. 64, will be enforced from 8 p.m. until 9:30 p.m., on November 17, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Coast Guard will enforce the safety zone listed in the regulations in Table 1 in 33 CFR 165.801, No. 64. The safety zone is for the annual fireworks display on the Ohio River, from mile 0.0 to 0.3, Monongahela River mile 0.0 to 0.22 and Allegheny River mile 0.0 to 0.25, extending the entire width of the rivers, from 8 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. on November 17, 2017. This action is being taken to protect vessels transiting the area and event spectators from the hazards associated with the fireworks display. Entry into the safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Marine Safety Unit Pittsburgh (COTP) or a designated representative. Persons or vessels desiring to enter into or passage through the safety zone must request permission from the COTP or a designated representative. If permission is granted, all persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the COTP or designated representative.

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

    Dated: November 9, 2017. F. Smith, Lieutenant Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Captain of the Port Marine Safety Unit Pittsburgh.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24820 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2017-1028] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; Atlantic Ocean, Rehoboth Beach, DE AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Correcting amendments.

    SUMMARY:

    On November 9, 2017, the Coast Guard published a rule establishing temporary safety zones in the Atlantic Ocean, off the coast of Rehoboth Beach, DE and in Breakwater Harbor near Cape Henlopen. The rule was made enforceable from November 6, 2017, through February 28, 2018. However, in regulatory text the February date was mistakenly given as February 28, 2017. This document corrects that error.

    DATES:

    Effective November 16, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this rule, call or email Petty Officer Edmund Ofalt, Waterways Management Branch, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Delaware Bay; telephone (215) 271-4814, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In its temporary final rule published on November 9, 2017, the Coast Guard established temporary safety zones near dredging and pipe laying operations, diving operations, and underwater construction operations (82 FR 52005). The DATES section of the rule and the preamble both gave the expiration date of the temporary rule as February 28, 2018. In the regulatory text provided for the Code of Federal Regulations, however, that date was mistakenly given as February 28, 2017. This document corrects the error. Because the temporary final rule uses the correct date in all other instances, and because February 2017 has already passed, the Coast Guard finds it unnecessary to offer prior notice and opportunity for public comment on this correction.

    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.

    § 165.T05-1028 [Amended]
    2. In § 165.T05-1028(d), remove the date “February 28, 2017” and add in its place the date “February 28, 2018”. Katia G. Kroutil, Chief, Office of Regulations and Administrative Law, U.S. Coast Guard.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24805 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers 33 CFR Part 334 [COE-2016-0005] United States Navy Restricted Area, Menominee River, Marinette Marine Corporation Shipyard, Marinette, Wisconsin AGENCY:

    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers published a document in the Federal Register on May 24, 2011, amending its regulations to establish a restricted area in the Menominee River at the Marinette Marine Corporation Shipyard in Marinette, Wisconsin. The Corps published correcting amendments in the Federal Register on April 4, 2012, which corrected latitude and longitude coordinates and also revised administrative and enforcement responsibilities. The Corps is further amending these regulations to expand the existing restricted area to provide additional area of protection during the construction and launching of Littoral Combat Ships. The expansion would result in temporary encroachment within the Menominee River Federal Navigation Channel. The regulations are necessary to provide adequate protection of U.S. Navy (USN) combat vessels, their materials, equipment to be installed therein, and crew, while located at the Marinette Marine Corporation Shipyard.

    DATES:

    Effective December 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Headquarters, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Operations and Regulatory Community of Practice, 441 G Street NW., Washington, DC 20314-1000.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. David Olson, Headquarters, Operations and Regulatory Community of Practice, Washington, DC at 202-761-4922 or by email at [email protected] or Mr. Ryan J. Huber, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District, Regulatory Branch, at 651-290-5859 or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Pursuant to its authorities under Section 7 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1917 (40 State 266; 33 U.S.C. 1) and Chapter XIX of the Army Appropriations Act of 1919 (40 Stat. 892; 33 U.S.C. 3), the Corps is amending restricted area regulations at 33 CFR part 334 by revising § 334.815 to expand the previously established restricted area in the Menominee River, at the Marinette Marine Corporation Shipyard, Marinette, Wisconsin. The amendment would also add a provision of disestablishment whereby the restricted area would be disestablished by no later than November 17, 2025. By correspondence dated October 29, 2015, the Department of the Navy, requested that the Corps of Engineers amend the regulations concerning this restricted area.

    On August 11, 2016, the Corps' St. Paul District issued a local public notice soliciting comments on the proposed rule from all known interested parties and no comments were received. The proposed rule was published in the August 10, 2016 edition of the Federal Register (81 FR 52781) with the docket number COE-2016-0005 and one comment was received. One commenter requested that the first set of coordinates be recalculated to ensure correct position along the shoreline and asked that the final rule include an explicit statement in regards to the horizontal datum used. The Corps responded to the comment by recalculating and updating the first set of coordinates as well as adding a statement in the final rule in regards to the horizontal datum used.

    Procedural Requirements 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 proposed rule has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this proposed rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.

    The Corps has made a determination this proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action. This regulatory action determination is based on the size and location of the restricted area. The restricted area does not occupy the entire Federal navigation channel near the shipyard and vessels utilizing that channel can transit around the restricted area. An operator of a vessel may also transit the restricted area as long as he or she obtains permission from the Supervisor of Shipbuilding, Conversion and Repair, USN, Bath, ME or his/her authorized representative.

    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 Corps certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. While some owners or operators of vessels that intend to transit the restricted area may be small entities, for the reasons stated in paragraph (a) above this rule would not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator. In addition, the restricted area is necessary to address a major anti-terrorism and safety concern due to the lack of perimeter fencing or physical denial system. Small entities can utilize navigable waters outside of the restricted area. Small entities may also transit the restricted area as long as they obtain permission from the Supervisor of Shipbuilding, Conversion and Repair, USN, Bath, ME or his/her authorized representative. The restricted area is necessary to provide adequate protection of U.S. Navy combat vessels, their materials, equipment to be installed therein, and crew, while located at the Marinette Marine Corporation Shipyard. The restricted area does not occupy the entire Federal navigation channel near the shipyard and vessels utilizing that channel can transit around the restricted area, or obtain permission to transit the restricted area. After considering the economic impacts of this restricted area regulation on small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    c. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act. An environmental assessment (EA) has been prepared. We have concluded that the establishment of the restricted area will not have a significant impact to the quality of the human environment and, therefore, preparation of an environmental impact statement is not required. The final EA and Finding of No Significant Impact may be reviewed at the District Office listed at the end of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section, above.

    d. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. This rule does not impose an enforceable duty among the private sector and, therefore, is not a Federal private sector mandate and is not subject to the requirements of Section 202 or 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (Pub. L. 104-4, 109 Stat. 48, 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.). We have also found, under Section 203 of the Act, that small governments will not be significantly or uniquely affected by this rule.

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 334

    Danger zones, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Restricted areas, Waterways.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Corps is amending 33 CFR part 334 to read as follows:

    PART 334—DANGER ZONE AND RESTRICTED AREA REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 334 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    40 Stat. 266 (33 U.S.C. 1) and 40 Stat. 892 (33 U.S.C. 3).

    2. Revise § 334.815 to read as follows:
    § 334.815 Menominee River, at the Marinette Marine Corporation Shipyard, Marinette, Wisconsin; naval restricted area.

    (a) The area. The waters adjacent to Marinette Marine Corporation's pier defined by a rectangular shape on the south side of the river beginning on shore at the eastern property line of Marinette Marine Corporation at latitude 45°05′58.70″ N., longitude 87°36′55.90″ W.; thence northerly to latitude 45°05′59.72″ N., longitude 87°36′55.61″ W.; thence westerly to latitude 45°06′03.22″ N., longitude 87°37′09.75″ W.; thence westerly to latitude 45°06′03.78″ N., longitude 87°37′16.40″ W.' thence southerly to latitude 45°06′2.80″ N., longitude 87°37′16.56″ W.; thence easterly along the Marinette Marine Corporation pier to the point of origin. The datum for these geographic coordinates is the World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS 84). The restricted area will be marked by a lighted and signed floating buoy line.

    (b) The regulation. All persons, swimmers, vessels and other craft, except those vessels under the supervision or contract to local military or Naval authority, vessels of the United States Coast Guard, and local or state law enforcement vessels, are prohibited from entering the restricted area when marked by signed floating buoy line without permission from the Supervisor of Shipbuilding, Conversion and Repair, USN, Bath, ME or his/her authorized representative.

    (c) Enforcement. The regulation in this section shall be enforced by the Supervisor of Shipbuilding, Conversion and Repair, USN, Bath, ME and/or such agencies or persons as he/she may designate.

    (d) Disestablishment of restricted area. The restricted area will be disestablished not later than November 17, 2025, unless written application for its continuance is made to and approved by the Secretary of the Army prior to that date.

    Dated: November 9, 2017.

    Approved:

    Thomas P. Smith, Chief, Operations and Regulatory Division, Directorate of Civil Works.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24890 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3720-58-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0824; FRL-9966-10] RIN 2070-ZA16 Tebufenozide; Pesticide Tolerance Actions AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    EPA is establishing tolerances for residues of tebufenozide in or on multiple commodities, which are identified and discussed later in this document. In addition, EPA is correcting commodity definitions, updating crop group tolerances, and harmonizing U.S. tolerances with Codex. EPA is also removing tolerances for residues of tebufenozide that are no longer needed due to the changes listed. EPA is also amending the existing tolerance for almond, hulls under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

    DATES:

    This regulation is effective November 16, 2017. However, certain regulatory actions will not occur until the date specified in the regulatory text. Objections and requests for hearings must be received on or before January 16, 2018, and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0824, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Christina Scheltema, Pesticide Re-evaluation Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (703) 308-2201; email address: [email protected]

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

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

    • Crop production (NAICS code 111).

    • Animal production (NAICS code 112).

    • Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).

    • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

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

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR part 180 through the Government Printing Office's e-CFR site at http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.

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

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0824 in the subject line on the first page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before January 16, 2018. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).

    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0824, by one of the following methods:

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

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

    Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.

    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    II. Background A. What actions is the agency taking?

    In the Federal Register of October 14, 2016 (81 FR 71029) (FRL-9952-75), EPA proposed, pursuant to its authority in section 408(e) of the FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), to establish, amend, and remove certain tolerances for residues of tebufenozide. The Agency proposed that 40 CFR 180.482 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of tebufenozide in or on the following commodities: Bushberry subgroup 13-07B at 3.0 part per million (ppm); caneberry subgroup 13-07A at 3.0 ppm; fruit, citrus, group 10-10 at 2.0 ppm; fruit, pome group 11-10 at 1.0 ppm; nut, tree, group 14-12 at 0.1 ppm; sugarcane, cane at 1.0 ppm; sugarcane, molasses at 3.0 ppm; vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10 at 1.0 ppm. EPA also proposed to increase the existing tolerances for almond, hulls from 25 to 30 parts per million (ppm). Finally, EPA proposed to remove as unnecessary the following tolerances upon establishment of the new tolerances: Apple; berry, group 13; fruit, citrus, group 10; fruit, pome; nut, tree, group 14; pistachio; vegetable, fruiting, group 8; and walnut.

    The proposed rule of October 14, 2016 (FRL-9952-75), provided for a 60-day comment period and invited public comments. EPA received anonymous public comments from three private citizens. The comments and EPA's response are presented in Unit IV. E.

    In this final rule, the Agency is establishing, modifying, and revoking the tolerances as indicated in its proposal of October 14, 2016, under its authority in FFDCA section 408(e)(1)(A). EPA is also establishing an expiration date for the existing tolerances for fruit, pome.

    B. What is the Agency's authority for taking this action?

    EPA may issue a regulation establishing, modifying, or revoking a tolerance under FFDCA section 408(e).

    C. When do these actions become effective?

    As stated in the DATES section, this regulation is effective November 16, 2017. In addition, the tolerance for fruit, pome, at 1.5 ppm, expires on May 16, 2018.

    III. Determination of Safety

    There have been no changes in the Agency's assessment of the safety of these tolerances since the issuance of the proposal, and no additional information or concerns were raised by the commenters warranting a reconsideration of the Agency's safety finding in the proposal. Therefore, the Agency is incorporating the Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety as contained in Unit III. of its October 14, 2016 proposal and relying upon the findings therein to support its conclusion that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the general population, or to infants and children, from aggregate exposure to tebufenozide residues.

    IV. Other Considerations A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    An adequate enforcement methodology is available to enforce the tolerance expression, as indicated in the proposal.

    B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain the reasons for departing from the Codex level.

    As indicated in the proposed rule, EPA is harmonizing its U.S. tolerances for sugarcane; fruit, citrus, group 10-10; fruit, pome, group 11-10; and almond, hulls, with Codex MRLs.

    C. International Trade Considerations

    In this final rule, EPA is converting the existing crop group tolerance on fruit, pome, to fruit, pome, group 11-10, and in the process, reducing the crop group tolerance from 1.5 ppm to 1.0 ppm to harmonize with Codex MRLs. For the commodities included in crop group 11-10 that are not covered by the fruit, pome tolerance, the new tolerances allow import of those additional commodities with residues of tebufenozide up to 1.0 ppm, which is not currently permitted under the existing tolerance. However, for the commodities currently in the crop group that continue to be included in crop group 11-10, the tolerance is reduced from 1.5 ppm to 1.0 ppm. With very few exceptions, all of the MRLs for tebufenozide on pome fruits are already at or below EPA's proposed tolerance level of 1.0 ppm. As a result, EPA believes that a reasonable interval between the publication of this rule and the effective date of these tolerances is not necessary; therefore, the Agency proposes to make the tolerance of 1.0 ppm for crop group 11-10, fruit, pome, effective upon publication of this final rule. Nonetheless, because this tolerance change represents a reduction in the allowable amount of tebufenozide residues allowed in or on fruit, pome, crop group 11, EPA is establishing an expiration date for the existing tolerances for fruit, pome, that is six months from the date of publication of this final rule. Before that date, residues of tebufenozide on those commodities will be permitted up to the 1.5 ppm level under the existing fruit, pome, tolerance; after that date, residues will need to comply with the new reduced 1 ppm tolerance level under crop group 11-10.

    The Agency is reducing the tolerances on commodities in this crop group to harmonize with the Codex MRL. The reduction is appropriate based on available data and residues levels resulting from registered use patterns. This reduction in tolerance levels is not discriminatory; the same food safety standard contained in the FFDCA applies equally to domestically produced and imported foods. None of the other tolerance actions taken in this rulemaking restrict permissible pesticide residues below currently allowed levels in the United States. In accordance with the World Trade Organization's (WTO) Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) Agreement, EPA intends to promptly publish this action with the WTO.

    D. Existing Stocks Considerations

    Any commodities listed in the regulatory text of this document that are treated with the pesticides subject to this final rule, and that are in the channels of trade following the tolerance revocations, shall be subject to FFDCA section 408(1)(5), as established by FQPA. Under this unit, any residues of this pesticide in or on such food shall not render the food adulterated so long as it is shown to the satisfaction of the Food and Drug Administration that:

    1. The residue is present as the result of an application or use of the pesticide at a time and in a manner that was lawful under FIFRA.

    2. The residue does not exceed the level that was authorized at the time of the application or use to be present on the food under a tolerance or exemption from tolerance. Evidence to show that food was lawfully treated may include records that verify the dates that the pesticide was applied to such food.

    E. Response to Comments

    The Agency received three comments on its October 14, 2016 proposal. The comments and EPA's responses follow.

    Comment by private citizen. An anonymous commenter expressed concerns about the toxicity of tebufenozide and pesticides in general.

    Agency response. The commenter did not take issue with EPA's specific proposal to establish or amend tolerances for tebufenozide or with the underlying risk assessments supporting the proposal. The commenter did not refer to any specific studies pertaining to the toxicity of tebufenozide or the conclusions of the tebufenozide risk assessments. Therefore, EPA has not changed its previous determination that the tolerances in question are safe and is not making any changes in response to these comments.

    Comment by private citizen. An anonymous commenter expressed support for implementing the tolerances in the proposed rule. However, the commenter also expressed some concern about the potential of tebufenozide to cause harm to humans, other mammals, and ecosystems.

    Agency response. The commenter supported EPA's specific proposal to establish and amend tolerances with tebufenozide. Although the commenter expressed concern regarding the potential effects of tebufenozide, he or she did not refer to any specific studies pertaining to the conclusions of the risk assessments. Therefore, EPA has not changed its previous determination that the tolerances in question are safe.

    Comment by private citizen. An anonymous commenter supported the crop group reassignments in the proposed rule. This commenter also expressed concern that the public might not support the proposed increase of the almond hull tolerance from 25 to 30 ppm.

    Agency Response: This commenter did not provide any evidence to support his or her concern regarding public support for the proposed increase of the almond hull tolerance.

    Therefore, the Agency has not changed its previous determination that the 30 ppm almond hull tolerance is safe.

    V. Conclusion

    EPA has determined that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the general population, or to infants and children, from aggregate exposure to tebufenozide residues. The details of the Agency's assessment of the safety of the tebufenozide tolerances may be found in the proposed rule; there have been no changes since its issuance. Therefore, EPA is incorporating the Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety as contained in Unit III of its October 14, 2016 proposal to support the conclusion of a reasonable certainty of no harm.

    The Agency hereby establishes tolerances for residues of tebufenozide in bushberry subgroup 13-07B at 3.0 ppm; caneberry subgroup 13-07A at 3.0 ppm; fruit, citrus, group 10-10 at 2.0 ppm; fruit, pome group 11-10 at 1.0 ppm; nut, tree, group 14-12, at 0.1 ppm; sugarcane, cane at 1.0 ppm; sugarcane, molasses at 3.0 ppm; and vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10 at 1.0 ppm. The Agency is also increasing the tolerance for almond, hulls from 25 ppm to 30 ppm. Further, upon the establishment of these tolerances, the Agency is removing the existing tolerances for apple; berry, group 13; fruit, citrus, group 10; nut, tree, group 14; pistachio; vegetable, fruiting, group 8; and walnut because they will be superseded by the newly established tolerances. Finally, the Agency is establishing a six-month expiration date for the current fruit, pome, tolerance.

    VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    In this final rule, EPA is establishing, modifying, and revoking tolerances under FFDCA section 408(e). The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions (e.g., establishment and modification of a tolerance and tolerance revocation for which extraordinary circumstances do not exist) from review under Executive Order 12866, entitled “Regulatory Planning and Review” (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this rule has been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866 due to its lack of significance, it is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This final rule does not contain any information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), or impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.). Nor does it require any special considerations as required by Executive Order 12898, entitled “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations” (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994); or OMB review or any other Agency action under Executive Order 13045, entitled “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This final rule does not involve any technical standards that would require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Agency previously assessed whether establishment of tolerances, exemptions from tolerances, raising of tolerance levels, expansion of exemptions, or revocations might significantly impact a substantial number of small entities and concluded that, as a general matter, these actions do not impose a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. These analyses for tolerance establishment and modifications, and for tolerance revocations were published in the Federal Register of May 4, 1981 (46 FR 24950) and December 17, 1997 (62 FR 66020) (FRL-5753-1), respectively, and were provided to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. In a memorandum dated May 25, 2001, EPA determined that eight conditions must all be satisfied for an import tolerance or tolerance exemption revocation to adversely affect a significant number of small entity importers, and that there is a negligible joint probability of all eight conditions holding simultaneously with respect to any particular revocation. (This Agency document is available in the docket for this rule). Furthermore, for tebufenozide, the Agency knows of no extraordinary circumstances that exist as to the present rule that would change EPA's previous analysis. Taking into account this analysis, and available information concerning the pesticides listed in this rule, EPA hereby certifies that this rule will not have a significant negative economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The Agency has determined that this rule will not have a substantial direct effect on 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132, entitled “Federalism” (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure “meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.” “Policies that have federalism implications” is defined in the Executive order to include regulations that have “substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.” This rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food handlers, and food retailers, not States. This rule does not alter the relationships or distribution of power and responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). For these same reasons, the Agency has determined that this rule does not have any “tribal implications” as described in Executive Order 13175, entitled Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments” (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). Executive Order 13175 requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure “meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.” “Policies that have tribal implications” is defined in the Executive order to include regulations that have “substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.” This rule will not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, 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, as specified in Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.

    VII. Congressional Review Act

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

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: October 24, 2017. Richard P. Keigwin, Jr., Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

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

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

    2. In § 180.482, the table in paragraph (a)(1) is revised to read as follows:
    § 180.482 Tebufenozide; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * * (1) * * *

    Commodity Parts per
  • million
  • Almond, hulls 30 Apple, dry pomace 3.0 Apple, wet pomace 3.0 Bushberrry subgroup 13-07B 3.0 Brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5A 5.0 Brassica, leafy greens, subgroup 5B 10.0 Canola, refined oil 4.0 Canola, seed 2.0 Caneberry subgroup 13-07A 3.0 Citrus, oil 15.0 Cotton 1.5 Cotton, gin byproducts 30 Cranberry 1.0 Fruit, citrus, group 10-10 2.0 Fruit, pome 1 1.5 Fruit, pome, group 11-10 1.0 Grape 3.0 Kiwifruit 2 0.5 Leaf petioles subgroup 4B 2.0 Leafy greens subgroup 4A 10.0 Nut, tree, group 14-12 0.1 Peppermint, tops 10.0 Spearmint, tops 10.0 Sugarcane, cane 1.0 Sugarcane, molasses 3.0 Turnip, greens 9.0 Turnip, roots 0.3 Vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10 1.0 Vegetable, tuberous and corm, except potato, subgroup 1D 0.015 1 This tolerance expires on May 16, 2018. 2 There are no U.S. registrations on kiwifruit.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24881 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 48 CFR Parts 1009 and 1052 Department of the Treasury Acquisition Regulations; Tax Check Requirements AGENCY:

    Department of the Treasury.

    ACTION:

    Interim rule.

    SUMMARY:

    Pursuant to Section 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code, taxpayer return information, with few exceptions, is confidential. Under this authority, officers and employees of the Department of the Treasury may have access to taxpayer return information as necessary for purposes of tax administration. The Department of the Treasury has determined that an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) contractor's compliance with the tax laws is a tax administration matter and that taxpayer return information is needed for determining an offeror's eligibility to receive an award, including but not limited to implementation of the statutory prohibition of making an award to corporations that have an unpaid Federal tax liability. This interim rule amends the Department of the Treasury Acquisition Regulation (DTAR) for the purposes of supplementing the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). This interim rule will amend the DTAR by adding a subpart titled “Responsible Prospective Contractor” and a paragraph concerning Representation and certifications regarding responsibility matters, for the purpose of directing IRS contracting officers to the newly added DTAR subpart titled “Tax Check Requirement,” which prescribes the policies and procedures for performing a tax check on the apparent successful offeror in order to determine eligibility to receive an award.

    DATES:

    Effective date: November 16, 2017.

    Comment due date: Interested parties should submit written comments to the Department of the Treasury on or before January 16, 2018 to be considered in the formation of the final rule.

    ADDRESSES:

    Treasury invites comments on the topics addressed in this interim rule. Comments may be submitted to Treasury by any of the following methods: by submitting electronic comments through the federal government e-rulemaking portal, www.regulations.gov or by sending paper comments to Department of the Treasury, Office of the Procurement Executive, Attn: Thomas O'Linn, 1722 I Street NW., Mezzanine—M12C, Washington, DC 20006.

    In general, Treasury will post all comments to www.regulations.gov without change, including any business or personal information provided, such as names, addresses, e-mail addresses, or telephone numbers. All comments, including attachments and other supporting materials received are part of the public record and subject to public disclosure. You should submit only information that you wish to make publicly available.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Thomas O'Linn, Procurement Analyst, Office of the Procurement Executive, at (202) 622-2092.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    The DTAR, which supplements the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), is codified at 48 CFR Chapter 10.

    A. General. It is in the interest of the United States Government to only award contracts to entities that are responsible and law abiding. This is codified in FAR 9.104 by requiring contracting officers to perform a responsibility determination prior to each contract award by using the standards at FAR 9.104-1, as well as consider information submitted by the contractor and information they research or acquire from other sources. The IRS administers the Internal Revenue Code as enacted by Congress. Since fiscal year 2012, language in the annual Consolidated Appropriations Act has prohibited the Federal Government under various conditions from using appropriated funds to enter into a contract with a prospective contractor unless the prospective contractor certifies in writing that it has not been notified of any unpaid Federal tax assessment. Most recently, Sections 744 and 745 of Division E of the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 (Pub. L. 113-235) prohibits the Federal Government from entering into a contract with any corporation where the awarding agency is aware of an unpaid Federal tax liability.

    For purposes of tax administration, the IRS has access to taxpayer return information that is not otherwise available to other Federal Agencies pursuant to 26 U.S.C. 6103(h)(1). The Department of the Treasury has determined that an IRS contractor's compliance with the tax laws is a tax administration matter. Additionally, 26 U.S.C. 6103(c) authorizes the IRS to disclose a taxpayer's return information to such person(s) as the taxpayer may designate in a consent to such disclosure. In many cases, however, the official signing a contract proposal on behalf of an offeror will not be an official to whom the IRS is authorized to disclose the offeror's tax information. Thus, in order to ensure that IRS is authorized is to discuss the offeror's own tax information with an authorized official of the offeror, a consent to disclosure is required. This consent to disclosure must be in the form of a separate written document pertaining solely to the authorized disclosure and must be signed and dated by an authorized person as required and defined in 26 U.S.C. 6103(c) and 26 CFR 301.6103(c)-1(e)(4).

    This interim rule amends the DTAR to establish policies and procedures that facilitate successful, timely, and economical execution of IRS contractual actions in compliance with the FAR and various appropriation restrictions. Specifically, this interim rule establishes an express requirement for IRS contracting officers to use taxpayer return information that is available only to IRS to perform a tax check on the apparent successful offeror for purposes of determining eligibility to enter into a contract with the IRS. The IRS has established an internal Procedure, Guidance and Information (PGI) that further supplements the DTAR requirement for IRS contracting officers to use when conducting a tax check. To ensure compliance with 26 U.S.C. 6103(h)(1) and to safeguard taxpayer return information, the PGI restricts the number of personnel within the IRS Office of Procurement who have access to tax compliance information. The PGI also limits the amount of information provided to the contracting officer regarding a delinquent Federal tax liability. Upon notification by the contracting officer that the offeror has a delinquent Federal tax liability, the offeror may provide the contracting officer with documentation that demonstrates the offeror's tax status as paid-in-full or that an approved payment agreement has been reached, at which time the contracting officer will coordinate with the appropriate office within IRS to validate the offeror's tax status (see FAR 9.104-5(a)(1), (b)(1) and (e)).

    The offeror may want to take steps to confirm it does not have a delinquent Federal tax liability prior to submission of its response to the solicitation. If the offeror recently settled a delinquent Federal tax liability, the offeror may want to take steps to obtain information in order to demonstrate the offeror's responsibility to the contracting officer, if such information is requested (see FAR 9.104-5(a)(1) and (b)(1)).

    B. FAR supplement. This interim rule will supplement paragraph (b) of FAR 9.104-5, Representation and certifications regarding responsibility matters, for the purpose of directing IRS contracting officers to the newly added DTAR subpart 1009.70, which prescribes the policies and procedures for performing a tax check on the apparent successful offeror to determine eligibility to receive an award.

    C. Subpart. This interim rule will add DTAR subparts 1009.1, Responsible Prospective Contractors, and 1009.70, Tax Check Requirements. This latter subpart prescribes the policies and procedures IRS contracting officers will use for performing a tax check on the apparent successful offeror to determine eligibility to receive an award. Definitions of terms “authorized representative(s) of the offeror,” “delinquent Federal tax liability” and “tax check” are included within this subpart. The definition of “authorized representative(s) of the offeror” is the person(s) identified to the IRS contracting officer by the offeror as authorized to represent the offeror in disclosure matters pertaining to the offer. The definition of “delinquent Federal tax liability” is derived from language within the FAR concerning Federal tax delinquency and unpaid Federal tax assessment (see FAR 9.104-5). The definition of “tax check” is an IRS process that accesses and uses taxpayer return information, that is available only to IRS, to support the Government's determination of an offeror's eligibility to receive an award, including but not limited to implementation of the statutory prohibition of making an award to corporations that have an unpaid Federal tax liability (see FAR 9.104-5(b)).

    D. Provision. This interim rule will add a provision to be inserted in all IRS solicitations regardless of dollar value, including those for commercial items. The provision will notify offerors that the IRS will conduct a tax check because the Department of the Treasury has determined that an IRS contractor's compliance with the tax laws is a tax administration matter, and that taxpayer return information is needed for determining an offeror's eligibility to receive an award, including but not limited to implementation of the statutory prohibition of making an award to corporations that have a unpaid Federal tax liability (see FAR 9.104-5(b)). The provision will also contain a consent to disclosure to be signed and dated by a person authorized to act on behalf of the offeror as defined in 26 CFR 301.6103(c)-1(e)(4). The consent to disclosure will authorize the officers and employees of the Department of the Treasury, including the IRS, to disclose the results of the tax check to the person(s) authorized by the offeror via the signed consent to disclosure.

    Applicability to Contracts at or Below the Simplified Acquisition Threshold and for Commercial Items, Including Commercially Available Off-the-Shelf Items

    This provision will apply to all IRS solicitations regardless of the dollar value, including commercial items (including Commercially Available Off-the-Shelf items). This determination is consistent with the FAR requirements regarding the inclusion of the provisions 52.209-5, 52.209-11 and 52.212-3 as well as various appropriation restrictions.

    Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This is not a significant regulatory action and, therefore, was not subject to review under section 6(b) of E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, dated September 30, 1993. This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804.

    Determination To Issue an Interim Rule

    Tax liability is a serious matter and there have been a number of congressional hearings and subsequent actions taken by Congress to ensure that appropriated funds are not spent with entities with a delinquent Federal tax liability. Most recently, Section 744 of Division E of the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 (Pub. L. 113-235) (and similar provisions in prior appropriations acts since 2012) prohibits the Federal Government from entering into a contract with any corporation where the awarding agency is aware of an unpaid Federal tax liability, unless the agency has considered suspension or debarment of the corporation and has made a determination that this further action is not necessary to protect the interests of the Government. This prohibition has been implemented in the FAR under FAR 9.104-5. Considering all these factors, it is in the interest of the United States Government to only award contracts to entities that are responsible and law abiding.

    As such a determination has been made under the authority of the Secretary of Treasury that urgent and compelling reasons exist to promulgate this interim rule without prior opportunity for public comment. Even absent this rule, IRS would have a duty under the appropriations act provision not to award contracts to entities with delinquent tax liability, and to review available tax information for this purpose. However, IRS would not have clear authority to discuss any adverse information with the offeror to which it pertained. The only effect of delaying the rule to consider public comment would be to increase the likelihood that offerors will be disqualified due to adverse tax information that could have been clarified or resolved if the rule were in place. For the same reason, the effective date is set as immediately upon publication. However, pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 1707 and FAR 1.501-3(b), Treasury will consider public comments received in response to this interim rule in the formation of the final rule.

    Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6) generally requires agencies to conduct an initial regulatory flexibility analysis and a final regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements, unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    It is hereby certified that this interim rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This interim rule will amend the DTAR to establish an internal process that strengthens IRS' compliance with appropriation act restrictions and the FAR prohibition of entering into a contract with contractors having a delinquent Federal tax liability (see FAR subpart 9.1) and should not have significant economic impacts on small entities other than the potential for not receiving award if the small entity has a delinquent Federal tax liability. This rule does not impose any new reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements. The rule does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any other Federal rules. No significant alternatives were identified during the development of this rule. Notwithstanding this certification, the Department welcomes comments on the potential impact on small entities.

    List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 1009 and 1052

    Government procurement.

    Accordingly, the Department of the Treasury amends 48 CFR Chapter 10 as follows:

    PART 1009—CONTRACTOR QUALIFICATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 1009 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    41 U.S.C. 418(b).

    2. Add subpart 1009.1 to read as follows: Subpart 1009.1—Responsible Prospective Contractors
    1009.104 Standards.
    1009.104-5 Representation and certifications regarding responsibility matters.

    (b) Internal Revenue Service (IRS) contracting officers shall comply with the requirements of subpart 1009.70 once an offeror has been identified as the apparent successful offeror.

    3. Add subpart 1009.70 to read as follows: Subpart 1009.70—Tax Check Requirements Sec. 1009.7000 Scope of subpart. 1009.7001 Definition. 1009.7003 Policy. 1009.7004 Procedure. 1009.7005 Solicitation provision. Subpart 1009.70—Tax Check Requirements
    1009.7000 Scope of subpart.

    This subpart prescribes the IRS policies and procedures for performing a tax check on the apparent successful offeror to determine eligibility to receive an award.

    1009.7001 Definition.

    As used in this subpart—

    Authorized representative(s) of the offeror means the person(s) identified to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) within the consent to disclosure by the offeror as authorized to represent the offeror in disclosure matters pertaining to the offer.

    Delinquent Federal tax liability means any unpaid Federal tax liability that has been assessed, for which all judicial and administrative remedies have been exhausted or have lapsed, and that is not being paid in a timely manner pursuant to an agreement with the authority responsible for collecting the tax liability.

    Tax check means an IRS process that accesses and uses taxpayer return information to support the Government's determination of an offeror's eligibility to receive an award, including but not limited to implementation of the statutory prohibition of making an award to corporations that have a delinquent Federal tax liability (see FAR 9.104-5(b)).

    1009.7003 Policy.

    (a) There are various Federal laws and regulations that in aggregate prohibit the Federal Government from entering into a contract with an entity where the awarding agency is aware of an unpaid Federal tax liability (see FAR subpart 9.1) unless the agency has considered suspension or debarment and has made a determination that this further action is not necessary to protect the interests of the Government.

    (b) IRS contracting officers shall include a provision in all solicitations regardless of dollar value, which contains a consent to disclosure to be signed and dated by a person authorized to act on behalf of the offeror as defined in 26 CFR 301.6103(c)-1(e)(4). The consent to disclosure will authorize officers and employees of the Department of the Treasury, including the IRS, to disclose the results of the tax check to the authorized representative(s) of the offeror. In the absence of a signed and dated consent to disclosure in an offer, taxpayer return information of the offeror may not be disclosed, which subsequently may remove the offeror from eligibility to receive an award.

    1009.7004 Procedure.

    IRS contracting officers shall not proceed with award, at any dollar value, until a tax check has been performed on the apparent successful offeror. See IRS Procedures, Guidance, and Information (PGI) 9.1.

    (a) The contracting officer, regardless of an offeror's response in paragraph (a)(1) of the provision 52.209-5, Certification Regarding Responsibility Matters, paragraph (b)(1) of the provision at FAR 52.209-11, or paragraphs (h) and (q)(2)(i) of the provision at FAR 52.212-3 (see FAR 9.104-5(b)), shall request a tax check through the IRS designated point of contact. The request shall include only the information required for purposes of conducting the tax check.

    (b) If the result of the tax check demonstrates the offeror as having a delinquent Federal tax liability, the contracting officer shall—

    (1) Confirm the offer includes a signed and dated consent to disclosure (see 1052.209-70, Notice and Consent to Disclose and Use of Taxpayer Return Information), the absence of which may remove the offeror from eligibility to receive an award under the solicitation because taxpayer return information of the offeror may not be disclosed.

    (2) If the consent to disclosure is completed in the offer, notify the authorized representative(s) of the offeror that a delinquent Federal tax liability exists and therefore the offeror is ineligible for award.

    (i) If upon notification the offeror provides the contracting officer with documentation, within the timeframe specified by the contracting officer, that demonstrates the offeror's tax status as being paid-in-full or that an approved payment agreement is in place, the contracting officer will coordinate with the appropriate office within IRS to validate the tax status. If the offeror is found to be tax compliant, the contracting officer will notify the offeror of such. Assuming the offeror meets all other standards of responsibility, the offeror is eligible for award.

    (3) Notify, in accordance with IRS PGI 9.1, the Department of the Treasury official responsible for suspension and debarment for purposes of requesting a determination in accordance with FAR 9.104-5(a)(2) and FAR 9.104-5(b)(3) respectively before an award to that contractor can be made.

    (c) If the result of the tax check demonstrates the offeror as tax compliant then the offeror is eligible for award, assuming all other standards of responsibility have been met.

    (d) The contracting officer shall include in the contract file documentation that verifies the tax check was conducted and if the results confirm a delinquent Federal tax liability existed at the time of award, confirmation that the offeror was notified of such.

    1009.7005 Solicitation provision.

    (a) The contracting officer shall insert the provision 1052.209-70, Notice and Consent to Disclose and Use of Taxpayer Return Information, in all IRS solicitations regardless of dollar value, including solicitations for acquisition of commercial items (including Commercially Available Off-The-Shelf items).

    PART 1052—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES 4. The authority citation for part 1052 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    41 U.S.C. 1707.

    5. Add 1052.209-70 to subpart 1052.2 as follows:
    1052.209-70 Notice and Consent to Disclose and Use of Taxpayer Return Information.

    As prescribed in 1009.7005, insert the following provision:

    NOTICE AND CONSENT TO DISCLOSE AND USE OF TAXPAYER RETURN INFORMATION—(NOV 2017)

    (a) Definitions. As used in this provision—

    Authorized representative(s) of the offeror means the person(s) identified to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) within the consent to disclose by the offeror as authorized to represent the offeror in disclosure matters pertaining to the offer.

    Delinquent Federal tax liability means any unpaid Federal tax liability that has been assessed, for which all judicial and administrative remedies have been exhausted or have lapsed, and that is not being paid in a timely manner pursuant to an agreement with the authority responsible for collecting the tax liability.

    Tax check means an IRS process that accesses and uses taxpayer return information to support the Government's determination of an offeror's eligibility to receive an award, including but not limited to implementation of the statutory prohibition of making an award to corporations that have an unpaid Federal tax liability (see FAR 9.104-5(b)).

    (b) Notice. Pursuant to 26 U.S.C. 6103(a) taxpayer return information, with few exceptions, is confidential. Under the authority of 26 U.S.C. 6103(h)(1), officers and employees of the Department of the Treasury, including the IRS, may have access to taxpayer return information as necessary for purposes of tax administration. The Department of the Treasury has determined that an IRS contractor's compliance with the tax laws is a tax administration matter and that the access to and use of taxpayer return information is needed for determining an offeror's eligibility to receive an award, including but not limited to implementation of the statutory prohibition of making an award to corporations that have an unpaid Federal tax liability (see FAR 9.104-5).

    (1) The performance of a tax check is one means that will be used for determining an offeror's eligibility to receive an award in response to this solicitation (see FAR 9.104). As a result, the offeror may want to take steps to confirm it does not have a delinquent Federal tax liability prior to submission of its response to this solicitation. If the offeror recently settled a delinquent Federal tax liability, the offeror may want to take steps to obtain information in order to demonstrate the offeror's responsibility to the contracting officer (see FAR 9.104-5).

    (c) The offeror shall execute the consent to disclosure provided in paragraph (d) of this provision and include it with the submission of its offer. The consent to disclosure shall be signed by an authorized person as required and defined in 26 U.S.C. 6103(c) and 26 CFR 301.6103(c)-1(e)(4).

    (d) Consent to disclosure. I hereby consent to the disclosure of taxpayer return information (as defined in 26 U.S.C. 6103(b)(2)) as follows:

    The Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, may disclose the results of the tax check conducted in connection with the offeror's response to this solicitation, including taxpayer return information as necessary to resolve any matters pertaining to the results of the tax check, to the authorized representatives of [insert OFFEROR NAME] on this offer.

    I am aware that in the absence of this authorization, the taxpayer return information of [insert OFFEROR NAME] is confidential and may not be disclosed, which subsequently may remove the offer from eligibility to receive an award under this solicitation.

    I consent to disclosure of taxpayer return information to the following person(s):
    [insert PERSON(S) NAME AND CONTACT INFORMATION]: I certify that I have the authority to execute this consent on behalf of [insert OFFEROR NAME]. Offeror Name: Offeror Taxpayer Identification Number: Offeror Address: Name of Individual Executing Consent: Title of Individual Executing Consent: Signature: Date: (End of provision) Dated: November 6, 2017. Iris B. Cooper, Senior Procurement Executive, Office of the Procurement Executive.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24911 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810-25-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 648 [Docket No. 161017970-6999-02] RIN 0648-XF814 Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Summer Flounder Fishery; Commercial Quota Harvested for the State of Rhode Island AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Temporary rule; closure.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS announces that the 2017 summer flounder commercial quota allocated to the State of Rhode Island has been harvested. Vessels issued a commercial Federal fisheries permit for summer flounder may not land summer flounder in Rhode Island for the remainder of calendar year 2017, unless additional quota becomes available through a transfer from another state. Regulations governing the summer flounder fishery require publication of this notification to advise vessel and dealer permit holders that Federal commercial quota is no longer available to land summer flounder in Rhode Island.

    DATES:

    Effective 0001 hours, November 14, 2017, through December 31, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Cynthia Hanson, (978) 281-9180, or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Regulations governing the summer flounder fishery are found at 50 CFR part 648. The regulations require annual specification of a commercial quota that is apportioned on a percentage basis 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.

    The coastwide commercial quota for summer flounder for the 2017 calendar year is 5,658,260 lb (2,566,544 kg) (81 FR 93842, December 22, 2016). The percent allocated to vessels landing summer flounder in Rhode Island is 15.68298 percent, resulting in an initial commercial quota of 887,542 lb (402,582 kg). Rhode Island has received one quota transfer of 380 lb (172 kg) from New Jersey on October 4, 2017 (82 FR 46936), bringing its commercial quota to 887,922 lb (402,755 kg).

    The NMFS Administrator for the Greater Atlantic Region (Regional Administrator) monitors the state commercial landings and determines when a state's commercial quota has been harvested. NMFS is required to publish a notice in the Federal Register advising and notifying commercial vessels and dealer permit holders that, effective upon a specific date, the state's commercial quota has been harvested and no commercial summer flounder quota is available to land in that state. The Regional Administrator has determined, based on dealer reports and other available information, that the 2017 Rhode Island commercial summer flounder quota will be harvested by November 14, 2017.

    Section 648.4(b) provides that Federal permit holders agree, as a condition of the permit, not to land summer flounder in any state that the Regional Administrator has determined no longer has commercial quota available. Therefore, effective 0001 hours, November 14, 2017, landings of summer flounder in Rhode Island by vessels holding summer flounder commercial Federal fisheries permits are prohibited for the remainder of the 2017 calendar year, unless additional quota becomes available through a transfer and is announced in the Federal Register. Effective 0001 hours, November 14, 2017, federally permitted dealers are also notified that they may not purchase summer flounder from federally permitted vessels that land in Rhode Island for the remainder of the calendar year, or until additional quota becomes available through a transfer from another state.

    Classification

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

    The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA, finds good cause pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) to waive prior notice and the opportunity for public comment because it would be contrary to the public interest. This action closes the commercial summer flounder fishery for Rhode Island until January 1, 2018, under current regulations. The regulations at § 648.103(b) require such action to ensure that summer flounder vessels do not exceed quotas allocated to the states. If implementation of this closure was delayed to solicit prior public comment, the quota for this fishing year will be exceeded, thereby undermining the conservation objectives of the Summer Flounder Fishery Management Plan. The Assistant Administrator further finds, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), good cause to waive the 30-day delayed effectiveness period for the reason stated above.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: November 13, 2017. Emily H. Menashes, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24880 Filed 11-13-17; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    82 220 Thursday, November 16, 2017 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 21 [Docket No. FAA-2017-1058] Airworthiness Criteria: Special Class Airworthiness Criteria for the FlightScan Corporation Camcopter S-100 AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed interim airworthiness criteria.

    SUMMARY:

    The FAA announces the availability of and requests comments on proposed airworthiness criteria for the Unmanned Aircraft System, FlightScan Corporation, Camcopter S-100. This document provides proposed policy for airworthiness criteria to address the designation of applicable regulations and other criteria for special classes of aircraft. In addition to the proposed airworthiness criteria presented in this document, we are also referencing operational considerations that have been used to support the development of the airworthiness criteria. We consider these proposed criteria to be interim because we anticipate the evolution of new operational criteria will necessitate additional airworthiness criteria in order to allow for the operation of the Camcopter S-100 in the National Airspace System. When those additional operational criteria are further established, we will again provide public notice of proposed policy with additional airworthiness criteria along with changes incorporated to these criteria based on the public comments received.

    DATES:

    Send comments on or before December 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2017-1058 using any of the following methods:

    Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your comments electronically.

    Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30, U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.

    Hand Delivery of Courier: Take comments to Docket Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m., and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at 202-493-2251.

    Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without change, to http://regulations.gov, including any personal information the commenter provides. Using the search function of the docket Web site, anyone can find and read the electronic form of all comments received into any FAA docket, including the name of the individual sending the comment (or signing the comment for an association, business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement can be found in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-19478), as well as at http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.

    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m., and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Raymond Johnston, AIR-692, Federal Aviation Administration, Policy & Innovation Division, Small Airplane Standards Branch, Aircraft Certification Service, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, MO 64106, telephone (816) 329-4159, facsimile (816) 329-4090.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Comments Invited

    We invite interested people to take part in the development of this policy by sending written comments, data, or views. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the airworthiness criteria, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. We ask that you send us two copies of written comments.

    We will consider all comments received on or before the closing date for comments. We will consider comments filed late if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay. We may change these airworthiness criteria based on received comments or based on evolving operational criteria.

    Background

    FlightScan Corporation (FlightScan) applied to the Federal Aviation Administration on June 1, 2015 for special class type certification under Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 21.17(b) for the Camcopter S-100 Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS).

    The Camcopter S-100 UAS (S-100) consists of the unmanned aircraft (UA) and its associated elements (including communication links and the components that control the unmanned aircraft). The S-100 is a vertical take-off UAS that is of the traditional main/tail rotor helicopter design. The fuselage is made of carbon fiber and titanium. The S-100 is powered by a liquid cooled rotary engine and has a maximum take-off weight of 440 pounds which can include a maximum payload of up to 110 pounds. The main rotor diameter is approximately 134 inches. The UAS is intended to be used to conduct airborne surveying of power transmission infrastructure using aerial photogrammetry.

    Risk Classes

    To facilitate the establishment of an initial risk class for UAS, the FAA proposes a scale of risk based on kinetic energy.1 These proposed risk classes are based on logical break points between data clusters that parallel the existing classes of aircraft defined in AC 23.1309-1E,2 the size boundaries for Light-Sport Aircraft, and the size boundaries in 14 CFR part 107. These energy based classifications for UAS are given in the definitions section of the Airworthiness Criteria for the FlightScan Camcopter S-100, which has been placed in the docket. The S-100 would be considered Risk Class 3.

    1 Within these risk categories, the FAA recognizes the opportunity to further define risk classes based on UAS operational considerations in the National Airspace System.

    2http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/719E41E1D26099108625795D005D5302?OpenDocument&Highlight=ac%2023.1309-1e.

    Operational Considerations

    The following operational considerations were evaluated during the development of this document:

    1. The S-100 would be used for power transmission line survey operations. It operates in a designated corridor and area within the right-of-way of the power transmission lines and is operationally limited to 100 feet above and laterally within 100 feet of the power line it would be surveying.

    2. While there is minimal population exposure within the power transmission line right-of-way, the mission path would cross several public highways and pass in close proximity to several neighborhoods with population densities of less than 950 people per square mile.

    3. The S-100 would operate Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS). BVLOS for this UAS is defined as those operations that do not conform to the definition of Visual Line of Sight (VLOS) in 14 CFR part 107.31 at amendment 107-1.

    4. The radio control uplink and downlink would operate within frequencies approved by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

    5. This S-100 is designed to operate both autonomously and manually by the pilot-in-command (PIC).

    6. Minimum crew includes one PIC, one mission specialist, and one mission flight director.

    7. The minimum crew would operate only one S-100 at any time.

    8. The aircraft would remain within Radio Line of Sight (RLOS) of the control station. RLOS refers to the straight and unobstructed path between the transmitting and receiving antennas.

    9. The control station would be ground based.

    10. All crew would be FAA certified airmen with current and applicable medical credentials.

    11. All crew would successfully complete required crew training.

    12. Maintenance personnel would hold appropriate FAA maintenance certificates.

    13. Maintenance personnel would complete required maintenance training.

    Unresolved Criteria

    The FAA's ongoing development of operational criteria will necessitate the incorporation of additional airworthiness criteria into the S-100 and may also necessitate future clarity of the airworthiness criteria published in the Airworthiness Criteria for the FlightScan Camcopter S-100, available in the docket. These may include but are not necessarily limited to the following—

    1. Command and Control (*) 3 —UAS control and communications link security is a key safety and interoperability requirement in integrating civil UAS into the National Airspace System NAS;

    3 Criteria that have not yet been developed are identified with an asterisk (*).

    2. Sense and Avoid (SAA) Equipage (*)—SAA systems could serve as a means of compliance with 14 CFR 91.113 right-of-way rules and others. Issues associated with the use of SAA systems to comply with 14 CFR 91 requirements and others, if any, must be identified; and

    3. Noise Act Finding (*)—Noise standards have not been developed for UAS.

    Proposed Airworthiness Criteria

    The FAA has not previously published airworthiness criteria for UAS. The FAA proposes new type certification airworthiness criteria for the FlightScan Camcopter S-100 as found in Airworthiness Criteria for the FlightScan Camcopter S-100, Revision 0, dated November 3, 2017. Locate the document at http://www.regulations.gov using docket number FAA-2017-1058.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on November 8, 2017. Pat Mullen, Manager, Small Airplane Standards Branch, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24866 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Parts 170 and 570 [Docket No. FDA-2017-D-0085] Best Practices for Convening a Generally Recognized as Safe Panel: Draft Guidance for Industry; Availability AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notification of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, we, or Agency) is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled “Best Practices for Convening a GRAS Panel.” This draft guidance document is intended for any person who is responsible for a conclusion that a substance may be used in food on the basis of the generally recognized as safe (GRAS) provision of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) when that person convenes a panel of experts (“GRAS panel”) to independently evaluate whether the available scientific data, information, and methods establish that the substance is safe under the conditions of its intended use in human food or animal food. This draft guidance provides our current thinking on best practices to identify GRAS panel members who have appropriate and balanced expertise; to take steps to reduce the risk that bias (or the appearance of bias) will affect the credibility of the GRAS panel's output (often called a “GRAS panel report”), including the assessment of potential GRAS panel members for conflict of interest and the appearance of conflict of interest; and to limit the data and information provided to a GRAS panel to public information (e.g., by not providing the GRAS panel with information such as trade secret information).

    DATES:

    Although you can comment on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR 10.115(g)(5)), to ensure that we consider your comment on this draft guidance before we issue the final version of the guidance, submit either electronic or written comments by May 15, 2018. For comments related to the collection of information provisions in this draft guidance, submit either electronic or written comments by January 16, 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-0085 for “Best Practices for Convening a GRAS Panel.” 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: http://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/dockets/default.htm.

    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.

    Submit written requests for single copies of the draft guidance to Office of Food Additive Safety, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, Food and Drug Administration (HFS-200), 5001 Campus Dr., College Park, MD 20740 or to the Office of Surveillance and Compliance (HFV-200), 7519 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855. Send two self-addressed adhesive labels to assist that office in processing your request. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic access to the draft guidance.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Regarding substances that would be used in human food: Paulette M. Gaynor, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS-255), Food and Drug Administration, 5001 Campus Dr., College Park, MD 20740, 240-402-1192. Regarding substances that would be used in animal food: Geoffrey K. Wong, Center for Veterinary Medicine (HFV-224), Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855, 240-402-5838. Regarding the information collection issues: FDA PRA Staff, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A63, 11601 Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    Section 201(s) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 321(s)) defines a “food additive” as any substance the intended use of which results or may reasonably be expected to result, directly or indirectly, in its becoming a component or otherwise affecting the characteristics of any food if such substance is not generally recognized, among experts qualified by scientific training and experience to evaluate its safety, as having been adequately shown through scientific procedures (or, in the case of a substance used in food prior to January 1, 1958, through either scientific procedures or experience based on common use in food) to be safe under the conditions of its intended use. Under this definition, a substance that is GRAS under the conditions of its intended use is not a “food additive” and is therefore not subject to mandatory premarket review by FDA under section 409 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 348). In this document, we refer to a person who is responsible for a conclusion that a substance may be used in human food or animal food on the basis of the GRAS provision of the FD&C Act, without premarket review by FDA under section 409 of the FD&C Act, as the “proponent” of that substance.

    We have established regulations implementing the GRAS provision of section 201(s) of the FD&C Act in part 170 (21 CFR part 170) for human food and in part 570 (21 CFR part 570) for animal food. Those regulations include a voluntary procedure (“GRAS notification procedure”) through which a proponent may notify us of a conclusion that a substance is GRAS under the conditions of its intended use in human food (part 170, subpart E) or animal food (part 570, subpart E). Under the interim pilot program, we have filed and responded to more than 600 GRAS notices for substances intended for use in human food and 18 GRAS notices for substances intended for use in animal food (80 FR 54960 at 54964, August 17, 2016).

    In some cases, the process whereby the proponent evaluates whether the available data and information support a conclusion that a substance is GRAS under the conditions of its intended use includes considering the opinion of a “GRAS panel” of qualified experts who independently evaluate whether the available scientific data, information, and methods establish that a substance is safe under the conditions of its intended use in human food or animal food. Depending on the outcome of the GRAS panel's analysis, the proponent could either reach a conclusion regarding the safety of the substance under the conditions of its intended use, or be advised of one or more issues (such as gaps in the data and information, or alternative interpretations of the available data and information) that warrant investigation before a conclusion can be drawn about whether the substance is safe under the conditions of its intended use. When the outcome of the GRAS panel's analysis supports the proponent's conclusion that a substance is safe under the conditions of its intended use, in essence the proponent then relies on the members of the GRAS panel to act as a proxy for the larger scientific community knowledgeable about the safety of substances directly or indirectly added to food and, in so doing, relies on the outcome of the GRAS panel's analysis to support the proponent's conclusion that the safety of the intended use is “generally recognized” by qualified experts. Whether a GRAS panel is a sufficient proxy for the larger scientific community depends on a number of factors, such as the subject matter expertise of the members of the GRAS panel and whether the members of the GRAS panel would be considered representative of experts qualified by scientific training and experience to evaluate the safety of the substance under the conditions of its intended use.

    A GRAS panel is one mechanism that proponents have used to demonstrate that the safety of a substance under the conditions of its intended use is generally recognized by qualified experts. However, the use of a GRAS panel is not the only mechanism for doing so and the use of a GRAS panel does not necessarily mean that the GRAS criteria have been met (81 FR 54960 at 54974-54975, August 17, 2016).

    We are announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled “Best Practices for Convening a GRAS Panel.” We are issuing the draft guidance consistent with our good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when finalized, will represent the current thinking of FDA on this topic. It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternate approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations. This is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 12866.

    This draft guidance document is intended for any proponent who convenes a GRAS panel and provides our current thinking on best practices to identify GRAS panel members who have appropriate and balanced expertise; to take steps to reduce the risk that bias (or the appearance of bias) will affect the credibility of a GRAS panel report, including the assessment of potential GRAS panel members for conflict of interest and the appearance of conflict of interest; and to limit the data and information provided to a GRAS panel to public information (e.g., by not providing the GRAS panel with information such as trade secret information).

    II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This draft guidance contains proposed information collection provisions that are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). “Collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register for each proposed collection of information before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, we are publishing this notice of the proposed collection of information set forth in this document.

    With respect to the collection of information associated with this draft guidance, we invite comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the information collected on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

    Title: Best Practices for Convening a GRAS Panel (OMB control number 0910—NEW).

    Description of respondents: This new collection of information would be performed by those persons (“proponents”) who are responsible for a conclusion that a substance may be used in food on the basis of the GRAS provision of the FD&C Act when such persons convene a GRAS panel to independently evaluate whether the available scientific data, information, and methods establish that the substance is safe under the conditions of its intended use in human food or animal food. The records recommended in this draft guidance would include a one-time information collection burden pertaining to a written GRAS panel policy to govern the assembly and conduct of a GRAS panel. The records recommended in this draft guidance also would include annual information collection burdens pertaining to documenting the application of the written GRAS panel policy to each member of a GRAS panel convened in a given year. Finally, the draft guidance recommends that a GRAS panel provide a written report of its findings; however, we consider that a written GRAS panel report is customary business practice that is already being created by GRAS panels and, thus, we do not estimate an annual information collection burden for the creation of a GRAS panel report.

    Analysis of Burden Estimates Resulting from the Recommendation for a Written GRAS Panel Policy: For the purpose of this analysis, we make the conservative assumption that all proponents who document a GRAS conclusion will create a written GRAS panel policy that would apply to GRAS panels convened in the first year that the draft guidance, if finalized, would be in effect as well as to GRAS panels convened in subsequent years. We also assume that these proponents will create a written GRAS panel policy regardless of whether they report the documented GRAS conclusion to FDA in the form of a GRAS notice. Therefore, for the purpose of this analysis we: (1) Calculated the number of proponents who have submitted at least one GRAS notice to FDA and (2) estimated the number of proponents who have documented at least one GRAS conclusion without reporting that documented GRAS conclusion to FDA in the form of a GRAS notice.

    Using the data in our inventories of GRAS notices submitted for substances intended for use in human food (Ref. 1) and animal food (Ref. 2) during the time period of April 17, 1997, through September 5, 2017, we calculate that 396 proponents submitted at least one GRAS notice for a substance intended for use in human food, and 15 proponents submitted at least one GRAS notice for a substance intended for use in animal food. During that time period, there were three proponents who had submitted at least one GRAS notice for a substance intended for use in human food and at least one GRAS notice for a substance intended for use in animal food. However, for the purpose of this analysis, we make the conservative assumption that there will be no overlap between proponents who submit GRAS notices for substances intended for use in human food and proponents who submit GRAS notices for substances intended for use in animal food. Therefore, the total number of proponents who have submitted at least one GRAS notice to FDA is 411 (396 proponents + 15 proponents = 411 proponents).

    We have very little information about the number of proponents who have documented a GRAS conclusion without reporting that GRAS conclusion to FDA in the form of a GRAS notice. To estimate the number of such proponents, we used a publicly available database entitled “Independent GRAS (Generally Recognized As Safe) Conclusion Inventory Database” (Ref. 3), which is a compilation of the results of a consulting company's search of publicly available information in industry trade journals about documented GRAS conclusions for substances intended for use in human food. The oldest entry is for the year 1995. FDA received the first GRAS notice for substances intended for use in human food in 1998 and, thus, the database covers the entire timeframe during which FDA has been receiving GRAS notices for substances intended for use in human food. As of September 5, 2017, that database recorded that there had been a total of 199 documented GRAS conclusions, with 41 of those documented GRAS conclusions reported to FDA as a GRAS notice and 158 of those documented GRAS conclusions not reported to FDA as a GRAS notice. In contrast, as of September 5, 2017, FDA's inventory of GRAS notices shows that the number of GRAS conclusions reported to FDA during this timeframe was 720, not 41 (Ref. 1). We assume that the reduced number of documented GRAS conclusions that the database recorded as being reported to FDA is due to the mechanism by which the database searches for documented GRAS conclusions (i.e., publications in industry trade journals). For example, there could be less incentive for a business that reports its documented GRAS conclusion to FDA to publicize that GRAS conclusion through industry trade journals, because the business can publicize FDA's response to the GRAS notice in other ways.

    The database attributes the 158 documented GRAS conclusions not reported to FDA to 142 different proponents. However, 62 of these proponents have also submitted a GRAS notice to FDA and, thus, we calculate that the database attributes documented GRAS conclusions to 80 proponents who have not submitted a GRAS notice to FDA (142 proponents listed in the database—62 proponents who we already counted because they submitted a GRAS notice to FDA). We also make the conservative assumption that the number of proponents who have documented GRAS conclusions without reporting them to FDA since FDA began receiving GRAS notices is twice as high as recorded in the database—i.e., 160 proponents (80 proponents listed in the database × 2 = 160).

    The publicly available database does not record documented GRAS conclusions for substances intended for use in animal food. However, based on the number of annual GRAS notices submitted to FDA in recent years, we previously estimated that the number of annual GRAS notices submitted to FDA for substances intended for use in animal food would be 50 percent of the number of annual GRAS notices submitted to FDA for substances intended for use in human food (i.e., we estimated 50 GRAS notices will be submitted to FDA annually for substances intended for use in human food and that 25 GRAS notices will be submitted to FDA annually for substances intended for use in animal food (OMB control number 0910-0342; 81 FR 54960)). Therefore, for the purpose of this analysis we assume that the number of proponents who have documented GRAS conclusions for substances intended for use in animal food without reporting those GRAS conclusions to FDA is 50 percent of the number of proponents who documented GRAS conclusions for substances intended for use in human food without reporting those GRAS conclusions to FDA—i.e., 80 proponents (160 estimated proponents who have documented GRAS conclusions without reporting those GRAS conclusions to FDA × 0.5 = 80 proponents). We calculate that the total number of proponents who documented GRAS conclusions without reporting those GRAS conclusions to FDA is 240 proponents (160 estimated proponents who have documented GRAS conclusions for substances intended for use in human food + 80 estimated proponents who have documented GRAS conclusions for substances intended for use in animal food = 240 proponents).

    To estimate the total number of proponents, we are adding 240 estimated proponents who have not reported their documented GRAS conclusions to FDA to the 411 proponents who have already submitted at least one GRAS notice to FDA for a total of 651 proponents who will document a GRAS conclusion (240 non-reporting proponents + 411 reporting proponents = 651 total proponents). As already stated, for the purpose of this analysis we make the conservative assumption that all of these proponents who document GRAS conclusions (i.e., 651 proponents) will create a written GRAS panel policy. We estimate that it would take 40 hours to create a written GRAS panel policy, including 8 hours to review relevant, publicly available policies (e.g., Refs. 4 and 5) that address conflict of interest and 32 hours to tailor a GRAS panel policy specific to the proponent, using relevant information from such existing policies as appropriate to the needs of the proponent. As shown in table 1, the total one-time burden to create a written GRAS panel policy is 40 hours per proponent × 651 proponents = 26,040 hours. We request comment on our estimate of the total number of proponents and on the hourly burden to create a written GRAS panel policy. There are no estimated capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with the information collection for a written GRAS panel policy.

    Analysis of Burden Estimates Resulting From the Recommendation for Application of a Written GRAS Panel Policy to GRAS Panel Members: Based on the number of annual GRAS notices submitted to FDA in recent years, we previously estimated that 50 GRAS notices will be submitted to FDA for substances intended for use in human food and that 25 GRAS notices will be submitted to FDA for substances intended for use in animal food (OMB control number 0910-0342; 81 FR 54960), for a total number of 75 GRAS notices submitted to FDA each year. We count each GRAS notice as a single GRAS conclusion, and, for the purpose of this analysis, we assume that a different proponent submits each of these GRAS notices. Therefore, we estimate that the total number of documented GRAS conclusions submitted to FDA on an annual basis is 75 GRAS conclusions and that these GRAS conclusions are submitted by 75 proponents.

    We have not previously estimated the annual number of documented GRAS conclusions that are not reported to FDA as a GRAS notice. For the purpose of this analysis, to estimate such GRAS conclusions we used the same database (Ref. 3) that we used to estimate the total number of proponents who document GRAS conclusions without reporting the GRAS conclusions to FDA in the form of a GRAS notice. As already stated, the oldest recorded entry in the database is for the year 1995. However, with the exception of that single entry for 1995, the remaining entries are for the years 2001 and beyond. In addition, the current year (2017) has not reached its end. Therefore, we use 16 years (i.e., from 2001 through 2016) as the number of years covering those documented GRAS conclusions that are not reported to FDA. For the purpose of calculating the annual number of documented GRAS conclusions that are for substances intended for use in human food but not reported to FDA, we estimate that there are 157 such GRAS conclusions (158 documented, unreported GRAS conclusions for substances intended for use in human food minus 1 GRAS conclusion reported before 2001). We calculate that, on average, the annual number of documented, unreported GRAS conclusions for substances intended for use in human food and recorded in the database is 10 (157 documented, unreported GRAS conclusions/16 years = 9.8 documented, unreported GRAS conclusions per year recorded in the database, rounded up to 10). As with our analysis of the total number of proponents, we conservatively assume that the annual number of documented, unreported GRAS conclusions for substances intended for use in human food could be twice as high as the annual number of documented, unrecorded GRAS conclusions recorded in the database—i.e., 20 documented, unreported GRAS conclusions for substances intended for use in human food each year (10 documented, unreported GRAS conclusions recorded in the database on an annual basis × 2 = 20 documented, unreported GRAS conclusions on an annual basis). As with documented GRAS conclusions that are reported to FDA, we assume that a different proponent is responsible for each documented GRAS conclusion not reported to FDA and, thus, on an annual basis there are 20 proponents who do not report their documented GRAS conclusions for substances intended for use in human food to FDA. As with our analysis of the total number of proponents, we conservatively assume that the annual number of documented, unreported GRAS conclusions for substances intended for use in animal food is 50 percent of the annual number of documented, unreported GRAS conclusions for substances intended for use in human food—i.e., 10 documented, unreported GRAS conclusions for substances intended for use in animal food on an annual basis (20 documented, unreported GRAS conclusions for substances intended for use in human food × 0.5). We therefore calculate that there is a total of 30 documented, unreported GRAS conclusions each year (20 documented, unreported GRAS conclusions for substances intended for use in human food + 10 documented, unreported GRAS conclusions for substances intended for use in animal food). We also calculate that there are 105 proponents who document a GRAS conclusion on an annual basis (75 proponents who report their documented GRAS conclusions to FDA as a GRAS notice + 30 proponents who do not report their documented GRAS conclusions to FDA as a GRAS notice = 105 total proponents).

    We have information about the percent of proponents who convene a GRAS panel for a documented GRAS conclusion and also submit a GRAS notice to FDA. During the time period April 17, 1997, through September 5, 2017, on average, 63 percent of proponents who submitted a GRAS notice for a substance intended for use in human food, and 60 percent of proponents who submitted a GRAS notice for a substance intended for use in animal food, convened a GRAS panel. We therefore estimate that, on an annual basis, 32 proponents will convene a GRAS panel and submit a GRAS notice to FDA for substances intended for use in human food (63 percent × 50 proponents = 31.5 proponents; rounded up to 32 proponents), and 15 proponents will convene a GRAS panel and submit a GRAS notice to FDA for substances intended for use in animal food (60 percent × 25 proponents = 15 proponents). We calculate that the total number of proponents who will convene a GRAS panel and submit a GRAS notice to FDA is 47 proponents (32 proponents who submit GRAS notices for substances intended for use in human food + 15 proponents who submit GRAS notices for substances intended for use in animal food = 47 proponents). We also assume that all proponents will document the application of a written GRAS panel policy to each member of the GRAS panel.

    We have very little information about the percent of proponents who convene a GRAS panel for a documented GRAS conclusion but do not report their documented GRAS conclusions to FDA as a GRAS notice. For the purpose of this analysis, we make the conservative assumption that all 30 proponents who annually document GRAS conclusions without reporting them to FDA will convene a GRAS panel. Taking into account the estimated number of proponents who convene a GRAS panel and submit a GRAS notice to FDA, and the estimated number of proponents who convene a GRAS panel but do not submit a GRAS notice to FDA, we calculate that the total number of proponents who will convene a GRAS panel and document the application of the written GRAS panel policy to each member of a GRAS panel on an annual basis is 77 proponents (47 proponents who submit GRAS notices to FDA+ 30 proponents who do not submit GRAS notices = 77 proponents).

    Based on the recommendations in the draft guidance, if finalized, we assume that all GRAS panels will include at least 3 panel members (with expertise in chemistry or biochemistry, toxicology, and exposure assessment) and that some GRAS panels will include as many as 6 panel members with expertise that reflects the physical, chemical, and biological properties of the substance and the scientific questions that arise in relation to the conditions of its intended use. We assume that a GRAS panel will include 5 panel members on average. We also assume that the proponent will reject at least one individual with applicable expertise due to a financial conflict of interest or the appearance of a financial or non-financial conflict of interest and, thus, that 77 proponents will document the application of the written GRAS panel policy to 6 individual GRAS panel members, for a total of 462 documentations by proponents of the application of the written GRAS panel policy (77 proponents × 6 individual panel members = 462 documentations). As shown in table 2, we estimate that it will take 16 hours to document the application of the written GRAS policy to each panel member, for a total of 7,392 hours (462 documentations × 16 hours per documentation = 7,392 hours). As shown in table 3, we assume that all 462 individuals who are being considered as members of a GRAS panel will each need 4 hours to provide applicable information to the proponent, for a total of 1,848 hours (462 individuals × 4 hours per individual = 1,848 hours).

    There are no estimated capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this information collection for the application of a written GRAS panel policy to individuals being considered as members of a GRAS panel.

    Table 1—Estimated One-Time Recordkeeping Burden 1 Recommendation Number of
  • recordkeepers
  • Number of
  • records per
  • recordkeeper
  • Total annual
  • records
  • Average
  • burden per
  • recordkeeping
  • (in hours)
  • Total hours
    Written GRAS panel policy 651 1 651 40 26,040 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
    Table 2—Estimated Annual Recordkeeping Burden 1 Recommendation Number of
  • recordkeepers
  • Number of
  • records per
  • recordkeeper
  • Total annual
  • records
  • Average
  • burden per
  • recordkeeping
  • (in hours)
  • Total hours
    Application of written GRAS panel policy to GRAS panel members 77 6 462 16 7,392 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
    Table 3—Estimated Annual Third-Party Disclosure Burden 1 Recommendation Number of
  • recordkeepers
  • Number of
  • records per
  • recordkeeper
  • Total annual
  • records
  • Average
  • burden per
  • recordkeeping
  • (in hours)
  • Total hours
    Information provided by potential GRAS panel members to the proponents of GRAS conclusions 462 1 462 4 1,848 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
    III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the Internet may obtain the draft guidance at either http://www.fda.gov/FoodGuidances or https://www.regulations.gov. Use the FDA Web site listed in the previous sentence to find the most current version of the guidance.

    IV. References

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

    1. FDA (2017). GRAS Notices. Available at https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/fdcc/?set=GRASNotices. 2. FDA (2017). Current Animal Food GRAS Notices Inventory. Available at https://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/Products/AnimalFoodFeeds/GenerallyRecognizedasSafeGRASNotifications/ucm243845.htm. 3. AIBMR Life Sciences, Inc. (2017). Independent GRAS (Generally Recognized As Safe) Conclusion Inventory Database. Available at http://aibmr.com/natural-products-industry-compliance-consultation/gras-generally-recognized-as-safe-safety-studies/. 4. Institute of Medicine (2009). Full Report. Conflict of Interest in Medical Research, Education, and Practice. National Academies Press, 500 5th Street NW., Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055. Available at https://www.nap.edu/catalog/12598/conflict-of-interest-in-medical-research-education-and-practice. 5. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (2003). Conflicts of Interest Policy for Committees Used in the Development of Reports. The National Academies Press, 500 5th Street NW., Washington, DC 20001. Available at http://www.nationalacademies.org/coi/. Dated: November 13, 2017. Anna K. Abram, Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Planning, Legislation, and Analysis.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24845 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers 33 CFR Part 334 [COE-2017-0003] Establishment of a Permanent Restricted Area for U.S. Coast Guard Yard, Baltimore, Maryland, in Curtis Creek and Arundel Cove AGENCY:

    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Corps of Engineers is proposing to establish a permanent restricted area for the U. S. Coast Guard in waters of Curtis Creek and Arundel Cove located in Baltimore, Maryland. The establishment of the restricted area is necessary to reflect the current security needs at U. S. Coast Guard Yard (CG Yard), Baltimore, Maryland, including the protection of Coast Guard-wide military assets. The CG Yard is the Coast Guard's only shipyard and its largest industrial facility. It performs major ship, electronics, and heavy weapons overhaul, repair, and manufacture. The CG Yard is also the host command for various Coast Guard commands supporting local and nationwide Coast Guard missions.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be submitted on or before December 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by docket number COE-2017-0003, by any of the following methods:

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

    Email: [email protected] Include the docket number, COE-2017-0003, in the subject line of the message.

    Mail: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Attn: CECW-CO-R (David B. Olson), 441 G Street NW., Washington, DC 20314-1000.

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

    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket number COE-2017-0003. All comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available on-line at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the commenter indicates that the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI, or otherwise protected, through regulations.gov or email. The regulations.gov Web site is an anonymous access system, which means we will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email directly to the Corps without going through regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, we recommend that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and also include your contact information with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If we cannot read your comment because of technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, we may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic comments should avoid the use of any special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. David Olson, Headquarters, Operations and Regulatory Division, Washington, DC at 202-761-4922, or Steve Elinsky, Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District, Regulatory Branch, at 410-962-4503.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Pursuant to its authorities in Section 7 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1917 (40 Stat. 266; 33 U.S.C. 1) and Chapter XIX of the Army Appropriations Act of 1919 (40 Stat. 892; 33 U.S.C. 3), the Corps of Engineers is proposing amendments to regulations in 33 CFR part 334 for the establishment of a permanent restricted area in waters of Curtis Creek and Arundel Cove in Baltimore, Maryland. In a memorandum dated November 28, 2016, the U.S. Coast Guard requested that the Corps establish this permanent restricted area. The proposed permanent restricted area is necessary to fulfill the current security needs of the U.S. Coast Guard at this facility. The CG Yard is the U.S. Coast Guard's only shipyard and is its largest industrial facility. The CG Yard is used for major ship, electronics, and heavy weapons overhaul, repair, and manufacture.

    Procedural Requirements 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 proposed rule has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this proposed rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.

    The Corps has made a determination this proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action. This regulatory action determination is based on the size, duration, and location of the restricted area. The restricted area occupies only a portion of the waterway and a vessel that needs to transit the restricted area may do so if the operator of the vessel obtains permission from the Commanding Officer, U.S. Coast Guard Yard or his/her designated representative. Fishing, crabbing, trawling, net-fishing, and other aquatic activities may also be conducted with prior approval from the Commanding Officer, U.S. Coast Guard Yard or his/her designated representative.

    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 Corps certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. While some owners or operators of vessels that intend to transit the restricted area may be small entities, for the reasons stated in paragraph (a) above this rule would not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator. In addition, the restricted area is necessary to address the current security needs at CG Yard, Baltimore, Maryland, including the protection of Coast Guard-wide military assets. Small entities can utilize navigable waters outside of the restricted area. Small entities may also transit the restricted area as long as they obtain permission from the Commanding Officer, CG Yard or his/her designated representative. Unless information is obtained to the contrary during the comment period, the Corps expects that the economic impact of the proposed restricted area would have practically no impact on the public, any anticipated navigational hazard or interference with existing waterway traffic. After considering the economic impacts of this restricted area regulation on small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    c. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act

    Due to the administrative nature of this action and because there is no intended change in the use of the area, the Corps expects that this regulation, if adopted, will not have a significant impact to the quality of the human environment and, therefore, preparation of an environmental impact statement will not be required. An environmental assessment will be prepared after the public notice period is closed and all comments have been received and considered.

    d. Unfunded Mandates Act

    This proposed rule does not impose an enforceable duty among the private sector and, therefore, it is not a Federal private sector mandate and it is not subject to the requirements of either Section 202 or Section 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Act. We have also found under Section 203 of the Act, that small governments will not be significantly and uniquely affected by this rulemaking.

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 334

    Danger zones, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Restricted areas, Waterways.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Corps proposes to amend 33 CFR part 334 as follows:

    PART 334—DANGER ZONE AND RESTRICTED AREA REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for 33 CFR Part 334 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    40 Stat. 266 (33 U.S.C. 1) and 40 Stat. 892 (33 U.S.C. 3).

    2. Add § 334.145 to read as follows:
    § 334.145 Curtis Creek and Arundel Cove, U.S. Coast Guard Yard, Baltimore, Maryland; restricted area.

    (a) The area. The restricted area shall encompass all navigable waters of the United States as defined at 33 CFR part 329, within the area bounded by a line connecting the following coordinates: Commencing from the shoreline at latitude 39°12′05.8″ N., longitude 076°34′28.4″ W.; thence to latitude 39°12′04.8″ N., longitude 076°34′31″ W.; thence to latitude 39°11′5.91″ N., longitude 076°34′28″ W.; thence to latitude 39°11′4.48″ N., longitude 076°34′25″ W.; thence to latitude 39°11′3.36″ N., longitude 076°34′06.9″ W. The datum for these coordinates is NAD-83.

    (b) The regulation. (1) The restricted area as described in paragraph (a) of this section is only open to government vessels. Government vessels include, but are not limited to, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Coast Guard Auxiliary, Department of Defense, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, state and local law enforcement, emergency services and vessels under contract with the U.S. Government. Vessels transiting the restricted area shall proceed across the area by the most direct route and without unnecessary delay. Fishing, crabbing, trawling, net-fishing and other aquatic activities are prohibited without prior approval from the Commanding Officer, U.S. Coast Guard Yard or his/her designated representative. The U.S. Coast Guard will install marker buoys along some or all of the referenced coordinates to demarcate the limits of the restricted area. The Coast Guard will also install warning signs notifying individuals of the restricted area and prohibiting all unauthorized entry into the area will be posted along the property boundary.

    (2) All persons, vessels and other craft are prohibited from entering, transiting, drifting, dredging or anchoring within the restricted area as described in paragraph (a) of this section without prior approval from the Commanding Officer, U.S. Coast Guard Yard or his/her designated representative.

    (3) The restrictions described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section are in effect 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

    (c) Enforcement. The regulations in this section shall be enforced by the Commanding Officer, U.S. Coast Guard Yard or such agencies as he/she may designate.

    Dated: November 9, 2017. Thomas P. Smith, Chief, Operations and Regulatory Division, Directorate of Civil Works.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24888 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3720-58-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers 33 CFR Part 334 [COE-2017-0007] United States Air Force 81st Security Forces Anti-Terrorism Office, Restricted Area, Keesler Air Force Base, Biloxi, Mississippi AGENCY:

    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) is proposing to establish a no anchorage restricted area within waters along the Back Bay of Biloxi shoreline of the Keesler Air Force Base (KAFB) located in Biloxi, Mississippi, on behalf of a request by the United States Air Force (USAF) 81st Security Forces Anti-Terrorism Office. The proposed no anchorage restricted area will be established by placing 12 buoys to demarcate the approximately 10,000 feet of shoreline east to west and extend approximately 150 feet from the shoreline of the base. The proposed restricted area is essential to address a major anti-terrorism and safety concern due to the lack of perimeter fencing or physical denial system.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be submitted on or before December 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by docket number COE-2017-0007, by any of the following methods:

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

    Email: [email protected] Include the docket number COE-2017-0007 in the subject line of the message.

    Mail: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Attn: CECW-CO (David B. Olson), 441 G Street NW., Washington, DC 20314-1000.

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

    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket number COE-2017-0007. All comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available on-line at http://regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the commenter indicates that the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI, or otherwise protected, through regulations.gov or email. The regulations.gov Web site is an anonymous access system, which means we will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email directly to the Corps without going through regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, we recommend that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If we cannot read your comment because of technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, we may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic comments should avoid the use of any special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. David Olson, Headquarters, Operations and Regulatory Community of Practice, Washington, DC at 202-761-4922 or Mr. Don Mroczko, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile District, at 251-690-3185.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The 81st Security Forces Anti-Terrorism Office, KAFB, located in Biloxi, Mississippi is responsible for USAF perimeter security at KAFB located in Biloxi, Mississippi. In accordance with Department of Defense and Department of the Air Force guidance, the 81st Security Forces Anti-Terrorism Office is responsible for the antiterrorism efforts and force protection of Department of the Air Force assets under his or her charge.

    In response to a request by the USAF, and pursuant to its authorities in Section 7 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1917 (40 Stat 266; 33 U.S.C. 1) and Chapter XIX of the Army Appropriations Act of 1919 (40 Stat 892; 33 U.S.C. 3), the Corps is proposing to amend the regulations in 33 CFR part 334 by establishing a new restricted area.

    Procedural Requirements 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 proposed rule has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this proposed rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.

    The Corps has made a determination this proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action. This regulatory action determination is based on the size, duration, and location of the restricted area. The restricted area occupies a small portion of the waterway and a vessel that needs to transit the restricted area may do so if the operator of the vessel obtains permission from the USAF 81st Security Forces Anti-Terrorism Office, KAFB or its authorized representative.

    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 Corps certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. While some owners or operators of vessels that intend to transit the restricted area may be small entities, for the reasons stated in paragraph (a) above this rule would not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator. In addition, the restricted area is necessary to address a major anti-terrorism and safety concern due to the lack of perimeter fencing or physical denial system. Small entities can utilize navigable waters outside of the restricted area. Small entities may also transit the restricted area as long as they obtain permission from the USAF 81st Security Forces Anti-Terrorism Office, KAFB, Biloxi, Mississippi, or its authorized representative. The restricted area is necessary for security of KAFB. Unless information is obtained to the contrary during the comment period, the Corps expects that the economic impact of the proposed restricted area would have practically no impact on the public, any anticipated navigational hazard or interference with existing waterway traffic. After considering the economic impacts of this restricted area regulation on small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    c. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act

    The Corps expects that the proposed rule will not have a significant impact to the quality of the human environment and, therefore, preparation of an environmental impact statement will not be required. An environmental assessment will be prepared after the public notice period is closed and all comments have been received and considered. After it is prepared, it may be reviewed at the District office listed at the end of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, above.

    d. Unfunded Mandates Act

    The proposed rule does not impose an enforceable duty among the private sector and, therefore, is not a Federal private sector mandate and is not subject to the requirements of Section 202 or 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (Pub. L. 104-4, 109 Stat. 48, 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.). We have also found, under Section 203 of the Act, that small governments will not be significantly or uniquely affected by this rulemaking.

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 334

    Danger Zones, Navigation (water), Restricted areas, Waterways.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Corps proposes to amend 33 CFR part 334 as follows:

    PART 334—DANGER ZONE AND RESTRICTED AREA REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for 33 CFR part 334 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    40 Stat. 266 (33 U.S.C. 1) and 40 Stat. 892 (33 U.S.C. 3).

    2. Add § 334.787 to read as follows:
    § 334.787 81st Security Forces Anti-Terrorism Office, Keesler Air Force Base, Biloxi, Mississippi; No Anchorage Restricted Area.

    (a) The area. The restricted area shall encompass all navigable waters of the United States, as defined at 33 CFR part 329, contiguous to the area identified as Keesler Air Force Base (KAFB) and the mean high water level within an area bounded by the shore and buoys from the east to the west of the area starting at: latitude 30°25′11.73″ N. longitude 88°54′57.69″ W., thence to latitude 30°25′11.85″ N. longitude 88°55′3.46″ W., thence to latitude 30°25′8.00″ N. longitude 88°55′10.10″ W., thence to latitude 30°25′4.15″ N. longitude 88°55′16.74″ W., thence to latitude 30°25′6.96″ N. longitude 88°55′24.12″ W., thence to latitude 30°25′1.83″ N. longitude 88°55′30.01″ W., thence to latitude 30°24′56.15″ N. longitude 88°55′34.16″ W., thence to latitude 30°24′51.14″ N. longitude 88°55′39.56″ W., thence to latitude 30°24′47.48″ N. longitude 88°55′46.64″ W., thence to latitude 30°24′51.08″ N. longitude 88°55′53.46″ W., thence to latitude 30°24′55.30″ N. longitude 88°55′59.91″ W., thence to latitude 30°24′56.87″ N. longitude 88°56′7.40″ W. The datum is NAD-83.

    (b) The regulations. (1) All persons, swimmers, vessels and other craft, except those vessels under the supervision or contract to local military or USAF authority, vessels of the United States Coast Guard, and local or state law enforcement vessels, are prohibited from entering the restricted area without permission from the USAF 81st Security Forces Anti-Terrorism Office, KAFB or its authorized representative.

    (2) The restricted area is in effect twenty-four hours per day and seven days a week (24/7).

    (3) Should warranted access into the restricted navigation area be needed, all entities are required to contact the USAF 81st Security Forces Anti-Terrorism Office, KAFB, Biloxi, Mississippi, or its authorized representative.

    (c) Enforcement. The regulation in this section shall be enforced by the USAF 81st Security Forces Anti-Terrorism Office, KAFB and/or such agencies or persons as that office may designate.

    Dated: November 9, 2017. Thomas P. Smith, Chief, Operations and Regulatory Division, Directorate of Civil Works.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24892 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3720-58-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 1037 and 1068 [EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0827; FRL-9970-61-OAR] RIN 2060-AT79 Repeal of Emission Requirements for Glider Vehicles, Glider Engines, and Glider Kits AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to repeal the emission standards and other requirements for heavy-duty glider vehicles, glider engines, and glider kits based on a proposed interpretation of the Clean Air Act (CAA) under which glider vehicles would be found not to constitute “new motor vehicles” within the meaning of CAA section 216(3), glider engines would be found not to constitute “new motor vehicle engines” within the meaning of CAA section 216(3), and glider kits would not be treated as “incomplete” new motor vehicles. Under this proposed interpretation, EPA would lack authority to regulate glider vehicles, glider engines, and glider kits under CAA section 202(a)(1).

    DATES:

    Comments: Comments on all aspects of this proposal must be received on or before January 5, 2018.

    Public Hearing: EPA will hold a public hearing on Monday, December 4, 2017. The hearing will be held at EPA's Washington, DC campus located at 1201 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC. The hearing will start at 10:00 a.m. local time and continue until everyone has had a chance to speak. More details concerning the hearing can be found at https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/regulations-greenhouse-gas-emissions-commercial-trucks.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0827, at http://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 http://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the following location:

    Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, EPA Docket Center, EPA/DC, EPA WJC West Building, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Room 3334, Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is (202) 566-1742.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Julia MacAllister, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Assessment and Standards Division, Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105; telephone number: 734-214-4131; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Does this action apply to me?

    This action relates to a previously promulgated final rule that affects companies that manufacture, sell, or import into the United States glider vehicles. Proposed categories and entities that might be affected include the following:

    Category NAICS code a Examples of potentially affected entities Industry 336110, 336111, 336112, 333618, 336120, 441310 Motor Vehicle Manufacturers, Engine Manufacturers, Engine Parts Manufacturers, Truck Manufacturers, Automotive Parts and Accessories Dealers. Note: a North American Industry Classification System (NAICS).

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely covered by these rules. This table lists the types of entities that we are aware may be regulated by this action. Other types of entities not listed in the table could also be regulated. To determine whether your activities are regulated by this action, you should carefully examine the applicability criteria in the referenced regulations. You may direct questions regarding the applicability of this action to the persons listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

    I. Introduction

    The basis for the proposed repeal of those provisions of the final rule entitled Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles—Phase 2 (the Phase 2 rule) 1 that apply to glider vehicles, glider engines, and glider kits is EPA's proposed interpretation of CAA section 202(a)(1) and sections 216(2) and 216(3), which is discussed below. Under this proposed interpretation: (1) Glider vehicles would not be treated as “new motor vehicles,” (2) glider engines would not be treated as “new motor vehicle engines,” and (3) glider kits would not be treated as “incomplete” new motor vehicles. Based on this proposed interpretation, EPA would lack authority to regulate glider vehicles, glider engines, and glider kits under CAA section 202(a)(1).

    1 81 FR 73478 (October 25, 2016).

    This proposed interpretation is a departure from the position taken by EPA in the Phase 2 rule. There, EPA interpreted the statutory definitions of “new motor vehicle” and “new motor vehicle engines” in CAA section 216(3) as including glider vehicles and glider engines, respectively. The proposed interpretation also departs from EPA's position in the Phase 2 rule that CAA section 202(a)(1) authorizes the Agency to treat glider kits as “incomplete” new motor vehicles.

    It is settled law that EPA has inherent authority to reconsider, revise, or repeal past decisions to the extent permitted by law so long as the Agency provides a reasoned explanation. This authority exists in part because EPA's interpretations of the statutes it administers “are not carved in stone.” Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. NRDC, Inc. 467 U.S. 837, 863 (1984). If an agency is to “engage in informed rulemaking,” it “must consider varying interpretations and the wisdom of its policy on a continuing basis.” Id. at 863-64. This is true when, as is the case here, review is undertaken “in response to . . . a change in administration.” National Cable & Telecommunications Ass'n v. Brand X Internet Services, 545 U.S. 967, 981 (2005). A “change in administration brought about by the people casting their votes is a perfectly reasonable basis for an executive agency's reappraisal of the costs and benefits of its programs and regulations,” and so long as an agency “remains within the bounds established by Congress,” the agency “is entitled to assess administrative records and evaluate priorities in light of the philosophy of the administration.” Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Ass'n. v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 463 U.S. 29, 59 (1983) (Rehnquist, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part).

    After reconsidering the statutory language, EPA proposes to adopt a reading of the relevant provisions of the CAA under which the Agency would lack authority under CAA section 202(a)(1) to impose requirements on glider vehicles, glider engines, and glider kits and therefore proposes to remove the relevant rule provisions. At the same time, under CAA section 202(a)(3)(D), EPA is authorized to “prescribe requirements to control” the “practice of rebuilding heavy-duty engines,” including “standards applicable to emissions from any rebuilt heavy-duty engines.” 42 U.S.C. 7521(a)(3)(D).2 If the interpretation being proposed here were to be finalized, EPA's authority to address heavy-duty engine rebuilding practices under CAA section 202(a)(3)(D) would not be affected.

    2 EPA has adopted regulations that address engine rebuilding practices. See, e.g., 40 CFR 1068.120. EPA is not proposing in this action to adopt additional regulatory requirements pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 7521(a)(3)(D) that would apply to rebuilt engines installed in glider vehicles.

    II. Background A. Factual Context

    A glider vehicle (sometimes referred to simply as a “glider”) is a truck that utilizes a previously owned powertrain (including the engine, the transmission, and usually the rear axle) but which has new body parts. When these new body parts (which generally include the tractor chassis with frame, front axle, brakes, and cab) are put together to form the “shell” of a truck, the assemblage of parts is referred to collectively as a “glider kit.” The final manufacturer of the glider vehicle, i.e., the entity that takes the assembled glider kit and combines it with the used powertrain salvaged from a “donor” truck, is typically a different manufacturer than the original manufacturer of the glider kit. See 81 FR 73512-13 (October 25, 2016).

    B. Statutory and Regulatory Context

    Section 202(a)(1) of the CAA directs that EPA “shall by regulation prescribe,” in “accordance with the provisions” of section 202, “standards applicable to the emission of any air pollutant from any . . . new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines.” 42 U.S.C. 7521(a)(1). CAA section 216(2) defines “motor vehicle” to mean “any self-propelled vehicle designed for transporting persons or property on a street or highway.” 42 U.S.C. 7550(2). A “new motor vehicle” is defined in CAA section 216(3) to mean, as is relevant here, a “motor vehicle the equitable or legal title to which has never been transferred to an ultimate purchaser.” 42 U.S.C. 7550(3) (emphasis added). A “new motor vehicle engine” is similarly defined as an “engine in a new motor vehicle” or a “motor vehicle engine the equitable or legal title to which has never been transferred to the ultimate purchaser.” Id.3

    3 The definitions of both “new motor vehicle” and “new motor vehicle engine” are contained in the same paragraph (3), reflecting the fact that “[w]henever the statute refers to `new motor vehicle' the phrase is followed by `or new motor vehicle engine.' ” See Motor and Equipment Manufacturers Ass'n v. EPA, 627 F.2d 1095, 1102 n.5 (D.C. Cir. 1979). As Title II currently reads, the term “new motor vehicle” appears some 32 times, and in all but two instances, the term is accompanied by “new motor vehicle engine,” indicating that, at the inception of Title II, Congress understood that the regulation of engines was essential to control emissions from “motor vehicles.”

    Comments submitted to EPA during the Phase 2 rulemaking stated that gliders are approximately 25% less expensive than new trucks,4 which makes them popular with small businesses and owner-operators.5 In contrast to an older vehicle, a glider requires less maintenance and yields less downtime.6 A glider has the same braking, lane drift devices, dynamic cruise control, and blind spot detection devices that are found on current model year heavy-duty trucks, making it a safer vehicle to operate, compared to the older truck that it is replacing.7

    4 Response to Comments for Joint Rulemaking, EPA-426-R-16-901 (August 2016) at 1846.

    5 EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0827-1964.

    6 EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0827-1005.

    7Id.

    Some commenters questioned EPA's authority to regulate glider vehicles as “new motor vehicles,” to treat glider engines as “new motor vehicle engines,” or to impose requirements on glider kits. Commenters also pointed out what they described as the overall environmental benefits of gliders. For instance, one commenter stated that “rebuilding an engine and transmission uses 85% less energy than manufacturing them new.” 8 Another commenter noted that the use of glider vehicles “improves utilization and reduces the number of trucks required to haul the same tonnage of freight.” 9 This same commenter further asserted that glider vehicles utilizing “newly rebuilt engines” produce less “particulate, NOX, and GHG emissions . . . compared to [a] worn oil burning engine which is beyond its useful life.” 10

    8 EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0827-1964.

    9 EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0827-1005.

    10Id.

    In the Phase 2 rule, EPA found that it was “reasonable” to consider glider vehicles to be “new motor vehicles” under the definition in CAA section 216(3). See 81 FR 73514 (October 25, 2016). Likewise, EPA found that the previously owned engines utilized by glider vehicles should be considered to be “new motor vehicle engines” within the statutory definition. Based on these interpretations, EPA determined that it had authority under CAA section 202(a) to subject glider vehicles and glider engines to the requirements of the Phase 2 rule. As for glider kits, EPA found that if glider vehicles are new motor vehicles, then the Agency was authorized to regulate glider kits as “incomplete” new motor vehicles. Id.

    C. Petition for Reconsideration

    Following promulgation of the Phase 2 rule, EPA received from representatives of the glider industry a joint petition requesting that the Agency reconsider the application of the Phase 2 rule to glider vehicles, glider engines, and glider kits.11 The petitioners made three principal arguments in support of their petition. First, they argued that EPA is not authorized by CAA section 202(a)(1) to regulate glider kits, glider vehicles, or glider engines. Petition at 3-4. Second, the petitioners contended that in the Phase 2 rule EPA “relied upon unsupported assumptions to arrive at the conclusion that immediate regulation of glider vehicles was warranted and necessary.” Id. at 4. Third, the petitioners asserted that reconsideration was warranted under Executive Order 13783. Id. at 6.

    11See Petition for Reconsideration of Application of the Final Rule Entitled “Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles—Phase 2 Final Rule” to Gliders, from Fitzgerald Glider Kits, LLC; Harrison Truck Centers, Inc.; and Indiana Phoenix, Inc. (July 10, 2017) (Petition). Available in the rulemaking docket, EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0827, and at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-07/documents/hd-ghg-fr-fitzgerald-recons-petition-2017-07-10.pdf.

    The petitioners took particular issue with what they characterized as EPA's having “assumed that the nitrogen oxide (`NOX') and particulate matter (`PM') emissions of glider vehicles using pre-2007 engines” would be “at least ten times higher than emissions from equivalent vehicles being produced with brand new engines.” Petition at 5, citing 81 FR 73942. According to the petitioners, EPA had “relied on no actual data to support this conclusion,” but had “simply relied on the pre-2007 standards.” Id. In support, the petitioners included as an exhibit to their petition a letter from the President of the Tennessee Technological University (“Tennessee Tech”), which described a study recently conducted by Tennessee Tech. This study, according to the petitioners, had “analyz[ed] the NOX, PM, and carbon monoxide . . . emissions from both remanufactured and OEM engines,” and “reached a contrary conclusion” regarding glider vehicle emissions. Petition at 5.

    The petitioners maintained that the results of the study “showed that remanufactured engines from model years between 2002 and 2007 performed roughly on par with OEM `certified' engines,” and “in some instances even out-performed the OEM engines.” Id. The petitioners further claimed that the Tennessee Tech research “ `showed that remanufactured and OEM engines experience parallel decline in emissions efficiency with increased mileage.' ” Id., quoting Tennessee Tech letter at 2. Based on the Tennessee Tech study, the petitioners asserted that “glider vehicles would emit less than 12% of the total NOX and PM emissions for all Class 8 heavy duty vehicles . . . not 33% as the Phase 2 Rule suggests.” Id., citing 81 FR 73943.

    Further, the petitioners complained that the Phase 2 rule had “failed to consider the significant environmental benefits that glider vehicles create.” Petition at 6 (emphasis in original). “Glider vehicle GHG emissions are less than those of OEM vehicles,” the petitioners contended, “due to gliders' greater fuel efficiency,” and the “carbon footprint of gliders is further reduced by the savings created by recycling materials.” Id. The petitioners represented that “[g]lider assemblers reuse approximately 4,000 pounds of cast steel in the remanufacturing process,” including “3,000 pounds for the engine assembly alone.” Id. The petitioners pointed out that “[r]eusing these components avoids the environmental impact of casting steel, including the significant associated NOX emissions.” Id. This “fact,” the petitioners argued, is something that EPA should have been considered but was “not considered in the development of the Phase 2 rule.” Id.

    EPA responded to the glider industry representatives' joint petition by separate letters on August 17, 2017, stating that the petition had “raise[d] significant questions regarding the EPA's authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate gliders.” 12 EPA further indicated that it had “decided to revisit the provisions in the Phase 2 Rule that relate to gliders,” and that the Agency “intends to develop and issue a Federal Register notice of proposed rulemaking on this matter, consistent with the requirements of the Clean Air Act.” 13

    12See, e.g., Letter from E. Scott Pruitt, EPA Administrator, to Tommy C. Fitzgerald, President, Fitzgerald Glider Kits (Aug. 17, 2017). Available in the rulemaking docket, EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0827, and at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-08/documents/hd-ghg-phase2-ttma-ltr-2017-08-17.pdf.

    13Id.

    III. Basis for the Proposed Repeal A. Statutory Analysis

    EPA is proposing that the statutory interpretations on which the Phase 2 rule predicated its regulation of glider vehicles, glider engines, and glider kits were incorrect. EPA proposes an interpretation of the relevant language of the CAA under which glider vehicles are excluded from the statutory term “new motor vehicles” and glider engines are excluded from the statutory term “new motor vehicle engines,” as both terms are defined in CAA section 216(3). Consistent with this interpretation of the scope of “new motor vehicle,” EPA is further proposing that it has no authority to treat glider kits as “incomplete” new motor vehicles under CAA section 202(a)(1).

    As was noted, a “new motor vehicle” is defined by CAA section 216(3) to mean, in relevant part, a “motor vehicle the equitable or legal title to which has never been transferred to an ultimate purchaser.” 42 U.S.C. 7550(3). In basic terms, a glider vehicle consists of the new components that make up a glider kit, into which a previously owned powertrain has been installed. Prior to the time a completed glider vehicle is sold, it can be said that the vehicle's “equitable or legal title” has yet to be “transferred to an ultimate purchaser.” It is on this basis that the Phase 2 rule found that a glider vehicle fits within the definition of “new motor vehicle.” 81 FR 73514 (October 25, 2016).

    EPA's rationale for applying this reading of the statutory language was that “[g]lider vehicles are typically marketed and sold as `brand new' trucks.” 81 FR 73514 (October 25, 2016). EPA took note of one glider kit manufacturer's own advertising materials that represented that the company had “ `mastered the process of taking the `Glider Kit' and installing the components to work seamlessly with the new truck.' ” Id. (emphasis added in original). EPA stated that the “purchaser of a `new truck' necessarily takes initial title to that truck.” Id. (citing statements on the glider kit manufacturer's Web site). EPA rejected arguments raised in comments that “this `new truck' terminology is a mere marketing ploy.” Id. Rather, EPA stated, “it obviously reflects reality.” Id.

    In proposing a new interpretation of the relevant statutory language, EPA now believes that its prior reading was not the best reading, and that the Agency failed to consider adequately the most important threshold consideration: i.e., whether or not Congress, in defining “new motor vehicle” for purposes of Title II, had a specific intent to include within the statutory definition such a thing as a glider vehicle—a vehicle comprised both of new and previously owned components. See Chevron, 467 U.S. at 843 n.9 (Where the “traditional tools of statutory construction” allow one to “ascertain[ ] that Congress had an intention on the precise question at issue,” that “intention is the law and must be given effect.”). Where “Congress has not directly addressed the precise question at issue,” and the “statute is silent or ambiguous with respect to the specific issue,” it is left to the agency charged with implementing the statute to provide an “answer based on a permissible construction of the statute.” Id. at 843.

    Focusing solely on that portion of the statutory definition that provides that a motor vehicle is considered “new” prior to the time its “equitable or legal title” has been “transferred to an ultimate purchaser,” a glider vehicle would appear to qualify as “new.” As the Supreme Court has repeatedly counseled, however, that is just the beginning of a proper interpretive analysis. The “definition of words in isolation,” the Court has noted, “is not necessarily controlling in statutory construction.” See Dolan v. United States Postal Service, 546 U.S. 481, 486 (2006). Rather, the “interpretation of a word or phrase depends upon reading the whole statutory text, considering the purpose and context of the statute,” and “consulting any precedents or authorities that inform the analysis.” Id. Similarly, in seeking to “determine congressional intent, using traditional tools of statutory construction,” the “starting point is the language of the statute.” See Dole v. United Steelworkers of America, 494 U.S. 26, 35 (1990) (emphasis added) (internal citation omitted). At the same time, “in expounding a statute,” one is not to be “guided by a single sentence or member of a sentence,” but is to “look to the provisions of the whole law, and to its object and policy.” Id. (internal citations omitted).

    Assessed in light of these principles, it is clear that EPA's reading of the statutory definition of “new motor vehicle” in the Phase 2 rule fell short. First, that reading failed to account for the fact that, at the time this definition of “new motor vehicle” was enacted, it is likely that Congress did not have in mind that the definition would be construed as applying to a vehicle comprised of new body parts and a previously owned powertrain. The manufacture of glider vehicles to salvage the usable powertrains of trucks wrecked in accidents goes back a number of years.14 But only more recently—after the enactment of Title II—have glider vehicles been produced in any great number.

    14 EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0827-1964.

    Furthermore, the concept of deeming a motor vehicle to be “new” based on its “equitable or legal title” not having been transferred to an “ultimate purchaser” appears to have originated with an otherwise unrelated federal statute that predated Title II by a few years—i.e., the Automobile Information Disclosure Act of 1958, Public Law 85-506 (Disclosure Act).15 The history of Title II's initial enactment and subsequent development indicates that, in adopting a definition of “new motor vehicle” for purposes of the Clean Air Act, Congress drew on the approach it had taken originally with the Disclosure Act.

    15 The provisions of the Disclosure Act are set forth at 15 U.S.C. 1231-1233.

    Among other things, the Disclosure Act requires that a label be affixed to the windshield or side window of new automobiles, with the label providing such information as the Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price. See 15 U.S.C. 1232 (“Every manufacturer of new automobiles distributed in commerce shall, prior to the delivery of any new automobile to any dealer, or at or prior to the introduction date of new models delivered to a dealer prior to such introduction date, securely affix to the windshield, or side window of such automobile a label . . . .”) (emphases added). The Disclosure Act defines the term “automobile” to “include[ ] any passenger car or station wagon,” and defines the term “new automobile” to mean “an automobile the equitable or legal title to which has never been transferred by a manufacturer, distributor, or dealer to an ultimate purchaser.” See 15 U.S.C. 1231(c), (d).

    In 1965, Congress amended the then-existing Clean Air Act, and for the first time enacted provisions directed at the control of air pollution from motor vehicles. See Clean Air Act Amendments of 1965, Public Law 89-272 (1965 CAA). Included in the 1965 CAA was a brand new Title II, the “Motor Vehicle Air Pollution Control Act,” the structure and language of which largely mirrored key provisions of Title II as it exists today. Section 202(a) of the 1965 CAA provided that the “Secretary [of what was then the Department of Health, Education and Welfare] shall by regulation, giving appropriate consideration to technological feasibility and economic costs, prescribe . . . standards applicable to the emission of any kind of substance, from any class or classes of new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines, which in his judgment cause or contribute to, or are likely to cause or to contribute to, air pollution which endangers the health or welfare of any persons . . . .” Public Law 89-272, 79 Stat. 992 (emphasis added).

    Section 208 of the 1965 CAA defined “motor vehicle” in terms identical to those in the CAA today: “any self-propelled vehicle designed for transporting persons or property on a street or highway.” Public Law 89-272, 79 Stat. 995. The 1965 CAA defined “new motor vehicle” and “new motor vehicle engine” to mean, as relevant here, “a motor vehicle the equitable or legal title to which has never been transferred to an ultimate purchaser; and the term `new motor vehicle engine' ” to mean “an engine in a new motor vehicle or a motor vehicle engine the equitable or legal title to which has never been transferred to the ultimate purchaser.” Id. Again, in relevant part, the 1965 CAA definitions of these terms were identical to those that currently appear in CAA section 216(3).

    While the legislative history of the 1965 CAA does not expressly indicate that Congress based its definition of “new motor vehicle” on the definition of “new automobile” first adopted by the Automobile Information Disclosure Act of 1958, it seems clear that such was the case. The statutory language of the two provisions is identical in all pertinent respects,16 and there appears to be no other federal statute, in existence prior to enactment of the 1965 CAA, from which Congress could have derived that terminology.

    16 Further, the 1965 CAA's definition of “ultimate purchaser,” as set forth in section 208(5), for the most part tracks the Disclosure Act's earlier-enacted definition: “The term `ultimate purchaser' means, with respect to any new automobile, the first person, other than a dealer purchasing in his capacity as a dealer, who in good faith purchases such new automobile for purposes other than resale.” Compare 1965 CAA section 208(5), Public Law 89-272, 79 Stat. 995 with 15 U.S.C. 1231(g). Such is the case, too, with respect to the 1965 CAA's definition of “manufacturer.” Compare 1965 CAA section 208(1), Public Law 89-272, 79 Stat. 994-995 with 15 U.S.C. 1231(a).

    Subsequently, the statutory language from the 1965 CAA, defining the terms “motor vehicle,” “new motor vehicle,” “new motor vehicle engine,” “ultimate purchaser,” and “manufacturer” was incorporated verbatim in the Air Quality Act of 1967 (1967 AQA). See Public Law 148, 81 Stat. 503. The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1970 (1970 CAAA) did not change those definitions, except to add the language regarding “vehicles or engines imported or offered for importation” that currently appears in CAA section 216(3). See Public Law 91-604, 84 Stat. 1694, 1703.17

    17 The legislative history of both the 1967 AQA and 1977 CAAA is silent with respect to the origin of Title II's definitions of “new motor vehicle,” “new motor vehicle engine,” “ultimate purchaser,” and “manufacturer,” which further underscores that Congress had originally derived those definitions from the Disclosure Act.

    The fact that Congress, in first devising the CAA's definition of “new motor vehicle” for purposes of Title II, drew on the pre-existing definition of “new automobile” in the Automobile Information Disclosure Act of 1958 serves to illuminate congressional intent. As with the Disclosure Act, Congress in the 1965 CAA selected the point of first transfer of “equitable or legal title” to serve as a bright line—i.e., to distinguish between those “new” vehicles (and engines) that would be subject to emission standards adopted pursuant to CAA section 202(a)(1) and those existing vehicles that would not be subject. Insofar as the 1965 CAA definition of “new motor vehicle” was based on the Disclosure Act definition of “new automobile,” it would seem clear that Congress intended, for purposes of Title II, that a “new motor vehicle” would be understood to mean something equivalent to a “new automobile”—i.e., a true “showroom new” vehicle. It is implausible that Congress would have had in mind that a “new motor vehicle” might also include a vehicle comprised of new body parts and a previously owned powertrain.

    Given this, EPA does not believe that congressional intent as to the meaning of the term “new motor vehicle” can be clearly ascertained on the basis of an isolated reading of a few words in the statutory definition, where that reading is divorced from the structure and history of the CAA as a whole. Based on that structure and history, it seems likely that Congress understood a “new motor vehicle,” as defined in CAA § 216(3), to be a vehicle comprised entirely of new parts and certainly not a vehicle with a used engine. At a minimum, ambiguity exists. This leaves EPA with the task of providing an “answer based on a permissible construction of the statute.” Chevron, 467 U.S. at 843.

    1. Glider Vehicles

    EPA is proposing to interpret “new motor vehicle,” as defined in CAA § 216(3), as not including glider vehicles. This is a reasonable interpretation—and commonsense would agree—insofar as it takes account of the reality that significant elements of a glider vehicle (i.e., the powertrain elements, including the engine and the transmission) are previously owned components. Under the Phase 2 rule's interpretation, in contrast, the act of installing a previously owned powertrain into a glider kit—i.e., something that, as is explained further below, is not a “motor vehicle” as defined by the CAA—results in the creation of a new “motor vehicle.” EPA believes that Congress, in adopting a definition of “new motor vehicle” for purposes of Title II, never had in mind that the statutory language would admit of such a counterintuitive result.

    In other words, EPA now believes that, in defining “new motor vehicle,” Congress did not intend that a vehicle comprised of a new outer shell conjoined to a previously owned powertrain should be treated as a “new” vehicle, based solely on the fact that the vehicle may have been assigned a new title following assembly. In this regard, insofar as Title II's regulatory regime was at its inception directed at the emissions produced by new vehicle engines, 18 it is not at all clear that Congress intended that Title II's reach should extend to a vehicle whose outer parts may be “new” but whose engine was previously owned.

    18See footnote 3, supra.

    2. Glider Engines

    EPA proposes to find that, since a glider vehicle does not meet the statutory definition of a “new motor vehicle,” it necessarily follows that a glider engine is not a “new motor vehicle engine” within the meaning of CAA section 216(3). Under that provision, a motor vehicle engine is deemed to be “new” in either of two circumstances: (1) The engine is “in a new motor vehicle,” or (2) the “equitable or legal title” to the engine has “never been transferred to the ultimate purchaser.” The second of these circumstances can never apply to a glider engine, which is invariably an engine that has been previously owned.

    As to the first circumstance, a glider engine is installed in a glider kit, which in itself is not a “motor vehicle.” A glider kit becomes a “motor vehicle” only after an engine (and the balance of the powertrain) has been installed. But while adding a previously owned engine to a glider kit may result in the creation of a “motor vehicle,” the assertion that the previously owned engine thereby becomes a “new motor vehicle engine” within the meaning of CAA section 216(3), due to the engine's now being in a “new motor vehicle,” reflects circular thinking. It presupposes that the installation of a (previously owned) engine in a glider kit creates not just a “motor vehicle” but a “new motor vehicle.” EPA is proposing to interpret the relevant statutory language in a manner that rejects the Agency's prior reliance on the view that (1) installing a previously owned engine in a glider kit transforms the glider kit into a “new motor vehicle,” and (2) that, thereafter, the subsequent presence of that previously owned engine in the supposed “new motor vehicle” transforms that engine into a “new motor vehicle engine” within the meaning of CAA section 216(3).

    3. Glider Kits

    Under EPA's proposed interpretation, EPA would have no authority to regulate glider kits under CAA section 202(a)(1). If glider vehicles are not “new motor vehicles,” which is the interpretation of CAA section 216(3) that EPA is proposing here, then the Agency lacks authority to regulate glider kits as “incomplete” new motor vehicles. Further, given that a glider kit lacks a powertrain, a glider kit does not explicitly meet the definition of “motor vehicle,” which, in relevant part, is defined to mean “any self-propelled vehicle.” 42 U.S.C. 7550(2) (emphasis added). It is not obvious that a vehicle without a motor could constitute a “motor vehicle.”

    4. Issues for Which EPA Seeks Comment

    EPA believes that its proposed interpretation is the most reasonable reading of the relevant statutory language, and that its proposed determination, based on this interpretation, that regulation of glider vehicles, glider engines, and glider kits is not authorized by CAA section 202(a)(1) is also reasonable. EPA seeks comment on this interpretation.

    Comments submitted in the Phase 2 rulemaking docket lead EPA to believe that a glider vehicle is often a suitable option for those small businesses and independent operators who cannot afford to purchase a new vehicle, but who wish to replace an older vehicle with a vehicle that is equipped with up-to-date safety features. EPA solicits comment and further information as to this issue. EPA also solicits comment and information on whether limiting the availability of glider vehicles could result in older, less safe, more-polluting trucks remaining on the road that much longer. EPA particularly seeks information and analysis addressing the question whether glider vehicles produce significantly fewer emissions overall compared to the older trucks they would replace.

    EPA also seeks comment on the matter of the anticipated purchasing behavior on the part of the smaller trucking operations and independent drivers if the regulatory provisions at issue were to repealed. Further, EPA seeks comment on the relative expected emissions impacts if the regulatory requirements at issue here were to be repealed or were to be left in place.

    Finally, EPA seeks comment on whether, if the Agency were to determine not to adopt the interpretation of CAA sections 202(a)(1) and 216(3) being proposed here, EPA should nevertheless revise the “interim provisions” of Phase 2 rule, 40 CFR 1037.150(t)(1)(ii), to increase the exemption available for small manufacturers above the current limit of 300 glider vehicles per year. EPA seeks input on how large an increase would be reasonable, were the Agency to increase the limit in taking final action. Further, EPA seeks comment on whether, if the Agency were to determine not to adopt the statutory interpretation being proposed here, EPA should nevertheless extend by some period of time the date for compliance for glider vehicles, glider engines, and glider kits set forth in 40 CFR 1037.635. EPA seeks comment on what would be a reasonable extension of the compliance date.

    B. Conclusion

    EPA has a fundamental obligation to ensure that the regulatory actions it takes are authorized by Congress, and that the standards and requirements that it would impose on the regulatory community have a sound and reasonable basis in law. EPA is now proposing to find that the most reasonable reading of the relevant provisions of the CAA, including CAA sections 202(a)(1), 216(2), and 216(3) is that glider vehicles should not be regulated as “new motor vehicles,” that glider engines should not be regulated as “new motor vehicle engines,” and that glider kits should not be regulated as “incomplete” new motor vehicles. Based on this proposed interpretation, EPA is proposing to repeal those provisions of the Phase 2 rule applicable to glider vehicles, glider engines, and glider kits.

    IV. Public Participation

    We request comment by January 5, 2018 on all aspects of this proposal. This section describes how you can participate in this process.

    Materials related to the Heavy-Duty Phase 2 rulemaking are available in the public docket noted above and at: https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/regulations-greenhouse-gas-emissions-commercial-trucks.

    1. How do I prepare and submit information?

    Direct your submittals to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0827. EPA's policy is that all submittals received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the submittal includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    Do not submit information to the docket that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your submittal. If you submit an electronic submittal, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your submittal and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

    EPA will hold a public hearing on the date and at the location stated in the DATES Section. To attend the hearing, individuals will need to show appropriate ID to enter the building. The hearing will start at 10:00 a.m. local time and continue until everyone has had a chance to speak. More details concerning the hearing can be found at https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/regulations-greenhouse-gas-emissions-commercial-trucks.

    2. Submitting CBI

    Do not submit this information to EPA through www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI). In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.

    3. Tips for Preparing Your Comments

    When submitting comments, remember to:

    • Identify the action by docket number and other identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).

    • Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and substitute language for your requested changes.

    • Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/or data that you used.

    • If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced.

    • Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and suggest alternatives.

    • Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or personal threats.

    • Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified in the DATES section above.

    V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews (1) Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

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

    (2) Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Costs

    This action is expected to be an Executive Order 13771 deregulatory action. This proposed rule is expected to provide meaningful burden reduction by eliminating regulatory requirements for glider manufacturers.

    (3) Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under the PRA because it does not contain any information collection activities. It would only eliminate regulatory requirements for glider manufacturers.

    (4) Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. In making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no net burden, or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small entities subject to the rule. Small glider manufacturers would be allowed to produce glider vehicles without meeting new motor vehicle emission standards. We have therefore concluded that this action will have no adverse regulatory impact for any directly regulated small entities.

    (5) Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local, or tribal governments.

    (6) Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

    (7) Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in Executive Order 13175. This proposed rule will be implemented at the Federal level and affects glider manufacturers. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

    (8) Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not an economically significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866. However, the Emission Requirements for Glider Vehicles, Glider Engines, and Glider Kits was anticipated to lower ambient concentrations of PM2.5 and some of the benefits of reducing these pollutants may have accrued to children. Our evaluation of the environmental health or safety effects of these risks on children is presented in Section XIV.H. of the HD Phase 2 Rule.19 Some of the benefits for children's health as described in that analysis would be lost as a result of this action.

    19 81 FR 73478 (October 25, 2016).

    In general, current expectations about future emissions of pollution from these trucks is difficult to forecast given uncertainties in future technologies, fuel prices, and the demand for trucking. Furthermore, the proposed action does not affect the level of public health and environmental protection already being provided by existing NAAQS and other mechanisms in the CAA. This proposed action does not affect applicable local, state, or federal permitting or air quality management programs that will continue to address areas with degraded air quality and maintain the air quality in areas meeting current standards. Areas that need to reduce criteria air pollution to meet the NAAQS will still need to rely on control strategies to reduce emissions. To the extent that states use other mechanisms in order to comply with the NAAQS, and still achieve the criteria pollution reductions that would have occurred under the CPP, this proposed rescission will not have a disproportionate adverse effect on children's health.

    (9) Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

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

    (10) National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

    (11) Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations, and Low-Income Populations

    Pursuant to Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994), EPA considered environmental justice concerns of the final HD Phase 2 rule. EPA's evaluation of human health and environmental effects on minority, low-income or indigenous populations for the final HD Phase 2 rule is presented in the Preamble, Section VIII.A.8 and 9 (81 FR 73844-7, October 25, 2016). We have not evaluated the impacts on minority, low-income or indigenous populations that may occur as a result of the proposed action to rescind emissions requirements for heavy-duty glider vehicles and engines. EPA likewise has not considered the economic and employment impacts of this rule specifically as they relate to or might impact minority, low-income and indigenous populations.

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 1037 and 1068

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control, Confidential business information, Labeling, Motor vehicle pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Warranties.

    Dated: November 9, 2017. E. Scott Pruitt, Administrator.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as set forth below.

    PART 1037—CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM NEW HEAVY-DUTY MOTOR VEHICLES 1. The authority for part 1037 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

    Subpart B—[Amended] 2. Section 1037.150 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph (t) as follows:
    § 1037.150 Interim provisions.

    (t) [Reserved]

    Subpart G—[Amended]
    § 1037.635 [Removed]
    3. Section 1037.635 is removed. Subpart I—[Amended] 4. Section 1037.801 is amended by removing the definitions “glider kit” and “glider vehicle” and revising the definitions of “manufacturer” and “new motor vehicle” to read as follows:
    § 1037.801 Definitions.

    Manufacturer has the meaning given in section 216(1) of the Act. In general, this term includes any person who manufactures or assembles a vehicle (including a trailer or another incomplete vehicle) for sale in the United States or otherwise introduces a new motor vehicle into commerce in the United States. This includes importers who import vehicles for resale.

    New motor vehicle has the meaning given in the Act. It generally means a motor vehicle meeting the criteria of either paragraph (1) or (2) of this definition. New motor vehicles may be complete or incomplete.

    (1) A motor vehicle for which the ultimate purchaser has never received the equitable or legal title is a new motor vehicle. This kind of vehicle might commonly be thought of as “brand new” although a new motor vehicle may include previously used parts. Under this definition, the vehicle is new from the time it is produced until the ultimate purchaser receives the title or places it into service, whichever comes first.

    (2) An imported heavy-duty motor vehicle originally produced after the 1969 model year is a new motor vehicle.

    PART 1068—GENERAL COMPLIANCE PROVISIONS FOR HIGHWAY, STATIONARY, AND NONROAD PROGRAMS 5. The authority for part 1068 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

    Subpart B—[Amended] 6. Section 1068.120 is amended by revising paragraph (f)(5) to read as follows:
    § 1068.120 Requirements for rebuilding engines.

    (f) * * *

    (5) The standard-setting part may apply further restrictions to situations involving installation of used engines to repower equipment.

    [FR Doc. 2017-24884 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    82 220 Thursday, November 16, 2017 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Federal Crop Insurance Corporation [Docket No. FCIC-17-0002] Notice of Request for Renewal and Revision of the Currently Approved Information Collection AGENCY:

    Federal Crop Insurance Corporation, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Renewal and Revision of the Currently Approved Information Collection.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces a public comment period on the information collection requests (ICRs) associated with the Standard Reinsurance Agreement and Appendices I, II and IV administered by Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC). Appendix III is excluded because it contains the Data Acceptance System requirements.

    DATES:

    Written comments on this notice will be accepted until close of business January 16, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    FCIC prefers that comments be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal. You may submit comments, identified by Docket ID No. FCIC-17-0002, by any of the following methods:

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

    By Mail to: David L. Miller, Director, Reinsurance Services Division, Federal Crop Insurance Corporation, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Stop 0801, Washington, DC 20250.

    All comments received, including those received by mail, will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, and can be accessed by the public. All comments must include the agency name and docket number or Regulatory Information Number (RIN) for this rule. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information, see http://www.regulations.gov. If you are submitting comments electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal and want to attach a document, we ask that it be in a text-based format. If you want to attach a document that is a scanned Adobe PDF file, it must be scanned as text and not as an image, thus allowing FCIC to search and copy certain portions of your submissions. For questions regarding attaching a document that is a scanned Adobe PDF file, please contact the RMA Web Content Team at (816) 823-4694 or by email at [email protected]

    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments received for any 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 the complete User Notice and Privacy Notice for Regulations.gov at http://www.regulations.gov/#!privacyNotice.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David L. Miller, Director, Risk Management Agency, at the address listed above, telephone (202) 720-9830.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Standard Reinsurance Agreement; Appendices I, II and IV.

    OMB Number: 0563-0069.

    Type of Request: Renewal of current Information Collection.

    Abstract: The Federal Crop Insurance Act (Act), Title 7 U.S.C. Chapter 36, Section 1508(k), authorizes the FCIC to provide reinsurance to insurers approved by FCIC that insure producers of any agricultural commodity under one or more plans acceptable to FCIC. The Act also states that the reinsurance shall be provided on such terms and conditions as the Board may determine to be consistent with subsections (b) and (c) of this section and sound reinsurance principles.

    FCIC executes the same form of reinsurance agreement, called the Standard Reinsurance Agreement (SRA), with sixteen participating insurers approved for the 2018 reinsurance year. Appendix I of the SRA, Regulatory Duties and Responsibilities, sets forth the company's responsibilities as required by statute. Appendix I includes; a) Conflict of Interest data collection, which in addition to the insurance companies reinsured by FCIC, encompasses the insurance companies' employees and their contracted agents and loss adjusters; and b) Controlled Business data collection from all employed or contracted agents. Appendix II of the SRA, the Plan of Operations (Plan), sets forth the information the insurer is required to file with RMA for each reinsurance year they wish to participate. The Plan's information enables RMA to evaluate the insurer's financial and operational capability to deliver the crop insurance program in accordance with the Act. Estimated premiums by fund by state, and retained percentages along with current policyholders surplus are used in calculations to determine whether to approve the insurer's requested maximum reinsurable premium volume for the reinsurance year per 7 CFR 400 Subpart L. This information has a direct effect upon the insurer's amount of retained premium and associated liability and is required to calculate the insurer's underwriting gain or loss.

    Appendix IV of the SRA, Quality Control and Program Integrity, establishes the minimum annual agent and loss adjuster training requirements, and quality control review procedures and performance standards required of the insurance companies. FCIC requires each insurer to submit, for each reinsurance year, a Quality Control Report to FCIC containing details of the results of their completed reviews. The insurance companies must also provide an annual Training and Performance Evaluation Report which details the evaluation of each agent and loss adjuster and reports of any remedial actions taken by the Company to correct any error or omission or ensure compliance with the SRA. The submission of these reports is included in Appendix II.

    FCIC is requesting the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to extend the approval of this information collection for an additional 3 years.

    The purpose of this notice is to solicit comments from the public concerning the continuation of the current information collection activity as associated with the SRA in effect for the 2018 and subsequent reinsurance years. These comments will help us:

    (1) Evaluate whether the current collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information has practical utility;

    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the current collection of information;

    (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information being collected; and

    (4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, through use, as appropriate, of automated, electronic, mechanical, and other collection technologies, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    The estimate below shows the burden that will be placed upon the following affected entities.

    Appendix I—Regulatory Duties and Responsibilities Conflict of Interest

    Estimate of Burden: The public reporting burden of employees, agents and loss adjusters for the Appendix I collection of Conflict of Interest information is estimated to average 1 hour per response.

    Respondents/Affected Entities: Insurance company employees and their contracted agents and loss adjusters.

    Estimated annual number of respondents: 20,000.

    Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 1.

    Estimated annual number of responses: 20,000.

    Estimated total annual burden on respondents (hours): 20,000.

    Estimate of Burden: The public reporting burden of the insurance companies of the Appendix I collection of Conflict of Interest information is estimated to average 24 hours per response.

    Respondents/Affected Entities: Insurance companies reinsured by FCIC.

    Estimated annual number of respondents: 16.

    Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 1.

    Estimated annual number of responses: 16.

    Estimated total annual burden on respondents (hours): 384.

    Controlled Business

    Estimate of Burden: The public reporting burden of agents for the Appendix I collection of Controlled Business information is estimated to average 1 hour per response.

    Respondents/Affected Entities: Insurance company agents.

    Estimated annual number of respondents: 12,500.

    Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 1.

    Estimated annual number of responses: 12,500.

    Estimated total annual burden on respondents (hours): 12,500.

    Estimate of Burden: The public reporting burden of the insurance companies for the Appendix I collection of Controlled Business information is estimated to average 24 hours per response.

    Respondents/Affected Entities: Insurance companies reinsured by FCIC.

    Estimated annual number of respondents: 16.

    Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 1.

    Estimated annual number of responses: 16.

    Estimated total annual burden on respondents (hours): 384.

    Appendix II—Plan of Operations

    Estimate of Burden: The public reporting burden of the insurance companies for the collection of Appendix II information is estimated to average 128 hours per response.

    Respondents/Affected Entities: Insurance companies reinsured by FCIC.

    Estimated annual number of respondents: 16.

    Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 1.

    Estimated annual number of responses: 16.

    Estimated total annual burden on respondents (hours): 2,048.

    Appendix IV—Quality Control and Program Integrity Quality Control and Training Plan and Report

    Estimate of Burden: The public reporting burden of the insurance companies for the collection of Appendix IV information is estimated to average 74 hours per response.

    Respondents/Affected Entities: Insurance companies reinsured by FCIC.

    Estimated annual number of respondents: 16.

    Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 1.

    Estimated annual number of responses: 16.

    Estimated total annual burden on respondents (hours): 1,184.

    Agent Training Requirements

    Estimate of Burden: The public reporting burden of agents the Appendix IV training requirements is estimated to average 4 hours per response.

    Respondents/Affected Entities: Insurance company agents.

    Estimated annual number of respondents: 12,500.

    Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 1.

    Estimated annual number of responses: 12,500.

    Estimated total annual burden on respondents (hours): 50,000.

    Loss Adjuster Training Requirements

    Estimate of Burden: The public reporting burden of loss adjusters for the Appendix IV training requirements is estimated to average 17 hours per response.

    Respondents/Affected Entities: Insurance company loss adjusters.

    Estimated annual number of respondents: 5,000.

    Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 1.

    Estimated annual number of responses: 5,000.

    Estimated total annual burden on respondents (hours): 85,000.

    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.

    Signed in Washington, DC, on November 9, 2017. Heather Manzano, Acting Director, Federal Crop Insurance Corporation.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24743 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-08-P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Delaware Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of monthly planning meetings.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission), and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), that a planning meeting of the Delaware State Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene by conference call, on Monday, November 20 at 10:00 a.m. (EST). The purpose of the meeting is to discuss what more needs to be done to complete the record of the briefing meeting conducted in Wilmington on November 1, 2017, titled, Implicit Bias and Policing in Communities of Color in Delaware. The Committee will also discuss tasks needed to prepare the report of its review to the Commission.

    DATES:

    Monday, November 20, 2017, at 10:00 a.m. (EST).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Interested members of the public may listen to the discussion by calling the following toll-free conference call number: 1-800-210-9006 and conference call ID: 4124362. Please be advised that before placing them into the conference call, the conference call operator may ask callers to provide their names, their organizational affiliations (if any), and email addresses (so that callers may be notified of future meetings). Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number herein.

    Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the discussion by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-888-364-3109 and providing the operator with the toll-free conference call number: 1-800-210-9006 and conference call ID: 4124362.

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

    Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing as they become available at http://facadatabase.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=240; click the “Meeting Details” and “Documents” links. Records generated from this meeting may also be inspected and reproduced at the Eastern Regional Office, as they become available, both before and after the meetings. Persons interested in the work of this advisory committee are advised to go to the Commission's Web site, www.usccr.gov, or to contact the Eastern Regional Office at the above phone number, email or street address.

    Agenda I. Welcome and Introductions Rollcall II. Planning Meeting Discuss post-briefing record and tasks III. Other Business IV. Adjourn

    Exceptional Circumstance: Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.150, the notice for this meeting is given less than 15 calendar days prior to the meeting because of the exceptional circumstance of completing the record on the implicit bias project.

    Dated: November 13, 2017. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24828 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-552-821] Certain Tool Chests and Cabinets From the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional Measures AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (the Department) preliminarily determines that certain tool chests and cabinets (tool chests) from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (Vietnam) are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV). The period of investigation (POI) is October 1, 2016, through March 31, 2017.

    DATES:

    Applicable November 16, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dmitry Vladimirov, AD/CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-0665.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    This preliminary determination is made in accordance with section 733(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). The Department published the notice of initiation of this investigation on May 9, 2017.1 On August 21, 2017, the Department postponed the preliminary determination of this investigation and the revised deadline is now November 7, 2017.2 For a complete description of the events that followed the initiation of this investigation, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.3 A list of topics included in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is included as Appendix II to this notice. 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 accessed directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/.

    1See Certain Tool Chests and Cabinets from the People's Republic of China and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 82 FR 21523 (May 9, 2017) (Initiation Notice).

    2See Certain Tool Chests and Cabinets from the People's Republic of China and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Postponements of Preliminary Determinations of Antidumping Duty Investigations, 82 FR 39563 (August 21, 2017).

    3See Memorandum, “Decision Memorandum for Preliminary Affirmative Determination in the Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation of Certain Tool Chests and Cabinets from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam,” dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice (Preliminary Decision Memorandum).

    Scope of the Investigation

    The products covered by this investigation are tool chests from Vietnam. For a complete description of the scope of this investigation, see Appendix I.

    Scope Comments

    In accordance with the preamble to the Department's regulations,4 the Initiation Notice set aside a period of time for parties to raise issues regarding product coverage (scope).5 Certain interested parties commented on the scope of the investigation as it appeared in the Initiation Notice. For a summary of the product coverage comments and rebuttal responses submitted to the record for this investigation, and accompanying discussion and analysis of all comments timely received, see the Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum.6 The Department has preliminarily modified the scope language that appeared in the Initiation Notice. See the revised scope in Appendix I to this notice. The Department intends to address any scope comments received 7 and issue a final scope decision along with the final determination in the concurrent countervailing duty (CVD) investigation on tool chests from the People's Republic of China.

    4See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).

    5See Initiation Notice, 82 FR at 21523.

    6See Memorandum, “Certain Tool Chests and Cabinets from the People's Republic of China and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Scope Comments Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determinations” (Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum), dated September 8, 2017.

    7 The scope case briefs were due 30 days after the publication of Certain Tool Chests and Cabinets from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, 82 FR 43331 (September 15, 2017), which was Sunday, October 15, 2017. See the Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum at 6. Therefore, the actual deadline for the scope case briefs was Monday, October 16, 2017. See 19 CFR 351.303(b)(1) (“For both electronically filed and manually filed documents, if the applicable due date falls on a non-business day, the Secretary will accept documents that are filed on the next business day.”). The deadline for scope rebuttal briefs was Monday, October 23, 2017.

    Methodology

    The Department is conducting this investigation in accordance with section 731 of the Act. The Department has calculated export prices and constructed export prices in accordance with sections 772(a) and (b) of the Act, respectively. Because Vietnam is a non-market economy, within the meaning of section 771(18) of the Act, the Department has calculated normal value (NV) in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act. In addition, pursuant to section 776(a) and (b) of the Act, the Department preliminarily has relied on facts otherwise available, with adverse inferences, for the Vietnam-wide entity. For a full description of the methodology underlying the Department's preliminary determination, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    Combination Rates

    In the Initiation Notice, 8 the Department stated that it would calculate producer/exporter combination rates for the respondents that are eligible for a separate rate in this investigation. Policy Bulletin 05.1 describes this practice.9 In this investigation, we calculated producer/exporter combination rates for respondents eligible for separate rates.

    8See Initiation Notice, 82 FR at 21528.

    9See Enforcement and Compliance's Policy Bulletin No. 05.1, regarding, “Separate-Rates Practice and Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigations involving Non-Market Economy Countries,” dated April 5, 2005 (Policy Bulletin 05.1), available on the Department's Web site at http://enforcement.trade.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf.

    Preliminary Determination

    The Department preliminarily determines that the following estimated weighted-average dumping margins exist: 10

    10 The Department preliminarily determines that Clearwater Metal VN JSC, Rabat Corporation, and CSPS Co., Ltd., are a single entity (hereinafter, Clearwater Metal Single Entity). See Preliminary Decision Memorandum; see also Memorandum, “Certain Tool Chests and Cabinets from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Collapsing and Single Entity Treatment,” dated concurrently with this notice.

    Exporter Producer Estimated
  • weighted-
  • average
  • dumping
  • margin
  • (%%)
  • Clearwater Metal Single Entity Clearwater Metal Single Entity 230.31 Vietnam-wide Entity 230.31
    Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 733(d)(2) of the Act, the Department will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation of subject merchandise as described in the scope of the investigation section entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register, as discussed below. Further, pursuant to section 733(d)(1)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(d), the Department will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit equal to the weighted-average amount by which normal value exceeds U.S. price, as indicated in the chart above as follows: (1) For the producer/exporter combination listed in the table above, the cash deposit rate is equal to the estimated weighted-average dumping margin listed for that combination in the table; (2) for all combinations of Vietnam producers/exporters of merchandise under consideration that have not established eligibility for their own separate rates, the cash deposit rate will be equal to the estimated weighted-average dumping margin established for the Vietnam-wide entity; and (3) for all third-country exporters of merchandise under consideration not listed in the table above, the cash deposit rate is the cash deposit rate applicable to the Vietnam producer/exporter combination (or the Vietnam-wide entity) that supplied that third-country exporter.

    Disclosure

    The Department intends to disclose to interested parties the calculations performed in connection with this preliminary determination within five days of its public announcement or, if there is no public announcement, within five days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    Verification

    As provided in section 782(i)(1) of the Act, the Department intends to verify information relied upon in making its final determination.

    Public Comment

    Case briefs or other written comments, with the exception of scope case briefs or scope comments,11 may be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance no later than seven days after the date on which the last final verification report is issued in this investigation, unless the Department 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.12 Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2), parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this investigation 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.

    11 As explained above, the actual deadline for the scope case briefs was Monday, October 16, 2017.

    12See 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, limited to issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs, 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, whether any participant is a foreign national, 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. Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and location of the hearing two days before the scheduled date.

    All documents must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically-filed request must be received successfully in its entirety by ACCESS no later than 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on the established due date.

    Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional Measures

    Section 735(a)(2) of the Act provides that a final determination may be postponed until not later than 135 days after the date of the publication of the preliminary determination if, in the event of an affirmative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by exporters who account for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise, or in the event of a negative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by the petitioners. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.210(e)(2), the Department requires that requests by respondents for postponement of a final antidumping determination be accompanied by a request for extension of provisional measures from a four-month period to a period not more than six months in duration.

    On September 19, 2017, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.210(e), the Clearwater Metal Single Entity requested that the Department postpone the final determination and that provisional measures be extended to a period not to exceed six months.13 In accordance with section 735(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(2)(ii), because (1) the preliminary determination is affirmative; (2) the requesting exporter accounts for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise; and (3) no compelling reasons for denial exist, the Department is postponing the final determination and extending the provisional measures from a four-month period to a period not greater than six months. Accordingly, the Department's final determination will be published no later than 135 days after the date of publication of this preliminary determination.

    13See Letter from the Clearwater Metal Single Entity, “Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Tool Chests and Cabinets from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Extension Request for Final Determination,” dated September 19, 2017.

    International Trade Commission Notification

    In accordance with section 733(f) of the Act, the Department will notify the International Trade Commission (ITC) of its preliminary determination of sales at LTFV. If the final determination is affirmative, the ITC will determine before the later of 120 days after the date of this preliminary determination or 45 days after the final determination whether imports of the subject merchandise are materially injuring, or threaten material injury to, the U.S. industry.

    Notification to Interested Parties

    This determination is issued and published in accordance with sections 733(f) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(c).

    Dated: November 7, 2017. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I Scope of the Investigation

    The scope of this investigation covers certain metal tool chests and tool cabinets, with drawers, (tool chests and cabinets), from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (Vietnam). The scope covers all metal tool chests and cabinets, including top chests, intermediate chests, tool cabinets and side cabinets, storage units, mobile work benches, and work stations and that have the following physical characteristics:

    (1) A body made of carbon, alloy, or stainless steel and/or other metals;

    (2) two or more drawers for storage in each individual unit;

    (3) a width (side to side) exceeding 15 inches for side cabinets and exceeding 21 inches for all other individual units but not exceeding 60 inches;

    (4) a body depth (front to back) exceeding 10 inches but not exceeding 24 inches; and

    (5) prepackaged for retail sale.

    For purposes of this scope, the width parameter applies to each individual unit, i.e., each individual top chest, intermediate top chest, tool cabinet, side cabinet, storage unit, mobile work bench, and work station.

    Prepackaged for retail sale means the units may, for example, be packaged in a cardboard box, other type of container or packaging, and may bear a Universal Product Code, along with photographs, pictures, images, features, artwork, and/or product specifications. Subject tool chests and cabinets are covered whether imported in assembled or unassembled form. Subject merchandise includes tool chests and cabinets produced in Vietnam but assembled, prepackaged for retail sale, or subject to other minor processing in a third country prior to importation into the United States. Similarly, it would include tool chests and cabinets produced in Vietnam that are later found to be assembled, prepackaged for retail sale, or subject to other minor processing after importation into the United States.

    Subject tool chests and cabinets may also have doors and shelves in addition to drawers, may have handles (typically mounted on the sides), and may have a work surface on the top. Subject tool chests and cabinets may be uncoated (e.g., stainless steel), painted, powder coated, galvanized, or otherwise coated for corrosion protection or aesthetic appearance.

    Subject tool chests and cabinets may be packaged as individual units or in sets. When packaged in sets, they typically include a cabinet with one or more chests that stack on top of the cabinet. Tool cabinets act as a base tool storage unit and typically have rollers, casters, or wheels to permit them to be moved more easily when loaded with tools. Work stations and mobile work benches are tool cabinets with a work surface on the top that may be made of rubber, plastic, metal, wood, or other materials.

    Top chests are designed to be used with a tool cabinet to form a tool storage unit. The top chests may be mounted on top of the base tool cabinet or onto an intermediate chest. They are often packaged as a set with tool cabinets or intermediate chests, but may also be packaged separately. They may be packaged with mounting hardware (e.g., bolts) and instructions for assembling them onto the base tool cabinet or onto an intermediate tool chest which rests on the base tool cabinet. Smaller top chests typically have handles on the sides, while the larger top chests typically lack handles. Intermediate tool chests are designed to fit on top of the floor standing tool cabinet and to be used underneath the top tool chest. Although they may be packaged or used separately from the tool cabinet, intermediate chests are designed to be used in conjunction with tool cabinets. The intermediate chests typically do not have handles. The intermediate and top chests may have the capability of being bolted together.

    Side cabinets are designed to be bolted or otherwise attached to the side of the base storage cabinet to expand the storage capacity of the base tool cabinet.

    Subject tool chests and cabinets also may be packaged with a tool set included. Packaging a subject tool chest and cabinet with a tool set does not remove an otherwise covered subject tool chest and cabinet from the scope. When this occurs, the tools are not part of the subject merchandise.

    All tool chests and cabinets that meet the above definition are included in the scope unless otherwise specifically excluded.

    Excluded from the scope of the investigation are tool boxes, chests, and cabinets with bodies made of plastic, carbon fiber, wood, or other non-metallic substances.

    Also excluded from the scope of the investigation are industrial grade steel tool chests and cabinets. The excluded industrial grade steel tool chests and cabinets are those:

    (1) Having a body that is over 60 inches in width; or

    (2) having each of the following physical characteristics:

    (a) A body made of steel that is 0.047 inches or more in thickness;

    (b) a body depth (front to back) exceeding 21 inches; and

    (c) a unit weight that exceeds the maximum unit weight shown below for each width range:

    ER16NO17.283

    Also excluded from the scope of the investigation are service carts. The excluded service carts have all of the following characteristics:

    (1) Casters, wheels, or other similar devices which allow the service cart to be rolled from place to place;

    (2) a flat top or flat lid on top of the unit that opens;

    (3) a space or gap between the casters, wheels, or other similar devices, and the bottom of the enclosed storage space (e.g., drawers) of at least 10 inches; and

    (4) a total unit height, including casters, of less than 48 inches.

    Also excluded from the scope of the investigation are non-mobile work benches. The excluded non-mobile work benches have all of the following characteristics:

    (1) A solid top working surface;

    (2) no drawers, one drawer, or two drawers in a side-by-side configuration; and

    (3) the unit is supported by legs and has no solid front, side, or back panels enclosing the body of the unit.

    Also excluded from the scope of this investigation are metal filing cabinets that are configured to hold hanging file folders and are classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) at subheading 9403.10.0020.

    Merchandise subject to this investigation is classified under HTSUS categories 9403.20.0021, 9403.20.0026, 9403.20.0030 and 7326.90.8688, but may also be classified under HTSUS category 7326.90.3500. While 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 Preliminary Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Period of Investigation IV. Scope Comments V. Product Characteristics VI. Selection of Respondents VII. Affiliation and Single Entity Treatment VIII. Discussion of the Methodology A. Non-Market Economy Country B. Surrogate Country 1. Economic Comparability 2. Significant Producer of Comparable Merchandise 3. Data Availability C. Surrogate Value Comments D. Separate Rates E. Combination Rates F. The Vietnam-Wide Entity G. Application of Facts Available and Adverse Inferences 1. Use of Facts Available 2. Application of Facts Available With an Adverse Inference 3. Selection of the AFA Rate H. Date of Sale I. Comparisons to Fair Value 1. Determination of Comparison Method 2. Results of the Differential Pricing Analysis J. U.S. Price K. Normal Value L. Factor Valuation Methodology 1. Direct and Packing Materials 2. Energy 3. Movement Expenses 4. Labor 5. Financial Ratios M. Use of Facts Available for Certain Factors of Production N. Currency Conversion IX. Conclusion
    [FR Doc. 2017-24862 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-201-830] Final Results of Changed Circumstances Review: Antidumping Duty Order on Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod From Mexico AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    On October 4, 2017, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published its notice of initiation and preliminary results of a changed circumstances review (CCR) of the antidumping duty order on carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod (wire rod) from Mexico to determine whether ArcelorMittal Mexico, S.A. de C.V. (AMM) is the successor-in-interest to ArcelorMittal Las Truchas, S.A. de C.V. (AMLT). No interested parties submitted case briefs or requested a hearing with respect to the Department's notice of initiation and preliminary results. Therefore, based on the information on the record, we continue to determine that AMM is the successor-in-interest to ALMT.

    DATES:

    Applicable November 16, 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

    The Department published in the Federal Register the initiation and preliminary results of an expedited CCR on October 4, 2017, preliminarily finding that AMM is the successor-in-interest to AMLT.1 In the Preliminary Results, we provided interested parties 30 days from the date of publication to submit case briefs or request a hearing. No interested parties submitted case briefs or requested a hearing.

    1See Initiation and Preliminary Results of Changed Circumstances Review: Antidumping Duty Order on Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Mexico, 82 FR 46222 (October 4, 2017) (Preliminary Results).

    Scope of the Order

    The merchandise covered by the order is carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod. The product is currently classified under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) item numbers 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 of the HTSUS. Although the HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written product description remains dispositive.2

    2 For a complete description of the scope of the order, see Memorandum from James Maeder, Senior Director performing the duties of Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Carole Showers, Executive Director, Office of Policy, performing the duties of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, “Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Mexico Preliminary Decision Memorandum of Changed Circumstances Review,” dated September 28, 2017 (Preliminary Decision Memorandum).

    Final Results of Changed Circumstances Review

    Because no party submitted a case brief in response to the Department's Preliminary Results, and because the record contains no other information or evidence that calls into question the Preliminary Results, the Department continues to find that AMM is the successor-in-interest to AMLT, and is entitled to AMLT's cash deposit rate with respect to entries of merchandise subject to the antidumping duty order on wire rod from Mexico.3

    3 For a complete discussion of the Department's findings, which remain unchanged in these final results and which are herein incorporated by reference and adopted by this notice, see, generally, Preliminary Results and Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    Instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection

    Based on these final results, we will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to suspend liquidation and collect estimated antidumping duties for all shipments of subject merchandise exported by AMM and entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication of this notice in the Federal Register at the current antidumping duty cash-deposit rate for AMLT (i.e., 2.59 percent). This cash deposit requirement shall remain in effect until further notice.

    Notification to Interested Parties

    This notice serves as a final 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)(3). Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.

    We are issuing and publishing these final results in accordance with sections 751(b) and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.216.

    Dated: November 13, 2017. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24865 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-056] Certain Tool Chests and Cabinets From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Postponement of Final Determination, and Extension of Provisional Measures AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (the Department) preliminarily determines that certain tool chests and cabinets (tool chests) from the People's Republic of China (the PRC) are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV). The period of investigation (POI) is October 1, 2016, through March 31, 2017.

    DATES:

    Applicable November 16, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Yang Jin Chun or Andre Gziryan, AD/CVD Operations Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-5760 and (202) 482-2201, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    This preliminary determination is made in accordance with section 733(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). The Department published the notice of initiation of this investigation on May 9, 2017.1 On August 21, 2017, the Department postponed the preliminary determination of this investigation and the revised deadline is now November 7, 2017.2 For a complete description of the events that followed the initiation of this investigation, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.3 A list of topics included in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is included as Appendix II to this notice. 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 accessed directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/.

    1See Certain Tool Chests and Cabinets from the People's Republic of China and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 82 FR 21523 (May 9, 2017) (Initiation Notice).

    2See Certain Tool Chests and Cabinets from the People's Republic of China and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Postponements of Preliminary Determinations of Antidumping Duty Investigations, 82 FR 39563 (August 21, 2017).

    3See Memorandum, “Certain Tool Chests and Cabinets from the People's Republic of China: Decision Memorandum for Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value,” dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice (Preliminary Decision Memorandum).

    Scope of the Investigation

    The products covered by this investigation are tool chests from the PRC. For a complete description of the scope of this investigation, see Appendix I.

    Scope Comments

    In accordance with the preamble to the Department's regulations,4 the Initiation Notice set aside a period of time for parties to raise issues regarding product coverage (scope).5 Certain interested parties commented on the scope of the investigation as it appeared in the Initiation Notice. For a summary of the product coverage comments and rebuttal responses submitted to the record for this investigation, and accompanying discussion and analysis of all comments timely received, see the Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum.6 The Department has preliminarily modified the scope language that appeared in the Initiation Notice. See the revised scope in Appendix I to this notice. The Department intends to address any scope comments received 7 and issue a final scope decision along with the final determination in the concurrent countervailing duty (CVD) investigation on tool chests from the PRC.

    4See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).

    5See Initiation Notice.

    6See Memorandum, “Certain Tool Chests and Cabinets from the People's Republic of China and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Scope Comments Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determinations” (Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum), dated September 8, 2017.

    7 The scope case briefs were due 30 days after the publication of Certain Tool Chests and Cabinets from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, 82 FR 43331 (September 15, 2017), which was Sunday, October 15, 2017. See the Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum at 6. Therefore, the actual deadline for the scope case briefs was Monday, October 16, 2017. See 19 CFR 351.303(b)(1) (“For both electronically filed and manually filed documents, if the applicable due date falls on a non-business day, the Secretary will accept documents that are filed on the next business day.”). The deadline for scope rebuttal briefs was Monday, October 23, 2017.

    Methodology

    The Department is conducting this investigation in accordance with section 731 of the Act. The Department has calculated export prices and constructed export prices in accordance with sections 772(a) and (b) of the Act, respectively. Because the PRC is a non-market economy, within the meaning of section 771(18) of the Act, the Department has calculated normal value (NV) in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act. In addition, pursuant to section 776(a) and (b) of the Act, the Department preliminarily has relied on facts otherwise available, with adverse inferences, for the PRC-wide entity. For a full description of the methodology underlying the Department's preliminary determination, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    Combination Rates

    In the Initiation Notice, 8 the Department stated that it would calculate producer/exporter combination rates for the respondents that are eligible for a separate rate in this investigation. Policy Bulletin 05.1 describes this practice.9 In this investigation, we calculated producer/exporter combination rates for respondents eligible for separate rates.

    8See Initiation Notice, 82 FR at 21528.

    9See Enforcement and Compliance's Policy Bulletin No. 05.1, regarding, “Separate-Rates Practice and Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigations involving Non-Market Economy Countries,” (April 5, 2005) (Policy Bulletin 05.1), available on the Department's Web site at http://enforcement.trade.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf.

    Preliminary Determination

    The Department preliminarily determines that the following estimated weighted-average dumping margins exist: 10

    10 The Tongrun Single Entity is comprised of Jiangsu Tongrun Equipment Technology Co., Ltd., Changshu Taron Machinery Equipment Manufacturing Co., Ltd., Changshu Tongrun Mechanical & Electrical Equipment Manufacture Co., Ltd., and Shanghai Tongrun Import and Export Co., Ltd. See Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 5-7.

    Exporter Producer Estimated
  • weighted-
  • average
  • dumping
  • margin
  • (percent)
  • Cash deposit
  • rate (adjusted
  • for subsidy
  • offsets)
  • (percent)
  • Geelong Sales (Macao Commercial Offshore) Limited Zhongshan Geelong Manufacturing Co., Ltd 168.93 158.30 The Tongrun Single Entity Changshu City Jiangrun Metal Product Co., Ltd 90.40 74.56 The Tongrun Single Entity The Tongrun Single Entity 90.40 74.56 Changzhou Machan Steel Furniture Co., Ltd Changzhou Machan Steel Furniture Co., Ltd 145.99 130.09 Guangdong Hisense Home Appliances Co., Ltd Guangdong Hisense Home Appliances Co., Ltd 145.99 130.09 Hyxion Metal Industry Hyxion Metal Industry 145.99 130.09 Jin Rong Hua Le Metal Manufactures Co., Ltd Jin Rong Hua Le Metal Manufactures Co., Ltd 145.99 130.09 Ningbo Safewell International Holding Corp Zhejiang Xiunan Leisure Products Co., Ltd 145.99 130.09 Pinghu Chenda Storage Office Equipment Co., Ltd Pinghu Chenda Storage Office Equipment Co., Ltd 145.99 130.09 Pooke Technology Co., Ltd Pooke Technology Co., Ltd 145.99 130.09 Shanghai All-Fast International Trade Co., Ltd Kunshan Trusteel Industry Co. Ltd 145.99 130.09 Shanghai All-Fast International Trade Co., Ltd Shanghai All-Hop Industry Co., Ltd 145.99 130.09 Shanghai All-Fast International Trade Co., Ltd Shanghai Hom-Steel Industry Co., Ltd 145.99 130.09 Shanghai All-Hop Industry Co., Ltd Shanghai All-Hop Industry Co., Ltd 145.99 130.09 Trantex Product (Zhong Shan) Co., Ltd Trantex Product (Zhong Shan) Co., Ltd 145.99 130.09 PRC-Wide Entity 168.93 158.39
    Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 733(d)(2) of the Act, the Department will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation of subject merchandise as described in the scope of the investigation section entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register, as discussed below. Further, pursuant to section 733(d)(1)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(d), the Department will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit equal to the weighted-average amount by which normal value exceeds U.S. price, as indicated in the chart above as follows: (1) For the producer/exporter combinations listed in the table above, the cash deposit rate is equal to the estimated weighted-average dumping margin listed for that combination in the table; (2) for all combinations of PRC producers/exporters of merchandise under consideration that have not established eligibility for their own separate rates, the cash deposit rate will be equal to the estimated weighted-average dumping margin established for the PRC-wide entity; and (3) for all third-country exporters of merchandise under consideration not listed in the table above, the cash deposit rate is the cash deposit rate applicable to the PRC producer/exporter combination (or the PRC-wide entity) that supplied that third-country exporter.

    To determine the cash deposit rate, the Department normally adjusts the estimated weighted-average dumping margin by the amount of domestic subsidy pass-through and export subsidies determined in a companion CVD proceeding when CVD provisional measures are in effect. Accordingly, where the Department has made a preliminary affirmative determination for domestic subsidy pass-through or export subsidies, the Department has offset the calculated estimated weighted-average dumping margin by the appropriate rate(s). Any such adjusted rates may be found in the Preliminary Determination Section's chart of estimated weighted-average dumping margins above.

    Should provisional measures in the companion CVD investigation expire prior to the expiration of provisional measures in this LTFV investigation, the Department will direct CBP to begin collecting cash deposits at a rate equal to the estimated weighted-average dumping margins calculated in this preliminary determination unadjusted for the passed-through domestic subsidies or for export subsidies at the time the CVD provisional measures expire.

    These suspension of liquidation instructions will remain in effect until further notice.

    Disclosure

    The Department intends to disclose to interested parties the calculations performed in connection with this preliminary determination within five days of its public announcement or, if there is no public announcement, within five days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    Verification

    As provided in section 782(i)(1) of the Act, the Department intends to verify information relied upon in making its final determination.

    Public Comment

    Case briefs or other written comments, with the exception of scope case briefs or scope comments,11 may be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance no later than seven days after the date on which the last final verification report is issued in this investigation, unless the Department 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.12 Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2), parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this investigation 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.

    11 As explained above, the actual deadline for the scope case briefs was Monday, October 16, 2017.

    12See 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, limited to issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs, 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, whether any participant is a foreign national, 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. Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and location of the hearing two days before the scheduled date.

    All documents must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically-filed request must be received successfully in its entirety by ACCESS no later than 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on the established due date.

    Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional Measures

    Section 735(a)(2) of the Act provides that a final determination may be postponed until not later than 135 days after the date of the publication of the preliminary determination if, in the event of an affirmative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by exporters who account for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise, or in the event of a negative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by the petitioners. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.210(e)(2), the Department requires that requests by respondents for postponement of a final antidumping determination be accompanied by a request for extension of provisional measures from a four-month period to a period not more than six months in duration.

    On October 6, 2017, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.210(e)(2), Geelong and the Tongrun Single Entity requested that the Department postpone the final determination and that provisional measures be extended to a period not to exceed six months.13 In accordance with section 735(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(2)(ii), because (1) the preliminary determination is affirmative; (2) the requesting exporters account for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise; and (3) no compelling reasons for denial exist, the Department is postponing the final determination and extending the provisional measures from a four-month period to a period not greater than six months. Accordingly, the Department's final determination will be published no later than 135 days after the date of publication of this preliminary determination.

    13See Letter from Geelong, “Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Tool Chests and Cabinets from the People's Republic of China: Request for Extension of the Final Determination,” dated October 6, 2017, and Letter from the Tongrun Single Entity, “Tongrun's Request to Extend the Final Determination in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Tool Chests and Cabinets from the People's Republic of China, A-570-056,” dated October 6, 2017.

    International Trade Commission Notification

    In accordance with section 733(f) of the Act, the Department will notify the International Trade Commission (ITC) of its preliminary determination of sales at LTFV. If the final determination is affirmative, the ITC will determine before the later of 120 days after the date of this preliminary determination or 45 days after the final determination whether imports of the subject merchandise are materially injuring, or threaten material injury to, the U.S. industry.

    Notification to Interested Parties

    This determination is issued and published in accordance with sections 733(f) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(c).

    Dated: November 7, 2017. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I Scope of the Investigation

    The scope of this investigation covers certain metal tool chests and tool cabinets, with drawers, (tool chests and cabinets), from the People's Republic of China (the PRC). The scope covers all metal tool chests and cabinets, including top chests, intermediate chests, tool cabinets and side cabinets, storage units, mobile work benches, and work stations and that have the following physical characteristics:

    (1) A body made of carbon, alloy, or stainless steel and/or other metals;

    (2) two or more drawers for storage in each individual unit;

    (3) a width (side to side) exceeding 15 inches for side cabinets and exceeding 21 inches for all other individual units but not exceeding 60 inches;

    (4) a body depth (front to back) exceeding 10 inches but not exceeding 24 inches; and

    (5) prepackaged for retail sale.

    For purposes of this scope, the width parameter applies to each individual unit, i.e., each individual top chest, intermediate top chest, tool cabinet, side cabinet, storage unit, mobile work bench, and work station.

    Prepackaged for retail sale means the units may, for example, be packaged in a cardboard box, other type of container or packaging, and may bear a Universal Product Code, along with photographs, pictures, images, features, artwork, and/or product specifications. Subject tool chests and cabinets are covered whether imported in assembled or unassembled form. Subject merchandise includes tool chests and cabinets produced in the PRC but assembled, prepackaged for retail sale, or subject to other minor processing in a third country prior to importation into the United States. Similarly, it would include tool chests and cabinets produced in the PRC that are later found to be assembled, prepackaged for retail sale, or subject to other minor processing after importation into the United States.

    Subject tool chests and cabinets may also have doors and shelves in addition to drawers, may have handles (typically mounted on the sides), and may have a work surface on the top. Subject tool chests and cabinets may be uncoated (e.g., stainless steel), painted, powder coated, galvanized, or otherwise coated for corrosion protection or aesthetic appearance.

    Subject tool chests and cabinets may be packaged as individual units or in sets. When packaged in sets, they typically include a cabinet with one or more chests that stack on top of the cabinet. Tool cabinets act as a base tool storage unit and typically have rollers, casters, or wheels to permit them to be moved more easily when loaded with tools. Work stations and mobile work benches are tool cabinets with a work surface on the top that may be made of rubber, plastic, metal, wood, or other materials.

    Top chests are designed to be used with a tool cabinet to form a tool storage unit. The top chests may be mounted on top of the base tool cabinet or onto an intermediate chest. They are often packaged as a set with tool cabinets or intermediate chests, but may also be packaged separately. They may be packaged with mounting hardware (e.g., bolts) and instructions for assembling them onto the base tool cabinet or onto an intermediate tool chest which rests on the base tool cabinet. Smaller top chests typically have handles on the sides, while the larger top chests typically lack handles. Intermediate tool chests are designed to fit on top of the floor standing tool cabinet and to be used underneath the top tool chest. Although they may be packaged or used separately from the tool cabinet, intermediate chests are designed to be used in conjunction with tool cabinets. The intermediate chests typically do not have handles. The intermediate and top chests may have the capability of being bolted together.

    Side cabinets are designed to be bolted or otherwise attached to the side of the base storage cabinet to expand the storage capacity of the base tool cabinet.

    Subject tool chests and cabinets also may be packaged with a tool set included. Packaging a subject tool chest and cabinet with a tool set does not remove an otherwise covered subject tool chest and cabinet from the scope. When this occurs, the tools are not part of the subject merchandise.

    All tool chests and cabinets that meet the above definition are included in the scope unless otherwise specifically excluded.

    Excluded from the scope of the investigation are tool boxes, chests, and cabinets with bodies made of plastic, carbon fiber, wood, or other non-metallic substances.

    Also excluded from the scope of the investigation are industrial grade steel tool chests and cabinets. The excluded industrial grade steel tool chests and cabinets are those:

    (1) Having a body that is over 60 inches in width; or

    (2) having each of the following physical characteristics:

    (a) A body made of steel that is 0.047 inches or more in thickness;

    (b) a body depth (front to back) exceeding 21 inches; and

    (c) a unit weight that exceeds the maximum unit weight shown below for each width range:

    ER16NO17.284

    Also excluded from the scope of the investigation are service carts. The excluded service carts have all of the following characteristics:

    (1) Casters, wheels, or other similar devices which allow the service cart to be rolled from place to place;

    (2) a flat top or flat lid on top of the unit that opens;

    (3) a space or gap between the casters, wheels, or other similar devices, and the bottom of the enclosed storage space (e.g., drawers) of at least 10 inches; and

    (4) a total unit height, including casters, of less than 48 inches.

    Also excluded from the scope of the investigation are non-mobile work benches. The excluded non-mobile work benches have all of the following characteristics:

    (1) A solid top working surface;

    (2) no drawers, one drawer, or two drawers in a side-by-side configuration; and

    (3) the unit is supported by legs and has no solid front, side, or back panels enclosing the body of the unit.

    Also excluded from the scope of this investigation are metal filing cabinets that are configured to hold hanging file folders and are classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) at subheading 9403.10.0020.

    Merchandise subject to this investigation is classified under HTSUS categories 9403.20.0021, 9403.20.0026, 9403.20.0030 and 7326.90.8688, but may also be classified under HTSUS category 7326.90.3500. While 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 Preliminary Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Period of Investigation IV. Scope Comments V. Product Characteristics VI. Selection of Respondents VII. Affiliation and Single Entity VIII. Discussion of the Methodology A. Non-Market Economy Country B. Surrogate Country C. Surrogate Value Comments D. Separate Rates E. Dumping Margin for the Separate Rate Companies F. Combination Rates G. The PRC-Wide Entity H. Application of Facts Available and Adverse Inferences I. Date of Sale J. Comparisons to Fair Value K. U.S. Price L. Normal Value M. Factor Valuation Methodology N. Currency Conversion IX. Adjustment Under Section 777A(F) of the Act X. Adjustment to Cash Deposit Rate for Export Subsidies XI. Conclusion
    [FR Doc. 2017-24861 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-051] Certain Hardwood Plywood Products From the People's Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, and Final Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances, in Part AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (the Department) determines that certain hardwood plywood products (hardwood plywood) from the People's Republic of China (PRC) are being, or is likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV). The final weighted-average dumping margins for the investigation on hardwood plywood from the PRC are listed in the “Final Determination Margins” section of this notice.

    DATES:

    Applicable November 16, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Amanda Brings or Ryan Mullen, AD/CVD Operations, Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3927 or (202) 482-5260, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    On June 23, 2017, the Department published its Preliminary Determination. 1 On July 17, 2017, we published an Amended Preliminary Determination. 2 We invited interested parties to comment on our Preliminary Determination and Amended Preliminary Determination of sales at LTFV. For a list of the parties that filed case and rebuttal briefs, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.3

    1See Certain Hardwood Plywood Products from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances, in Part, 82 FR 28629 (June 23, 2017) (Preliminary Determination) and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    2See Certain Hardwood Plywood Products from the People's Republic of China: Amended Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 82 FR 32683 (July 17, 2017) (Amended Preliminary Determination).

    3See Memorandum, “Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Determination of the Less Than Fair Value Investigation of Certain Hardwood Plywood Products from the People's Republic of China,” dated concurrently with this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum).

    Period of Investigation

    The period of investigation (POI) is April 1, 2016 through September 30, 2016. This period corresponds to the two most recent fiscal quarters prior to the month of the filing of the petition, which was November 2016.4

    4See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).

    Scope of the Investigation

    The scope of the investigation covers hardwood plywood from the PRC. For a complete description of the scope of the investigation, see Appendix I to this notice. The Department issued a Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum,5 Additional Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum,6 and a Post-Preliminary Scope Decision Memornadum.7 Several interested parties submitted case and rebuttal briefs concerning scope, which we have summarized in the Department's Final Scope Decision Memorandum.8 The scope in Appendix I reflects the final scope language.

    5See Memorandum, “Certain Hardwood Plywood Products from the People's Republic of China: Scope Comments Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determinations,” dated April 17, 2017 (Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum).

    6See Memorandum, “Certain Hardwood Plywood Products from the People's Republic of China: Additional Scope Comments Preliminary Decision Memorandum and Extension of Deadlines for Scope Case Briefs and Scope Rebuttal Briefs,” dated June 16, 2017 (Additional Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum).

    7See Memorandum, “Certain Hardwood Plywood Products from the People's Republic of China: Scope Comments Post-Preliminary Decision Memorandum,” dated October 16, 2017 (Post-Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum).

    8See Memorandum, “Certain Hardwood Plywood Products from the People's Republic of China: Final Scope Decision Memorandum,” dated concurrently with this notice (Final Scope Decision Memorandum).

    Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in this investigation are addressed in either the Issues and Decision Memorandum or the Final Scope Decision Memorandum accompanying this notice, both of which are hereby adopted by this notice.9 A list of the issues raised in the Issues and Decision Memorandum is attached to this notice as Appendix II. 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. The Issues and Decision Memorandum 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 is available at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. The signed and electronic versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    9See Issues and Decision Memorandum; Final Scope Decision Memorandum.

    Verification

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), in September 2017, the Department conducted verification of the information submitted by Linyi Chengen Import and Export Co., Ltd. (Chengen) for use in the final determination. We issued our verification report on September 29, 2017.10 The Department used standard verification procedures, including examination of relevant accounting and production records and original source documents provided by the respondent.11

    10See Memorandum, “Verification of the Questionnaire Responses of Linyi Chengen Import and Export Co., Ltd. in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Hardwood Plywood Products from the People's Republic of China,” dated September 29, 2017 (Chengen Verification Report).

    10Id.

    11Id.

    Changes Since the Preliminary Determination

    Based on our analysis of the comments received and our findings at verification, we have determined to apply the intermediate input methodology 12 in calculating Chengen's margin and made certain other changes to the margin calculations. For a discussion of these changes, see the “Changes Since the Preliminary Determination” section of the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

    12See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 2 for a discussion of the Department's determination to apply the intermediate input methodology.

    PRC-Wide Entity

    For the reasons explained in the Preliminary Determination, we are continuing to find that the use of adverse facts available (AFA), pursuant to sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act, is appropriate and are applying a rate based entirely on AFA to the PRC-wide entity. The Department did not receive timely responses to its quantity and value (Q&V) questionnaire, separate rate applications, or separate rate supplemental questionnaires from certain PRC exporters and/or producers of subject merchandise that were named in the petition and to which the Department issued Q&V questionnaires.13 As these non-responsive PRC companies did not demonstrate that they are eligible for separate rate status, the Department continues to consider them to be part of the PRC-wide entity. Consequently, we continue to find that the PRC-wide entity withheld requested information, significantly impeded the proceeding, and failed to cooperate to the best of their abilities, and thus we are continuing to base the PRC-wide entity rate on AFA. We also continue to find that mandatory respondent, Shandong Dongfang Bayley Wood Co., Ltd. (Bayley), should be treated as part of the PRC-wide entity based on AFA.14

    13See Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 17-32 (Separate Rate).

    14See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 1.

    PRC-Wide Rate

    In selecting the AFA rate for the PRC-wide entity, the Department's practice is to select a rate that is sufficiently adverse to ensure that the uncooperative party does not obtain a more favorable result by failing to cooperate than if it had fully cooperated.15 Specifically, it is the Department's practice to select, as an AFA rate, the higher of: (a) The highest dumping margin alleged in the petition; or, (b) the highest calculated dumping margin of any respondent in the investigation.16 As AFA, the Department has assigned to the PRC-wide entity the rate of 183.36 percent, which is the highest calculated dumping margin of any respondent in the investigation.17

    15See, e.g., Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination: Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from Finland, 69 FR 77216 (December 27, 2004), unchanged in Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from Finland, 70 FR 28279 (May 17, 2005).

    16See, e.g., Certain Stilbenic Optical Brightening Agents from the People's Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 77 FR 17436, 17438 (March 26, 2012); Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cold-Rolled Flat-Rolled Carbon Quality Steel Products from the People's Republic of China, 65 FR 34660 (May 31, 2000), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum.

    17See Issues and Decision Memorandum at 7-8.

    Separate Rate

    Under section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act, the all-others rate is normally 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 on the basis of facts available. Accordingly, when only one weighted-average dumping margin for an individually investigated respondent is above de minimis and not based entirely on facts available, the separate rate will be equal to that single, above de minimis rate.

    In this final determination, the Department has calculated a rate for Chengen that is not zero, de minimis, or based entirely on facts available. With respect to the other mandatory respondent, Bayley, we have determined that Bayley is part of the PRC-wide entity and subject to the PRC-wide rate, which is based entirely on adverse facts available. Therefore, the Department has assigned to the companies that have not been individually examined but have demonstrated their eligibility for a separate rate a margin of 183.36 percent, which is the rate calculated for Chengen.

    Final Determination

    The Department determines that the estimated final weighted-average dumping margins are as follows:

    Exporter Producer Estimated weighted-
  • average dumping
  • margin
  • (percent)
  • Cash deposit rate
  • (percent)
  • Linyi Chengen Import and Export Co., Ltd Linyi Dongfangjuxin Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Anhui Hoda Wood Co., Ltd Feixian Jianxin Board Factory 183.36 171.55 Anhui Hoda Wood Co., Ltd Linyi Xicheng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Anhui Hoda Wood Co., Ltd Linyi Longxin Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Anhui Hoda Wood Co., Ltd Fengxian Jihe Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Anhui Hoda Wood Co., Ltd Xuzhou Chunyiyang Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Anhui Hoda Wood Co., Ltd Linyi Lanshan District Xiangfeng Decorative Board Factory 183.36 171.55 Anhui Hoda Wood Co., Ltd Linyi Lanshan District Fubai Wood Board Factory 183.36 171.55 Anhui Hoda Wood Co., Ltd Shandong Jubang Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Anhui Hoda Wood Co., Ltd Feixian Shangye Town Mingda Multi-layered Board Factory 183.36 171.55 Anhui Hoda Wood Co., Ltd Xuzhou Dayuan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Anhui Hoda Wood Co., Ltd Linyi Mingzhu Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Anhui Hoda Wood Co., Ltd Linyi Renlin Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Celtic Co., Ltd Linyi Celtic Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Celtic Co., Ltd Pinyi Fuhua Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 China Friend Limited Feixian Wanda Wood Factory 183.36 171.55 China Friend Limited Shandong Huaxin Jiasheng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 China Friend Limited Feixian Xinhe Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 China Friend Limited Shandong Dongfang Bayley Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 China Friend Limited Xuzhou Yujinfang Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 China Friend Limited Linyi Huifeng Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 China Friend Limited Linyi Dongfangjuxin Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Cosco Star International Co., Ltd Linyi Huasheng Yongbin Wood Corp 183.36 171.55 Cosco Star International Co., Ltd Suining Pengxiang Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Cosco Star International Co., Ltd Pizhou Jiangshan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Cosco Star International Co., Ltd Shandong Union Wood Co. Ltd 183.36 171.55 Cosco Star International Co., Ltd Linyi Sanfortune Wood Co. Ltd 183.36 171.55 Cosco Star International Co., Ltd Shandong Anxin Timber Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Cosco Star International Co., Ltd Linyi Evergreen Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Cosco Star International Co., Ltd Shandong Huaxin Jiasheng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Cosco Star International Co., Ltd Xuzhou Shenghe Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Cosco Star International Co., Ltd Pingyi Jinniu Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Cosco Star International Co., Ltd Linyi Celtic Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Cosco Star International Co., Ltd Linyi Laiyi Timber Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Cosco Star International Co., Ltd Feixian Hongqiang Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Cosco Star International Co., Ltd Feixan Xingying Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Cosco Star International Co., Ltd Linyi City Lanshan District Fubo Wood Factory 183.36 171.55 Deqing China-Africa Foreign Trade Port Co., Ltd Suqian Welcomewood Products CO., LTD 183.36 171.55 Deqing China-Africa Foreign Trade Port Co., Ltd Feixian Hongqiang Wooden Products CO., LTD 183.36 171.55 Feixian Jinde Wood Factory Feixian Jinde Wood Factory 183.36 171.55 Feixian Longteng Wood Co., Ltd Feixian Longteng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Golder International Trade Co., Ltd Fengxian Shuangxingyuan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Golder International Trade Co., Ltd Fengxian Fangyuan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Golder International Trade Co., Ltd Pizhou Jinuoyuan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Golder International Trade Co., Ltd Xuzhou Changcheng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Golder International Trade Co., Ltd Xuzhou Jiamei Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 G.D. Enterprise Limited International Wood Products (Kunshan) Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Happy Wood Industrial Group Co., Ltd Happy Wood Industrial Group Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Henan Hongda Woodcraft Industry Co., Ltd Henan Hongda Woodcraft Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Highland Industries Inc. Weifang Hanlin Timber Producers co. Ltd 183.36 171.55 Highland Industries Inc. Anqiu Hengrui Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Highland Industries Inc. Weifang Chenglin Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Huainan Mengping Import and Export Co., Ltd Linyi Qianfeng Panel Factory Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Jiangsu High Hope Arser Co., Ltd Shandong Dongfang Bayley Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Jiangsu High Hope Arser Co., Ltd Xuzhou Zhongtong Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Jiangsu High Hope Arser Co., Ltd Pizhou Arser Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Jiangsu High Hope Arser Co., Ltd Linyi Jinghai Wood Products Factory 183.36 171.55 Jiangsu Qianjiuren International Trading Co., Ltd Jiangsu Shuren Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Jiangsu Shengyang Industrial Joint Stock Co., Ltd Jiangsu Shengyang Industrial Joint Stock Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Jiangsu Top Point International Co., Ltd Linyi Jinkun Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Jiangsu Top Point International Co., Ltd Feixian Huafeng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Jiangsu Top Point International Co., Ltd Feixian Xindongfang Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Jiangsu Top Point International Co., Ltd Feixian Fuyang Plywood Factory 183.36 171.55 Jiangsu Top Point International Co., Ltd Fengxian Shuangxingyuan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Jiangsu Top Point International Co., Ltd Linyi Celtic Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Jiashan Dalin Wood Industry Co., Ltd Jiashan Dalin Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Jiaxing Gsun Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd Fengxian Hengyuan Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Jiaxing Gsun Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd Feixian Junyang Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Jiaxing Gsun Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd Feixian Junbang Wood Factory 183.36 171.55 Jiaxing Gsun Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd Linyi City Lanshan District Mingda Wood Factory 183.36 171.55 Jiaxing Gsun Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd Feixian Hongyun Wood Factory 183.36 171.55 Jiaxing Gsun Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd Linyi City Lanshan District Xiangfeng Wood Decoration Factory 183.36 171.55 Jiaxing Gsun Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd Shandong Jubang Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Jiaxing Gsun Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd Feixian Yixin Wood Processing Factory 183.36 171.55 Jiaxing Gsun Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd Pizhou Wantai Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Jiaxing Gsun Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd Feixian Fengxiang Wood Processing Factory 183.36 171.55 Jiaxing Gsun Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd Shandong Compete Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Jiaxing Gsun Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd Linyi Kunyu Plywood Factory 183.36 171.55 Jiaxing Hengtong Wood Co., Ltd Jiaxing Hengtong Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Jiaxing Kaochuan Woodwork Co., Ltd Jiaxing Kaochuan Woodwork Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Leadwood Industrial Corp Leadwood Industrial Corp 183.36 171.55 Lianyungang Yuantai International Trade Co., Ltd Xinyi Chaohua Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Lianyungang Yuantai International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi Huasheng Yongbin Wood Corp 183.36 171.55 Lianyungang Yuantai International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi City Lanshan District Baoshan Wood Factory 183.36 171.55 Lianyungang Yuantai International Trade Co., Ltd Pizhou Yuanxing Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Lianyungang Yuantai International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi Celtic Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Lianyungang Yuantai International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi City Lanshan District Fubo Wood Factory 183.36 171.55 Lianyungang Yuantai International Trade Co., Ltd Fei County Hongsheng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Lianyungang Yuantai International Trade Co., Ltd Xuzhou Hongwei Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Lianyungang Yuantai International Trade Co., Ltd Pizhou Jinguoyuan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Lianyungang Yuantai International Trade Co., Ltd Feixian Wanda Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Lianyungang Yuantai International Trade Co., Ltd Fengxian Shuangxingyuan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Lianyungang Yuantai International Trade Co., Ltd Feixian Hongqiang Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Lianyungang Yuantai International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi City Lanshan District Fuerda Wood Factory 183.36 171.55 Lianyungang Yuantai International Trade Co., Ltd Fengxian Hengyuan Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Lianyungang Yuantai International Trade Co., Ltd Feixian Xingying Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Lianyungang Yuantai International Trade Co., Ltd Shandong Jubang Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Lianyungang Yuantai International Trade Co., Ltd Feixian Junyang Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Lianyungang Yuantai International Trade Co., Ltd Feixian Junbang Wood Factory 183.36 171.55 Lianyungang Yuantai International Trade Co., Ltd Feixian Hongyun Wood Factory 183.36 171.55 Lianyungang Yuantai International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi City Lanshan District Xiangfeng Wood Decoration Factory 183.36 171.55 Lianyungang Yuantai International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi Renlin Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Lianyungang Yuantai International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi City Lanshan District Mingda Wood Factory 183.36 171.55 Linyi City Dongfang Fukai Wood Industry Co., Ltd Linyi City Dongfang Fukai Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Linyi City Dongfang Jinxin Economic and Trade Co., Ltd Linyi City Dongfang Jinxin Economic and Trade Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Linyi City Shenrui International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi City Dongfang Fuchao Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Linyi City Shenrui International Trade Co., Ltd Feixian Zhenghua Wood Factory 183.36 171.55 Linyi Dahua Wood Co., Ltd Linyi Dahua Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Linyi Evergreen Wood Co., Ltd Linyi Evergreen Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Linyi Glary Plywood Co., Ltd Linyi Glary Plywood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Linyi Hengsheng Wood Industry Co., Ltd Linyi Hengsheng Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Linyi Huasheng Yongbin Wood Co., Ltd Linyi Huasheng Yongbin Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Linyi Jiahe Wood Industry Co., Ltd Linyi Jiahe Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Linyi Linhai Wood Co., Ltd Linyi Linhai Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Linyi Mingzhu Wood Co., Ltd Linyi Mingzhu Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Linyi Sanfortune Wood Co., Ltd Linyi Sanfortune Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Linyi Tian He Wooden Industry Co., Ltd Linyi Tian He Wooden Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Pingyi Jinniu Wood Co., Ltd Pingyi Jinniu Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Pizhou Dayun Import & Export Trade Co., Ltd Xuzhou Camry Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Pizhou Jin Sheng Yuan International Trade Co., Ltd Xuzhou Chengxin Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Pizhou Jin Sheng Yuan International Trade Co., Ltd Xuzhou Golden River Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Good Faith Import and Export Co., Ltd Linyi Fubo Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Good Faith Import and Export Co., Ltd Linyi Tuopu Zhixin Wooden Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Good Faith Import and Export Co., Ltd Linyi Haisen Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Good Faith Import and Export Co., Ltd Linyi Jubang Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Good Faith Import and Export Co., Ltd Xuzhou Changcheng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Good Faith Import and Export Co., Ltd Xuzhou Jinguoyuan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Good Faith Import and Export Co., Ltd Xuzhou Xuexin Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Good Faith Import and Export Co., Ltd Anhui Fuyang Qinglin Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Good Faith Import and Export Co., Ltd Anhui Huijin Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Good Faith Import and Export Co., Ltd Anhui Lingfeng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Good Faith Import and Export Co., Ltd Suzhou Dongsheng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Good Faith Import and Export Co., Ltd Pizhou Zhongxin Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Good Faith Import and Export Co., Ltd Xuzhou Spring Art Yang Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Linyi Dahua Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Yutai Zezhong Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Linyi Evergreen Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Suzhou Dongsheng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Shandong Dongfang Bayley Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Feixian Tanyi Youchengjiafu Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Feixian Mingteng Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Linyi Dahua Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Yutai Zezhong Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Linyi Qianfeng Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Shandong Jinqiu Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Linyi Laite Plywood Factory 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Xuzhou Chunyiyang Wood Products Co. Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Feixian Lijun Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Feixian Shuangfeng Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Linyi Longxin Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Linyi Lanshan Wanmei Wood Factory 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Feixian Xinhe Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Linyi Chenyuan Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Di Birch Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Shandong Junxing Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Linyi Jiexin Wood Products Factory 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Xuzhou Fuyu Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Jiangsu Lishun Industry And Trade Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Linyi Evergreen Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Anhui Qinglin Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Linyi Haisen Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Linyi Hongze Plywood Factory 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Linyi Kaifeng Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Feixian Fugang Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Lanling Longziyun Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Linyi Fuerda Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Fengxian Shuangxingyuan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Suzhou Dongsheng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Feixan Dexin Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Shandong Dongfang Bayley Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Linyi Huifeng Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Qingdao Top P&Q International Corp Feixian Kailin Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shandong Anxin Timber Co., Ltd Shandong Anxin Timber Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shandong Huaxin Jiasheng Wood Co., Ltd Shandong Huaxin Jiasheng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shandong Huiyu International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi Huifeng Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shandong Jinluda International Trade Co., Ltd Shandong Union Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shandong Jinluda International Trade Co., Ltd Shandong Jinqiu Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shandong Johnson Trading Co., Ltd Fengxian Hengyuan Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shandong Johnson Trading Co., Ltd Feixian Junyang Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shandong Johnson Trading Co., Ltd Feixian Junbang Wood Factory 183.36 171.55 Shandong Johnson Trading Co., Ltd Linyi City Lanshan District Mingda Wood Factory 183.36 171.55 Shandong Johnson Trading Co., Ltd Feixian Hongyun Wood Factory 183.36 171.55 Shandong Johnson Trading Co., Ltd Linyi City Lanshan District Xiangfeng Wood Decoration Factory 183.36 171.55 Shandong Johnson Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Lanshan Yulin Wood Factory 183.36 171.55 Shandong Johnson Trading Co., Ltd Shandong Jubang Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shandong Johnson Trading Co., Ltd Feixian Yixin Wood Processing Factory 183.36 171.55 Shandong Johnson Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Renlin Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shandong Johnson Trading Co., Ltd Xuzhou Dayuan Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shandong Johnson Trading Co., Ltd Xuzhou Yuantai Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shandong Johnson Trading Co., Ltd Pizhou Wantai Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shandong Johnson Trading Co., Ltd Feixian Desheng Wood Industry Factory 183.36 171.55 Shandong Johnson Trading Co., Ltd Xuzhou Zhongcai Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shandong Johnson Trading Co., Ltd Feixian Fengxiang Wood Processing Factory 183.36 171.55 Shandong Johnson Trading Co., Ltd Shandong Compete Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shandong Qishan International Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Tuopu Zhixin Wooden Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shandong Senmanqi Import & Export Co., Ltd Shandong Jinqiu Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shandong Shengdi International Trading Co., Ltd Qufu Shengda Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Brightwood Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Jinghua Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Brightwood Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Lianbang Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Brightwood Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Huada Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Brightwood Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Laite Board Factory 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Brightwood Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Yuqiao Board Factory 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Brightwood Trading Co., Ltd Feixian Huafeng Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Brightwood Trading Co., Ltd Xuzhou Shuangxingyuan Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Brightwood Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Youcheng Jiafu Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Brightwood Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Lanshan Jinhao Board Factory 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Brightwood Trading Co., Ltd Siyang Dazhong Wood Product Factory 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Brightwood Trading Co., Ltd Binzhou Yongsheng Artificial Board Industrial Trade Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Brightwood Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Senpeng Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Brightwood Trading Co., Ltd Dangshan County Weidi Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Brightwood Trading Co., Ltd Yutai County Zezhong Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Brightwood Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Huasheng Yongbin Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Brightwood Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Hengan Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Jinghua Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Lianbang Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Huada Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Jinkun Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Yuqiao Board Factory 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Laite Board Factory 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Tuopu Zhixin Wooden Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Feixian Huafeng Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Xuzhou Shuangxingyuan Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Youcheng Jiafu Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Shandong Qingyuan Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Lanshan Jinhao Board Factory 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Lanshan Fubai Wood Industry Board Factory 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Siyang Dazhong Wood Product Factory 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Binzhou Yongsheng Artificial Board Industrial Trade Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Shandong Jinqiu Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Senpeng Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Xuzhou Heng'an Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Dangshan Weidi Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Fengxian Jihe Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Yutai Zezhong Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Huasheng Yongbin Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Kaifeng Wood Board Factory 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Mingda Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Yangxin County Xintong Decorative Materials Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Pingyi County Zhongli Wood Products Factory 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Pingyi County Yuxin Board Factory 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Futuwood Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Mingzhu Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Luli Trading Co., Ltd Feixian Wanda Wood Factory 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Luli Trading Co., Ltd Shandong Huaxin Jiasheng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Luli Trading Co., Ltd Feixian Xinhe Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Luli Trading Co., Ltd Xuzhou Yujinfang Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai Luli Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Huifeng Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai S&M Trade Co., Ltd LinYi Celtic Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai S&M Trade Co., Ltd Linyi Lanshan District Jinhao Wood Factory 183.36 171.55 Shanghai S&M Trade Co., Ltd Jiangsu Shuren Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Shanghai S&M Trade Co., Ltd Jiangsu Sending Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Smart Gift International LinYi Celtic Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Smart Gift International Linyi Lanshan District Jinhao Wood Factory 183.36 171.55 Smart Gift International Jiangsu Shuren Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Smart Gift International Jiangsu Sending Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suining Pengxiang Wood Co., Ltd Suining Pengxiang Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Sumec International Technology Co., Ltd Suqian Huilin Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Sumec International Technology Co., Ltd Shandong Junxing Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Sumec International Technology Co., Ltd Linyi Longxin Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Sumec International Technology Co., Ltd Linyi Xicheng Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Sumec International Technology Co., Ltd Feixian County Mingda Multilayered Board Factory 183.36 171.55 Sumec International Technology Co., Ltd Linyi Celtic Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Sumec International Technology Co., Ltd Shandong Haote Decorative Materials Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Sumec International Technology Co., Ltd Linyi City Lanshan District Linyu Board Factory 183.36 171.55 Sumec International Technology Co., Ltd Linyi City Lanshan District Xiangfeng Decorative Board Factory 183.36 171.55 Sumec International Technology Co., Ltd Linyi City Baoshan Board Factory 183.36 171.55 Sumec International Technology Co., Ltd Feixian Xingying Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Sumec International Technology Co., Ltd Fengxian Jihe Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Sumec International Technology Co., Ltd Xuzhou Jiangshan Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Sumec International Technology Co., Ltd Xuzhou Senyuan Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Sumec International Technology Co., Ltd Xuzhou Jinguoyuan Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Sumec International Technology Co., Ltd Xuzhou Chunyiyang Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Sumec International Technology Co., Ltd Zibo Sumaida Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suqian Hopeway International Trade Co., Ltd Xuzhou Henglin Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suqian Hopeway International Trade Co., Ltd Qufu Shengda Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suqian Hopeway International Trade Co., Ltd Pizhou Xuexin Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suqian Hopeway International Trade Co., Ltd Pizhou Jiangshan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suqian Hopeway International Trade Co., Ltd Shandong Union Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suqian Hopeway International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi City Lanshan District Fubo Wood Factory 183.36 171.55 Suqian Hopeway International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi Mingzhu Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suqian Hopeway International Trade Co., Ltd Suzhou Dongsheng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suqian Hopeway International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi Jiahe Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suqian Hopeway International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi Dahua Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suqian Yaorun Trade Co., Ltd Pizhou Jiangshan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suqian Yaorun Trade Co., Ltd Suqian Bairun Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Dongsheng Wood Co., Ltd Suzhou Dongsheng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Fengshuwan Import and Exports Trade Co., Ltd Xuzhou Henglin Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Fengshuwan Import and Exports Trade Co., Ltd Qufu Shengda Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Fengshuwan Import and Exports Trade Co., Ltd Pizhou Xuexin Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Fengshuwan Import and Exports Trade Co., Ltd Pizhou Jiangshan Wood Co. Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Fengshuwan Import and Exports Trade Co., Ltd Shandong Union Wood Co. Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Fengshuwan Import and Exports Trade Co., Ltd Linyi City Lanshan District Fubo Wood Factory 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Fengshuwan Import and Exports Trade Co., Ltd Linyi Mingzhu Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Fengshuwan Import and Exports Trade Co., Ltd Suzhou Dongsheng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Fengshuwan Import and Exports Trade Co., Ltd Linyi Jiahe Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Fengshuwan Import and Exports Trade Co., Ltd Linyi Dahua Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Linyi Tiancai Timber Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Lingyi Huasheng Yongbin Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Linyi Xicheng Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Linyi Longxin Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Linyi Oriental Fuchao Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Linyi Qianfeng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Feixian Wanda Wood Factory 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Shandong Union Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Shandong Jinqiu Wood Corporation 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Yinhe Machinery Chemical Limited Company of Shandong Province 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Linyi City Yongsen Wood Corp 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Xuzhou Changcheng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Pizhou Fushen Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Pizhou Yuanxing Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Xuzhou Yuantai Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Xuzhou Hongfu Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Feng County Shuangxingyuan Wood 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Anhui Fuyang Qinglin Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Linyi Dahua Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Juxian Dechang Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Feixian Jinhao Wood Board Plant 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Siyang Dahua Plywood Plant 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Linyi Lanshan District Fubo Woods Factory 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Xuzhou Deheng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Linyi Kaifeng Wood Board Factory 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Linyi Zhenyuan Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Xuzhou Weilin Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Linyi Tianlu Wood Board Factory 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Linyi Baoshan Board Factory 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Linyi Mingzhu Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Xinyi Chaohua Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Pizhou Jinguoyuan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Feng County Jihe Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Dangshan County Weidi Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Suzhou Oriental Dragon Import and Export Co., Ltd Zhucheng Runheng Industrial and Trading Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Amish Import & Export Trade Co., Ltd Xuzhou Amish Import & Export Trade Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Andefu Wood Co., Ltd Fengxian Fangyuan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Baoqi Wood Product Co., Ltd Linyi Jinghai Board Plant 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Baoqi Wood Product Co., Ltd Linyi Lanshan Yulin Board Plant 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Dilun Wood Co. Ltd Xuzhou Dilun Wood Co. Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Xuzhou Longyuan Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Linyi Changcheng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Feixian Jinde Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Suzhou Dongsheng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Fengxian Fangyuan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Xuzhou City Hengde Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Pizhou Jiangshan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Linyi Huasheng Yongbin Wood Corp 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Pizhou Jinguoyuan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Linyi Mingzhu Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Linyi Renlin Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Binzhou Yongsheng Artificial Board Industrial & Training Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Xuzhou Zhongcai Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Anhui Xinyuanda Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Shandong Lianbang Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Linyi Xinrui Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Shandong Huashi Lvyuan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Xuzhou Fuyu Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Linyi Dazhong Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Shandong Junxing Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Linyi City Lanshan District Linyu Plywood Factory 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Linyi City Dongfang Fuchao Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Linyi Dahua Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Linyi Qianfeng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Xuzhou Zhongtong Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Shandong Oufan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Shandong Jubang Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Xuzhou Changcheng Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Feixian Jinhao Wood Board Plant 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Feixian Huafeng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Dhanshan County Weidi Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou DNT Commercial Co., Ltd Xuzhou Hongmei Wood Development Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Eastern Huatai International Trading Co., Ltd Xuzhou Well-Done Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Eastern Huatai International Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Longxin Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Eastern Huatai International Trading Co., Ltd Linyi Xicheng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Eastern Huatai International Trading Co., Ltd Xuzhou Hongfu Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Eastern Huatai International Trading Co., Ltd Oufan Wooden Products Shandong Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Eastern Huatai International Trading Co., Ltd Dangshan Weidi Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Eastern Huatai International Trading Co., Ltd Xu Zhou Chang Cheng Wood Co,Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Hansun Import & Export Co. Ltd XuZhou Zhongyuan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Jiangheng Wood Products Co., Ltd Xuzhou Jiangheng Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Jiangyang Wood Industries Co., Ltd Xuzhou Jiangyang Wood Industries Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Longyuan Wood Industry Co., Ltd Xuzhou Longyuan Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Maker's Mark Building Materials Co., Ltd Xuzhou Qinglin Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Maker's Mark Building Materials Co., Ltd Xuzhou Maomei Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Maker's Mark Building Materials Co., Ltd Suzhou Jiakaide Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Xuzhou Longyuan Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi Changcheng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Feixian Jinde Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Suzhou Dongsheng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Fengxian Fangyuan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Xuzhou City Hengde Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Pizhou Jiangshan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi Huasheng Yongbin Wood Corp 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Pizhou Jinguoyuan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi Mingzhu Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi Renlin Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Binzhou Yongsheng Artificial Board Industrial & Training Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Xuzhou Zhongcai Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Anhui Xinyuanda Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Shandong Lianbang Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi Xinrui Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Shandong Huashi Lvyuan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Xuzhou Fuyu Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi Dazhong Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Shandong Junxing Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi City Lanshan District Linyu Plywood Factory 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi City Dongfang Fuchao Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi Dahua Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi Qianfeng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Xuzhou Zhongtong Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Shandong Oufan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Shandong Jubang Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Xuzhou Changcheng Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Feixian Jinhao Wood Board Plant 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Feixian Huafeng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Dhanshan County Weidi Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Pinlin International Trade Co., Ltd Xuzhou Hongmei Wood Development Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Shenghe Wood Co. Ltd Xuzhou Shenghe Wood Co. Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Shengping Imp and Exp Co., Ltd Xuzhou Longyuan Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Shuiwangxing Trading Co., Ltd Fengxian Jihe Wood Industry Co. Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Shuner Import & Export Trade Co. Ltd Pizhou Fushen Wood Co. Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Tianshan Wood Co., Ltd Xuzhou Tianshan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Timber International Trade Co., Ltd Xuzhou Jiangheng Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Timber International Trade Co., Ltd Xuzhou Jiangyang Wood Industries Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Timber International Trade Co., Ltd Xuzhou Changcheng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Timber International Trade Co., Ltd Fengxian Shuangxingyuan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Timber International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi Mingzhu Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Timber International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi City Lanshan District Daqian Wood Board Factory 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Timber International Trade Co., Ltd Feixian Hongsheng Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Timber International Trade Co., Ltd Xuzhou Hongwei Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Timber International Trade Co., Ltd Pizhou Jinguoyuan Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Timber International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi Qianfeng Wood Factory 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Timber International Trade Co., Ltd Linyi Renlin Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Timber International Trade Co., Ltd Xuzhou Senyuan Wood Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Timber International Trade Co., Ltd Jiangsu Lishun Industrial and Trading Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Timber International Trade Co., Ltd Pizhou Xuexin Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Timber International Trade Co., Ltd Feixian Hongjing Board Factory 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Timber International Trade Co., Ltd Xuzhou Jiaqiang Wood Industry Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Timber International Trade Co., Ltd Shandong Shelter Forest Products Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Xuzhou Timber International Trade Co., Ltd Jiangsu Binsong Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Yangzhou Hanov International Co., Ltd Linyi Longxin Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Yishui Zelin Wood Made Co., Ltd Yishui Zelin Wood Made Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Zhejiang Dehua TB Import & Export Co., Ltd Dehua TB New Decoration Material Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 Zhejiang Dehua TB Import & Export Co., Ltd Zhangjiagang Jiuli Wood Co., Ltd 183.36 171.55 PRC-Wide Entity18 183.36
    Disclosure

    We intend to disclose to parties the calculations performed in this proceeding within five days of any public announcement of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224 (b).

    18 As detailed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum and Issues and Decision Memorandum, Bayley, a mandatory respondent in this investigation, Jiangsu Hanbao Building Material Co., Ltd., Qingdao King Sports Products Technology Co., Ltd., and Shanghai Sunshine did not demonstrate that they were entitled to a separate rate. Accordingly, we consider these companies to be part of the PRC-wide entity. As discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum and Issues and Decision Memorandum, we have made an affirmative critical circumstances determination with regard to the PRC-wide entity.

    Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, we will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to continue to suspend liquidation of all entries of hardwood plywood from the PRC, as described in the “Scope of the Investigation” section, entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after June 23, 2017, the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination notice in the Federal Register.

    Pursuant to section 735(c)(1)(B)(ii) of the Act, the Department will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit 19 equal to the weighted-average amount by which NV exceeds U.S. price as follows: (1) The cash deposit rate for the exporter/producer combination listed in the table above will be the rate identified for that combination in the table; (2) for all combinations of PRC exporters/producers of merchandise under consideration that have not received their own separate rate above, the cash-deposit rate will be the cash deposit rate established for the PRC-wide entity; and (3) for all non-PRC exporters of the merchandise under consideration which have not received their own separate rate above, the cash-deposit rate will be the cash deposit rate applicable to the PRC exporter/producer combination that supplied that non-PRC exporter. These suspension of liquidation instructions will remain in effect until further notice.

    19See Modification of Regulations Regarding the Practice of Accepting Bonds During the Provisional Measures Period in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations, 76 FR 61042 (October 3, 2011).

    We normally adjust antidumping duty cash deposit rates by the amount of export subsidies, where appropriate. In the companion CVD investigation, with respect to Chengen, a mandatory respondent in this investigation not individually examined in the CVD investigation, and the separate-rate companies, we find that an export subsidy adjustment of 11.81 percent to the cash deposit rate is warranted because this is the export subsidy rate included in the countervailing duty “all others” rate to which the separate-rate companies are subject. As part of our determination in this final determiation to apply adverse facts available the PRC-wide entity (which includes Bayley), the Department has not adjusted the PRC-wide entity's AD cash deposit rate by the lowest export subsidy rate determined for any party in the companion CVD proceeding, because the lowest export subsidy rate determined in the companion CVD proceeding is 0.00 percent.2021

    20See, e.g., Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value; Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances; In Part and Postponement of Final Determination, 80 FR 4250 (January 27, 2015), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at 35.

    21See Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Hardwood Plywood Products from the People's Republic of China: Final Affirmative Determination, and Final Affirmative Critical Circumstances Determination, in Part (CVD Final) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum. The final determination in this companion CVD proceeding is being issued on the same day as this final determination.

    Pursuant to section 777A(f) of the Act, we normally adjust preliminary cash deposit rates for estimated domestic subsidy pass-through, where appropriate. However, in this case there is no basis to grant a domestic subsidy pass-through adjustment.22

    22See Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 42-43.

    International Trade Commission Notification

    In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we notified the International Trade Commission (ITC) of the final affirmative determination of sales at LTFV. As the Department's final determination is affirmative, in accordance with section 735(b)(2) of the Act, the ITC will determine, within 45 days, whether the domestic industry in the United States is materially injured, or threatened with material injury, by reason of imports of hardwood plywood for sale from the PRC, or sales (or the likelihood of sales) for importation, of hardwood plywood from the PRC. If the ITC determines that such injury does not exist, this 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 all imports of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the effective date of the suspension of liquidation.

    Return or Destruction of Proprietary Information

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

    This determination is issued and published in accordance with sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: November 6, 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

    The merchandise subject to this investigation is hardwood and decorative plywood, and certain veneered panels as described below. For purposes of this proceeding, hardwood and decorative plywood is defined as a generally flat, multilayered plywood or other veneered panel, consisting of two or more layers or plies of wood veneers and a core, with the face and/or back veneer made of non-coniferous wood (hardwood) or bamboo. The veneers, along with the core may be glued or otherwise bonded together. Hardwood and decorative plywood may include products that meet the American National Standard for Hardwood and Decorative Plywood, ANSI/HPVA HP-1-2016 (including any revisions to that standard).

    For purposes of this investigation a “veneer” is a slice of wood regardless of thickness which is cut, sliced or sawed from a log, bolt, or flitch. The face and back veneers are the outermost veneer of wood on either side of the core irrespective of additional surface coatings or covers as described below.

    The core of hardwood and decorative plywood consists of the layer or layers of one or more material(s) that are situated between the face and back veneers. The core may be composed of a range of materials, including but not limited to hardwood, softwood, particleboard, or medium-density fiberboard (MDF).

    All hardwood plywood is included within the scope of this investigation regardless of whether or not the face and/or back veneers are surface coated or covered and whether or not such surface coating(s) or covers obscures the grain, textures, or markings of the wood. Examples of surface coatings and covers include, but are not limited to: Ultra violet light cured polyurethanes; oil or oil-modified or water based polyurethanes; wax; epoxy-ester finishes; moisture-cured urethanes; paints; stains; paper; aluminum; high pressure laminate; MDF; medium density overlay (MDO); and phenolic film. Additionally, the face veneer of hardwood plywood may be sanded; smoothed or given a “distressed” appearance through such methods as hand-scraping or wire brushing. All hardwood plywood is included within the scope even if it is trimmed; cut-to-size; notched; punched; drilled; or has underwent other forms of minor processing.

    All hardwood and decorative plywood is included within the scope of this investigation, without regard to dimension (overall thickness, thickness of face veneer, thickness of back veneer, thickness of core, thickness of inner veneers, width, or length). However, the most common panel sizes of hardwood and decorative plywood are 1219 x 1829 mm (48 x 72 inches), 1219 x 2438 mm (48 x 96 inches), and 1219 x 3048 mm (48 x 120 inches).

    Subject merchandise also includes hardwood and decorative plywood that has been further processed in a third country, including but not limited to trimming, cutting, notching, punching, drilling, or any other processing that would not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of the investigation if performed in the country of manufacture of the in-scope product.

    The scope of the investigation excludes the following items: (1) Structural plywood (also known as “industrial plywood” or “industrial panels”) that is manufactured to meet U.S. Products Standard PS 1-09, PS 2-09, or PS 2-10 for Structural Plywood (including any revisions to that standard or any substantially equivalent international standard intended for structural plywood), and which has both a face and a back veneer of coniferous wood; (2) products which have a face and back veneer of cork; (3) multilayered wood flooring, as described in the antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders on Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of China, Import Administration, International Trade Administration. See Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of China, 76 FR 76690 (December 8, 2011) (amended final determination of sales at less than fair value and antidumping duty order), and Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of China, 76 FR 76693 (December 8, 2011) (countervailing duty order), as amended by Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of China: Amended Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 77 FR 5484 (February 3, 2012); (4) multilayered wood flooring with a face veneer of bamboo or composed entirely of bamboo; (5) plywood which has a shape or design other than a flat panel, with the exception of any minor processing described above; (6) products made entirely from bamboo and adhesives (also known as “solid bamboo”); and (7) Phenolic Film Faced Plyform (PFF), also known as Phenolic Surface Film Plywood (PSF), defined as a panel with an “Exterior” or “Exposure 1” bond classification as is defined by The Engineered Wood Association, having an opaque phenolic film layer with a weight equal to or greater than 90g/m3 permanently bonded on both the face and back veneers and an opaque, moisture resistant coating applied to the edges.

    Excluded from the scope of this investigation are wooden furniture goods that, at the time of importation, are fully assembled and are ready for their intended uses. Also excluded from the scope of this investigation is “ready to assemble” (RTA) furniture. RTA furniture is defined as (A) furniture packaged for sale for ultimate purchase by an end-user that, at the time of importation, includes (1) all wooden components (in finished form) required to assemble a finished unit of furniture, (2) all accessory parts (e.g., screws, washers, dowels, nails, handles, knobs, adhesive glues) required to assemble a finished unit of furniture, and (3) instructions providing guidance on the assembly of a finished unit of furniture; (B) unassembled bathroom vanity cabinets, having a space for one or more sinks, that are imported with all unassembled hardwood and hardwood plywood components that have been cut-to-final dimensional component shape/size, painted or stained prior to importation, and stacked within a singled shipping package, except for furniture feet which may be packed and shipped separately; or (C) unassembled bathroom vanity linen closets that are imported with all unassembled hardwood and hardwood plywood components that have been cut-to-final dimensional shape/size, painted or stained prior to importation, and stacked within a single shipping package, except for furniture feet which may be packed and shipped separately.

    Excluded from the scope of this investigation are kitchen cabinets that, at the time of importation, are fully assembled and are ready for their intended uses. Also excluded from the scope of this investigation are RTA kitchen cabinets. RTA kitchen cabinets are defined as kitchen cabinets packaged for sale for ultimate purchase by an end-user that, at the time of importation, includes (1) all wooden components (in finished form) required to assemble a finished unit of cabinetry, (2) all accessory parts (e.g., screws, washers, dowels, nails, handles, knobs, hooks, adhesive glues) required to assemble a finished unit of cabinetry, and (3) instructions providing guidance on the assembly of a finished unit of cabinetry.

    Excluded from the scope of this investigation are finished table tops, which are table tops imported in finished form with pre-cut or drilled openings to attach the underframe or legs. The table tops are ready for use at the time of import and require no further finishing or processing.

    Excluded from the scope of this investigation are finished countertops that are imported in finished form and require no further finishing or manufacturing.

    Excluded from the scope of this investigation are laminated veneer lumber door and window components with (1) a maximum width of 44 millimeters, a thickness from 30 millimeters to 72 millimeters, and a length of less than 2413 millimeters (2) water boiling point exterior adhesive, (3) a modulus of elasticity of 1,500,000 pounds per square inch or higher, (4) finger-jointed or lap-jointed core veneer with all layers oriented so that the grain is running parallel or with no more than 3 dispersed layers of veneer oriented with the grain running perpendicular to the other layers; and (5) top layer machined with a curved edge and one or more profile channels throughout.

    Imports of hardwood plywood are primarily entered under the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings: 4412.10.0500; 4412.31.0520; 4412.31.0540; 4412.31.0560; 4412.31.0620; 4412.31.0640; 4412.31.0660; 4412.31.2510; 4412.31.2520; 4412.31.2610; 4412.31.2620; 4412.31.4040; 4412.31.4050; 4412.31.4060; 4412.31.4075; 4412.31.4080; 4412.31.4140; 4412.31.4150; 4412.31.4160; 4412.31.4180; 4412.31.5125; 4412.31.5135; 4412.31.5155; 4412.31.5165; 4412.31.5175; 4412.31.5235; 4412.31.5255; 4412.31.5265; 4412.31.5275; 4412.31.6000; 4412.31.6100; 4412.31.9100; 4412.31.9200; 4412.32.0520; 4412.32.0540; 4412.32.0565; 4412.32.0570; 4412.32.0620; 4412.32.0640; 4412.32.0670; 4412.32.2510; 4412.32.2525; 4412.32.2530; 4412.32.2610; 4412.32.2630; 4412.32.3125; 4412.32.3135; 4412.32.3155; 4412.32.3165; 4412.32.3175; 4412.32.3185; 4412.32.3235; 4412.32.3255; 4412.32.3265; 4412.32.3275; 4412.32.3285; 4412.32.5600; 4412.32.3235; 4412.32.3255; 4412.32.3265; 4412.32.3275; 4412.32.3285; 4412.32.5700; 4412.94.1030; 4412.94.1050; 4412.94.3105; 4412.94.3111; 4412.94.3121; 4412.94.3141; 4412.94.3161; 4412.94.3175; 4412.94.4100; 4412.99.0600; 4412.99.1020; 4412.99.1030; 4412.99.1040; 4412.99.3110; 4412.99.3120; 4412.99.3130; 4412.99.3140; 4412.99.3150; 4412.99.3160; 4412.99.3170; 4412.99.4100; 4412.99.5115; and 4412.99.5710.

    Imports of hardwood plywood may also enter under HTSUS subheadings 4412.99.6000; 4412.99.7000; 4412.99.8000; 4412.99.9000; 4412.10.9000; 4412.94.5100; 4412.94.9500; and 4412.99.9500. While the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive.

    Appendix II—Issues and Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Scope of the Investigation IV. Scope Comments V. Changes Since the Preliminary Determination VI. Critical Circumstances VII. List of Issues VIII. Discussion of Comments Comment 1: The Department's Continued Use of AFA for Bayley Comment 2: Valuation of Raw Material (Logs) or Intermediate Input (Veneers) Comment 3: Selection of Surrogate Country Comment 4: Department's Limited Selection of Mandatory Respondents and Denial of the FEA Group's Request for Voluntary Respondent Status Comment 5: The Department Should Find Negative Critical Circumstances for the PRC-Wide Entity Comment 6: The Department Should Treat China as a Market Economy Comment 7: The Department Should Grant Hanbao a Separate Rate Comment 8: Moot Arguments regarding AFA to Separate Rate Applicants Comment 9: Bifurcated Briefing Schedule IX. Conclusion
    [FR Doc. 2017-24863 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C-560-831] Biodiesel From the Republic of Indonesia: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (Department) determines that countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters of biodiesel from the Republic of Indonesia (Indonesia). The period of investigation is January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2016.

    DATES:

    Appicable November 16, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Joseph Traw or Gene Calvert, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-6079 or (202) 482-3586, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    The Department published the Preliminary Determination on August 28, 2017.1 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 parties for this final determination, may be found in the Final Decision Memorandum.2 The Final 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 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 Final Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Final Decision Memorandum and the electronic version are identical in content.

    1See Biodiesel From the Republic of Indonesia: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, 82 FR 40746 (August 28, 2017) (Preliminary Determination).

    2See Memorandum, “Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Determination in the Countervailing Duty Investigation of Biodiesel from Indonesia,” (Final Decision Memorandum), dated concurrently with this determination and hereby adopted by this notice.

    Period of Investigation

    The period of investigation for which we are measuring subsidies is January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2016.

    Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is biodiesel from Indonesia. For a complete description of the scope of this investigation, see the “Scope of the Investigation,” in Appendix II of this notice.

    Analysis of Subsidy Programs and Comments Received

    The subsidy programs under investigation, and the issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs submitted by the interested parties in this proceeding, are discussed in the Final Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues raised by the parties and responded to by the Department in the Final Decision Memorandum, is attached at Appendix I to this notice.

    Verification

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), during September 2017, the Department verified the subsidy information reported by the Government of Indonesia, PT Musim Mas (Musim Mas), and Wilmar Trading Co., Ltd. (Wilmar Trading). We used standard verification procedures, including an examination of relevant accounting records and original source documents provided by the respondents.3

    3See Memorandum, “Verification of the CVD Responses of the Government of Indonesia in the Countervailing Duty Investigation of Biodiesel,” dated October 3, 2017; Memorandum, “Verification of the CVD Responses of Wilmar Trading Ptd. Ltd. and its Cross Owned Affiliates in the Countervailing Duty Investigation of Biodiesel,” dated October 2, 2017; and Memorandum, “Countervailing Duty Investigation of Biodiesel from the Republic of Indonesia: Verification of the Questionnaire Responses Submitted by PT Musim Mas,” dated September 28, 2017.

    Changes Since the Preliminary Determination

    Based on our analysis of the comments received from parties and the minor corrections presented, we made certain changes to the respondents' subsidy rate calculations set forth in the Preliminary Determination. For a discussion of these changes, see the Final Decision Memorandum and the Final Calculation Memoranda.4

    4See Issues and Decision Memorandum dated concurrently with this determination; see also Wilmar Trading's Final Calculation Memorandum, dated concurrently with this determination, and Musim Mas's Final Calculation Memorandum, dated concurrently with this determination.

    All-Others Rate

    In accordance with section 705(c)(1)(B)(i)(I) of the Act, the Department calculated a countervailable subsidy rate for the individually investigated exporters/producers of the subject merchandise. Consistent with sections 705(c)(1)(B)(i)(I) and 705(c)(5)(A) of the Act, the Department also calculated an estimated “all-others” rate for exporters and producers not individually investigated. Section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act provides that the “all-others” rate shall be an amount equal to the weighted-average of the countervailable subsidy rates established for individually investigated exporters and producers, excluding any rates that are zero or de minimis or any rates determined entirely under section 776 of the Act. In this investigation, the Department calculated individual estimated countervailable subsidy rates for Wilmar Trading and Musim Mas that are not zero, de minimis, or based entirely on facts otherwise available. Therefore, 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 publicly-ranged values for the merchandise under consideration.5

    5 With two respondents under examination, the Department normally calculates: (A) A weighted-average of the estimated subsidy rates calculated for the examined respondents; (B) a simple average of the estimated subsidy rates calculated for the examined respondents; and (C) a weighted-average of the estimated subsidy rates calculated for the examined respondents using each company's publicly-ranged U.S. sale quantities for the merchandise under consideration. The Department then compares (B) and (C) to (A) and selects the rate closest to (A) as the most appropriate rate for all other producers and exporters. See, e.g., Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof from France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, Final Results of Changed-Circumstances Review, and Revocation of an Order in Part, 75 FR 53661, 53663 (September 1, 2010). As complete publicly ranged sales data were available, the Department based the all-others rate on the publicly ranged sales data of the mandatory respondents. For a complete analysis of the data, please see the All-Others' Rate Calculation Memorandum dated concurrently with this determination.

    Final Determination

    In accordance with section 705(c)(1)(B)(i)(I) of the Act, we established individual estimated countervailable subsidy rates for PT Musim Mas and Wilmar Trading Co., Ltd., and their cross-owned entities.

    Company Subsidy rate
  • (%)
  • PT Musim Mas 64.73 Wilmar Trading Co., Ltd 34.45 All-Others 38.95
    Disclosure

    The Department will disclose the calculations performed within five days of the date of publication of this notice to parties in this proceeding in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with sections 703(d) of the Act, the Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to continue to suspend liquidation of all appropriate entries of biodiesel from Indonesia, which were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after August 28, 2017, the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination.

    International Trade Commission Notification

    In accordance with section 705(d) of the Act, we will notify the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) of the final affirmative determination of countervailable subsidies. Because the final determination in this proceeding is affirmative, in accordance with section 705(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 biodiesel from Indonesia no later than 45 days after our final determination. If the ITC determines that material injury or threat of material injury does not exist, the proceeding will be terminated and all cash deposits will be refunded. If the ITC determines that such injury does exist, the Department will issue a CVD order directing CBP to assess, upon further instruction by the Department, countervailing duties on all imports of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the effective date of the suspension of liquidation, as discussed above in the “Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation” section.

    Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders

    In the event the ITC issues a final negative injury determination, this notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to an APO of their responsibility concerning the destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials, or conversion to judicial protective order, is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation subject to sanction.

    This determination is issued and published pursuant to sections 705(d) and 777(i) of the Act.

    Dated: November 6, 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 Final Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Period of Investigtaion IV. Scope Comments V. Scope of the Investigation VI. Subsidies Valuation VII. Analysis of Programs VIII. Discussion of the Issues Comment 1: Whether payments from the oil palm plantation fund are countervailable Comment 2: Whether the Department should treat OPPF payments as more than adequate remuneration program instead of a grant program Comment 3: Whether the Department was correct to tie OPPF payments to all biodiesel sales Comment 4: Whether the Department should offset any benefit to mandatory respondents by the amount of export levy they pay into the OPPF Comment 5: Whether there is a basis for finding that the GOI entrusted or directed the provision of crude palm oil (CPO) for LTAR Comment 6: Whether the Department should use a tier-one benchmark for CPO Comment 7: Whether the Department should change its freight calculation for the CPO benchmark values IX. Conclusion Appendix II Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is biodiesel, which is a fuel comprised of mono-alkyl esters of long chain fatty acids derived from vegetable oils or animal fats, including biologically-based waste oils or greases, and other biologically-based oil or fat sources. The investigations cover biodiesel in pure form (B100) as well as fuel mixtures containing at least 99 percent biodiesel by volume (B99). For fuel mixtures containing less than 99 percent biodiesel by volume, only the biodiesel component of the mixture is covered by the scope of the investigation.

    Biodiesel is generally produced to American Society for Testing and Materials International (ASTM) D6751 specifications, but it can also be made to other specifications. Biodiesel commonly has one of the following Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) numbers, generally depending upon the feedstock used: 67784-80-9 (soybean oil methyl esters); 91051-34-2 (palm oil methyl esters); 91051-32-0 (palm kernel oil methyl esters); 73891-99-3 (rapeseed oil methyl esters); 61788-61-2 (tallow methyl esters); 68990-52-3 (vegetable oil methyl esters); 129828-16-6 (canola oil methyl esters); 67762-26-9 (unsaturated alkylcarboxylic acid methyl ester); or 68937-84-8 (fatty acids, C12-C18, methyl ester).

    The B100 product subject to the investigation is currently classifiable under subheading 3826.00.1000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), while the B99 product is currently classifiable under HTSUS subheading 3826.00.3000. Although the HTSUS subheadings, ASTM specifications, and CAS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope is dispositive.

    [FR Doc. 2017-24858 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C-570-052] Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Hardwood Plywood Products From the People's Republic of China: Final Affirmative Determination, and Final Affirmative Critical Circumstances Determination, in Part AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (Department) determines that countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters of certain hardwood plywood products (hardwood plywood) from the People's Republic of China (PRC). The period of investigation is January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015. For information on the estimated subsidy rates, see the “Suspension of Liquidation” section of this notice.

    DATES:

    Applicable November 16, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Matthew Renkey or Justin Neuman, AD/CVD Operations, Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone 202.482.2312 or 202.482.0486, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    The petitioner in this investigation is the Coalition for Fair Trade in Hardwood Plywood and its individual members, Columbia Forest Products, Commonwealth Plywood Inc., Murphy Plywood, Roseburg Forest Products Co., States Industries, Inc., and Timber Products Company (the petitioners). In addition to the Government of China (GOC), the mandatory respondents in this investigation are Linyi Sanfortune Wood Co., Ltd. (Sanfortune) and Dongfang Bayley Wood Co., Ltd. (Bayley Wood). The Department has determined that Bayley Wood is cross-owned with Linyi Yinhe Panel Factory, a producer of subject merchandise, and will refer to them collectively as “Bayley Wood.”

    The Department published its Preliminary Determination on April 25, 2017.1 On October 24, 2017, the Department issued a Post-Preliminary Analysis.2 A complete summary of the events that occurred since the Preliminary Determination, as well as a full discussion of the issues raised by the parties for this final determination, may be found in the Issues and Decision Memorandum accompanying the Final Affirmative Determination,3 which is dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is available electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). Access to ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov and to all parties in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the Department's main building. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be viewed at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn. The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum and the electronic version are identical in content.

    1See Certain Hardwood Plywood Products from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, Preliminary Affirmative Critical Circumstances Determination, in Part, and Alignment of Final Determination with Final Antidumping Duty Determination, 82 FR 19022 (April 25, 2017) (Preliminary Determination).

    2See Department Memorandum, “Certain Hardwood Plywood Products from the People's Republic of China: Post-Preliminary Analysis,” dated October 24, 2017 (Post-Preliminary Analysis).

    3See Department Memorandum, “Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Hardwood Plywood Products from the People's Republic of China: Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Affirmative Determination,” dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice (Issues and Decisions Memorandum).

    Methodology

    The Department is conducting this countervailing duty (CVD) investigation in accordance with section 701 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (Act). For each of the subsidy programs found to be countervailable, we determine that there is a subsidy (i.e., a financial contribution by an “authority” that gives rise to a benefit to the recipient) and that the subsidy is specific. For a full description of the methodology underlying our final determination, see the Issues and Decisions Memorandum.

    Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is hardwood plywood from the PRC. For a complete description of the scope of this investigation, see Appendix II.

    Analysis of Subsidy Programs and Comments Received

    All issues raised in the comments filed by interested parties to this proceeding are discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues raised by interested parties and responded to by the Department in the Issues and Decisions Memorandum are attached at Appendix I to this notice.

    Use of Adverse Facts Available

    For purposes of this final determination, we relied on facts available, and because certain respondents did not act to the best of their ability in responding to the Department's requests for information, we drew an adverse inference, where appropriate, in selecting from among the facts otherwise available.4 A full discussion of our decision to rely on adverse facts available is presented in the “Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences” section of the Issues and Decisions Memorandum.

    4See sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act.

    Changes Since the Preliminary Determination

    Based on our review and analysis of the comments received from parties, and minor corrections accepted at verification, we made certain changes to the respondents' subsidy rate calculations since the Preliminary Determination. For a discussion of these changes, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

    Final Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances, in Part

    In the Preliminary Determination, the Department found that critical circumstances exist with respect to imports of hardwood plywood from the PRC for Bayley Wood and all other exporters or producers not individually examined (including those that did not respond to our quantity and value (Q&V) questionnaire).5 Upon further analysis of the data and comments submitted by interested parties following the Preliminary Determination, we are modifying our findings for this final determination. Specifically, in accordance with section 705(a)(2) of the Act, we find that critical circumstances exist with respect to imports from Bayley Wood and the companies that did not respond to the Q&V questionnaire, but do not exist for Sanfortune and “all other” producers or exporters.6

    5See Preliminary Determination at 19023.

    6See the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

    Final Determination

    In accordance with section 705(c)(1)(B)(i)(I) of the Act, we calculated an estimated individual countervailable subsidy rate for each producer/exporter of the subject merchandise individually investigated.

    In accordance with section 705(c)(5)(A) of the Act, for companies not individually investigated, we applied an “all-others” rate, which is normally calculated by weighting the subsidy rates of the individual companies selected as mandatory respondents by those companies' exports of the subject merchandise to the United States. Under section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act, the all-others rate excludes zero and de minimis rates calculated for the exporters and producers individually investigated, as well as rates based entirely on facts otherwise available. In this investigation, the only non-de minimis rate, or rate not based entirely on facts otherwise available, is the rate calculated for Sanfortune. Consequently, the rate calculated for Sanfortune is assigned as the “all-others” rate.

    Company Subsidy rate
  • (percent)
  • Shandong Dongfang Bayley Wood Co., Ltd 7 194.90 Linyi Sanfortune Wood Co., Ltd 22.98 All-Others 22.98 Anji Qichen Bamboo Industry Co. Ltd 8 194.90 Deqing Shengqiang Wood Co., Ltd 194.90 Guangxi Sunway Cen.Xi Artificial Board Ltd 194.90 Guangxi Sunway Forest Products Industry Co., Ltd 194.90 Hebei Tongli Wood Co., Ltd 194.90 Heze Fulin Wood Products Co., Ltd 194.90 Jiashan Minghong Wood Industry Co., Ltd 194.90 Jiaxing Brilliant Import & Export Co., Ltd 194.90 Keens Products 194.90 King Sheng 194.90 Kunming Alston Ast Wood Products Co., Ltd 194.90 Langfang Baomujie Wood Co., Ltd 194.90 Larkcop International Co., Ltd 194.90 Linyi Cathay Pacific Wood Factory 194.90 Linyi Celtic Wood Co., Ltd 194.90 Linyi Dongri Plywood Co., Ltd 194.90 Linyi Hongma 194.90 Linyi Jinhua Wood Co., Ltd 194.90 Linyi Kai Yi Arts and Crafts Co., Ltd 194.90 Linyi Laiyi Timber Industry Co., Ltd 194.90 Linyi Lianyi Wood Co., Ltd 194.90 Linyi Raya Commerce 194.90 Linyi Yutai Wood Co., Ltd 194.90 Lishui Liancheng Pencil Manufacturing Co., Ltd 194.90 Mol Consolidation Service 194.90 Ningbo Asia Pulp and Paper 194.90 Ningbo Zhonghua Paper 194.90 Qiangsheng Wood Co., Ltd 194.90 Qingdao Liansheng International Trading 194.90 Qufu Shengda Wood Co., Ltd 194.90 Shandong Fengtai Wood Co., Ltd 194.90 Shandong Hongyang Fire Resistant 194.90 Shandong Xingang Group 194.90 Shanghai Sunshine Decorative Materials Co., Ltd 194.90 Shenghe Wood Company Ltd 194.90 Shouguang Evergreen Im & Ex Co. Ltd 9 194.90 Shouguang Taizhong Wood Co., Ltd 194.90 Siyang Jiayuan Woodindustry Co., Ltd 194.90 Siyang Senda Wood Industry Co., Ltd 194.90 Suqian Bairun Wood Industry Co., Ltd 194.90 Suqian Foreign Trade Co., Ltd 194.90 Suqian Sulu Wood Industry Co., Ltd 10 194.90 Suzbou Dong He Wood Co., Ltd 194.90 Tianjin Canex 194.90 Tianjin Zhanye Metal Products Co., Ltd 194.90 Xuzhou Fuyuan Wood Co., Ltd 194.90 Xuzhou Hongwei Wood Co., Ltd 194.90 Xuzhou Ruilin Timber Co., Ltd 194.90 Xuzhou Shenghe Wood Products 194.90 Xuzhou Woodhi Trading Co. Ltd 194.90 Xuzhou Yishun Brightwood Co. Ltd 194.90 Xuzhou Zhongda Building Materials Co., Ltd 194.90 Xuzhou Zhongyuan Wood Co., Ltd 194.90 Yixing Lion-King Timber Industry Co., Ltd 194.90 Zhejiang Deqing Shengqiang Wood Co., Ltd 194.90 Zhejiang Fuerjia Wooden Company 194.90 Zhejiang Jufeng Wood Co., Ltd 194.90 Zhejiang Xinyuan Bamboo Products Co., Ltd 194.90 Zhejiang Yongyu Bamboo Joint-Stock Co., Ltd 194.90
    Disclosure

    We intend to disclose to parties in this proceeding the calculations performed for this final determination within five days of the date of public announcement of our final determination, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    7 As discussed in the Preliminary Determination, the Department has found that Bayley Wood is cross-owned with Linyi Yinhe Panel Factory (Yinhe Panel), a producer of subject merchandise. The Department also applied total adverse facts available (AFA) to Bayley Wood and Yinhe Panel.

    8 This company and those listed below are receiving the AFA rate because they did not respond to our quantity and value questionnaire.

    9 This company was listed as having the following two “aka” names: Shouguang Evergreen Co., Ltd. and Weifang Evergreen Wood Co., Ltd.

    10 This company was listed as having the following “aka” name: Suqian Sulu Import and Export Trading.

    Suspension of Liquidation

    As a result of our Preliminary Determination and pursuant to section 703(d) of the Act, we instructed U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation of all entries of hardwood plywood from the PRC, that were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after April 25, 2017, the date of the publication of the Preliminary Determination in the Federal Register (except for those companies for which we made a preliminary affirmative determination of critical circumstances, as explained below). In accordance with section 703(d) of the Act, we instructed CBP to discontinue the suspension of liquidation for CVD purposes for subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, on or after August 23, 2017, but to continue the suspension of liquidation of all entries from April 25, 2017, through August 22, 2017.

    The Department continues to find that critical circumstances exist for those companies receiving AFA (i.e., Bayley Wood and those companies that did not respond to our quantity and value questionnaire),11 and therefore we will instruct CBP to continue to suspend liquidation of all entries of subject merchandise from the PRC-wide entity entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after January 25, 2017, which is 90 days prior to the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination. CBP shall continue to require a cash deposit equal to the rates shown above. These instructions suspending liquidation will remain in effect until further notice.

    11See footnote 8 above.

    In accordance with the preliminary affirmative determination of critical circumstances, we instructed CBP to suspend liquidation of all entries of the subject merchandise from “all other” producers and exporters, which were entered or withdrawn from warehouse, on or after January 25, 2017, which is 90 days prior to April 25, 2017, the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination. Because we do not find critical circumstances for the “all-other” producers and exporters in this final determination, we will instruct CBP to terminate suspension of liquidation, and release any cash deposits or bonds, on imports during the 90-day period prior to the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination.

    If the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) issues a final affirmative injury determination, we will issue a CVD order and reinstate the suspension of liquidation under section 706(a) of the Act, requiring a cash deposit of estimated CVDs for such entries of subject merchandise in the amounts indicated above. If the ITC determines that material injury, or threat of material injury, does not exist, this proceeding will be terminated and all estimated duties deposited or securities posted as a result of the suspension of liquidation will be refunded or canceled.

    International Trade Commission 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 relating 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.

    Return or Destruction of Proprietary Information

    In the event that the ITC issues a final negative injury determination, this notice will serve as the only reminder to parties subject to an APO of their responsibility concerning the destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or, alternatively, conversion to judicial protective order, is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation that is subject to sanction.

    This determination is published pursuant to sections 705(d) and 777(i) of the Act.

    Dated: November 6, 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 Issues and Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Scope of The Investigation IV. Scope Comments V. Subsidies Valuation VI. Benchmarks and Discount Rates VII. Final Determination of Critical Circumstances VIII. Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences IX. Analysis of Programs X. Analysis of Comments Comment 1: The Department's Continued Use of AFA for Bayley Wood Comment 2: Selection of Electricity AFA Benchmark Comment 3: Whether Sanfortune Was Uncreditworthy and Whether Certain of Its Loans Should Be Treated as Long-Term Loans Comment 4: Whether Two Grants Received by Sanfortune Should Be Consolidated Comment 5: Treatment of Sanfortune's Outstanding Time Drafts Comment 6: Electricity for LTAR Benefit Attribution for Sanfortune Comment 7: Land for LTAR Benefit Attribution for Sanfortune Comment 8: Whether Certain of Sanfortune's Loans Are Export Loans Comment 9: Correction of Mistranslations in the GOC's Explanation of Transformer Capacities Comment 10: Whether Loans to the Hardwood Plywood Industry Are Countervailable Comment 11: Whether the Department Should Apply AFA and Find the Provision of Electricity To Be Provided for LTAR Comment 12: Whether the Department Should Apply AFA to Find That Land Was Provided to Sanfortune for LTAR Comment 13: Whether the Department Should Apply AFA for the Specificity for Four of Sanfortune's Reported Grants Comment 14: Whether JOC Yuantai Should Receive the All Others Rate, Rather Than the AFA Rate Comment 15: Critical Circumstances Comment 16: All-Others Rate Calculation Comment 17: Presentation of Sanfortune's Drawer Slides at Verification Comment 18: Whether the Department Properly Initiated on the Petitioners' New Subsidy Allegations Comment 19: Whether the Provision of Urea for LTAR Is Countervailable Comment 20: Whether the GOC Provided Formaldehyde to Sanfortune Comment 21: Whether the COG's Provision of Timber, UF Resin, and Cut Timber for LTAR Is Specific Comment 22: Whether the Department Should Correct the Ocean Freight Data Used in Calculating the Urea and Formaldehyde Benchmarks Comment 23: Whether Veneers Are Included as Part of the Program for the Provision of Cut Timber for LTAR Comment 24: Export-Buyers' Program XI. Recommendation Appendix II Scope of the Investigation

    The merchandise subject to this investigation is hardwood and decorative plywood, and certain veneered panels as described below. For purposes of this proceeding, hardwood and decorative plywood is defined as a generally flat, multilayered plywood or other veneered panel, consisting of two or more layers or plies of wood veneers and a core, with the face and/or back veneer made of non-coniferous wood (hardwood) or bamboo. The veneers, along with the core may be glued or otherwise bonded together. Hardwood and decorative plywood may include products that meet the American National Standard for Hardwood and Decorative Plywood, ANSI/HPVA HP-1-2016 (including any revisions to that standard).

    For purposes of this investigation a “veneer” is a slice of wood regardless of thickness which is cut, sliced or sawed from a log, bolt, or flitch. The face and back veneers are the outermost veneer of wood on either side of the core irrespective of additional surface coatings or covers as described below.

    The core of hardwood and decorative plywood consists of the layer or layers of one or more material(s) that are situated between the face and back veneers. The core may be composed of a range of materials, including but not limited to hardwood, softwood, particleboard, or medium-density fiberboard (MDF).

    All hardwood plywood is included within the scope of this investigation regardless of whether or not the face and/or back veneers are surface coated or covered and whether or not such surface coating(s) or covers obscures the grain, textures, or markings of the wood. Examples of surface coatings and covers include, but are not limited to: Ultra violet light cured polyurethanes; oil or oil-modified or water based polyurethanes; wax; epoxy-ester finishes; moisture-cured urethanes; paints; stains; paper; aluminum; high pressure laminate; MDF; medium density overlay (MDO); and phenolic film. Additionally, the face veneer of hardwood plywood may be sanded; smoothed or given a “distressed” appearance through such methods as hand-scraping or wire brushing. All hardwood plywood is included within the scope even if it is trimmed; cut-to-size; notched; punched; drilled; or has underwent other forms of minor processing.

    All hardwood and decorative plywood is included within the scope of this investigation, without regard to dimension (overall thickness, thickness of face veneer, thickness of back veneer, thickness of core, thickness of inner veneers, width, or length). However, the most common panel sizes of hardwood and decorative plywood are 1219 x 1829 mm (48 x 72 inches), 1219 x 2438 mm (48 x 96 inches), and 1219 x 3048 mm (48 x 120 inches).

    Subject merchandise also includes hardwood and decorative plywood that has been further processed in a third country, including but not limited to trimming, cutting, notching, punching, drilling, or any other processing that would not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of the investigation if performed in the country of manufacture of the in-scope product.

    The scope of the investigation excludes the following items: (1) Structural plywood (also known as “industrial plywood” or “industrial panels”) that is manufactured to meet U.S. Products Standard PS 1-09, PS 2-09, or PS 2-10 for Structural Plywood (including any revisions to that standard or any substantially equivalent international standard intended for structural plywood), and which has both a face and a back veneer of coniferous wood; (2) products which have a face and back veneer of cork; (3) multilayered wood flooring, as described in the antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders on Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of China, Import Administration, International Trade Administration. See Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of China, 76 FR 76690 (December 8, 2011) (amended final determination of sales at less than fair value and antidumping duty order), and Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of China, 76 FR 76693 (December 8, 2011) (countervailing duty order), as amended by Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of China: Amended Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 77 FR 5484 (February 3, 2012); (4) multilayered wood flooring with a face veneer of bamboo or composed entirely of bamboo; (5) plywood which has a shape or design other than a flat panel, with the exception of any minor processing described above; (6) products made entirely from bamboo and adhesives (also known as “solid bamboo”); and (7) Phenolic Film Faced Plyform (PFF), also known as Phenolic Surface Film Plywood (PSF), defined as a panel with an “Exterior” or “Exposure 1” bond classification as is defined by The Engineered Wood Association, having an opaque phenolic film layer with a weight equal to or greater than 90g/m3 permanently bonded on both the face and back veneers and an opaque, moisture resistant coating applied to the edges.

    Excluded from the scope of this investigation are wooden furniture goods that, at the time of importation, are fully assembled and are ready for their intended uses. Also excluded from the scope of this investigation is “ready to assemble” (RTA) furniture. RTA furniture is defined as (A) furniture packaged for sale for ultimate purchase by an end-user that, at the time of importation, includes (1) all wooden components (in finished form) required to assemble a finished unit of furniture, (2) all accessory parts (e.g., screws, washers, dowels, nails, handles, knobs, adhesive glues) required to assemble a finished unit of furniture, and (3) instructions providing guidance on the assembly of a finished unit of furniture; (B) unassembled bathroom vanity cabinets, having a space for one or more sinks, that are imported with all unassembled hardwood and hardwood plywood components that have been cut-to-final dimensional component shape/size, painted or stained prior to importation, and stacked within a singled shipping package, except for furniture feet which may be packed and shipped separately; or (C) unassembled bathroom vanity linen closets that are imported with all unassembled hardwood and hardwood plywood components that have been cut-to-final dimensional shape/size, painted or stained prior to importation, and stacked within a single shipping package, except for furniture feet which may be packed and shipped separately.

    Excluded from the scope of this investigation are kitchen cabinets that, at the time of importation, are fully assembled and are ready for their intended uses. Also excluded from the scope of this investigation are RTA kitchen cabinets. RTA kitchen cabinets are defined as kitchen cabinets packaged for sale for ultimate purchase by an end-user that, at the time of importation, includes (1) all wooden components (in finished form) required to assemble a finished unit of cabinetry, (2) all accessory parts (e.g., screws, washers, dowels, nails, handles, knobs, hooks, adhesive glues) required to assemble a finished unit of cabinetry, and (3) instructions providing guidance on the assembly of a finished unit of cabinetry.

    Excluded from the scope of this investigation are finished table tops, which are table tops imported in finished form with pre-cut or drilled openings to attach the underframe or legs. The table tops are ready for use at the time of import and require no further finishing or processing.

    Excluded from the scope of this investigation are finished countertops that are imported in finished form and require no further finishing or manufacturing.

    Excluded from the scope of this investigation are laminated veneer lumber door and window components with (1) a maximum width of 44 millimeters, a thickness from 30 millimeters to 72 millimeters, and a length of less than 2413 millimeters (2) water boiling point exterior adhesive, (3) a modulus of elasticity of 1,500,000 pounds per square inch or higher, (4) finger-jointed or lap-jointed core veneer with all layers oriented so that the grain is running parallel or with no more than 3 dispersed layers of veneer oriented with the grain running perpendicular to the other layers; and (5) top layer machined with a curved edge and one or more profile channels throughout.

    Imports of hardwood plywood are primarily entered under the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings: 4412.10.0500; 4412.31.0520; 4412.31.0540; 4412.31.0560; 4412.31.0620; 4412.31.0640; 4412.31.0660; 4412.31.2510; 4412.31.2520; 4412.31.2610; 4412.31.2620; 4412.31.4040; 4412.31.4050; 4412.31.4060; 4412.31.4075; 4412.31.4080; 4412.31.4140; 4412.31.4150; 4412.31.4160; 4412.31.4180; 4412.31.5125; 4412.31.5135; 4412.31.5155; 4412.31.5165; 4412.31.5175; 4412.31.5235; 4412.31.5255; 4412.31.5265; 4412.31.5275; 4412.31.6000; 4412.31.6100; 4412.31.9100; 4412.31.9200; 4412.32.0520; 4412.32.0540; 4412.32.0565; 4412.32.0570; 4412.32.0620; 4412.32.0640; 4412.32.0670; 4412.32.2510; 4412.32.2525; 4412.32.2530; 4412.32.2610; 4412.32.2630; 4412.32.3125; 4412.32.3135; 4412.32.3155; 4412.32.3165; 4412.32.3175; 4412.32.3185; 4412.32.3235; 4412.32.3255; 4412.32.3265; 4412.32.3275; 4412.32.3285; 4412.32.5600; 4412.32.3235; 4412.32.3255; 4412.32.3265; 4412.32.3275; 4412.32.3285; 4412.32.5700; 4412.94.1030; 4412.94.1050; 4412.94.3105; 4412.94.3111; 4412.94.3121; 4412.94.3141; 4412.94.3161; 4412.94.3175; 4412.94.4100; 4412.99.0600; 4412.99.1020; 4412.99.1030; 4412.99.1040; 4412.99.3110; 4412.99.3120; 4412.99.3130; 4412.99.3140; 4412.99.3150; 4412.99.3160; 4412.99.3170; 4412.99.4100; 4412.99.5115; and 4412.99.5710.

    Imports of hardwood plywood may also enter under HTSUS subheadings 4412.99.6000; 4412.99.7000; 4412.99.8000; 4412.99.9000; 4412.10.9000; 4412.94.5100; 4412.94.9500; and 4412.99.9500. While the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive.

    [FR Doc. 2017-24864 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C-357-821] Biodiesel From the Republic of Argentina: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (Department) determines that countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters of biodiesel from the Republic of Argentina. The period of investigation is January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2016.

    DATES:

    Applicable November 16, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kathryn Wallace or Elfi Blum, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-6251, or (202) 482-0197, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    The Department published the Preliminary Determination on August 28, 2017.1 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 parties for this final determination, may be found in the accompanying Final Decision Memorandum.2 The Final 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 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 Final Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov. The signed and electronic versions of the Final Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    1See Biodiesel from Argentina: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Preliminary Affirmative Critical Circumstances Determination, in Part, 82 FR 40748 (Preliminary Determination) and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum (PDM).

    2See Memorandum, “Issues and Decision Memorandum for the final Determination in the Countervailing Duty Investigation of Biodiesel from the Republic of Argentina,” dated concurrently with this determination and hereby adopted by this notice (Final Decision Memorandum).

    Period of Investigation

    The period of investigation for which we are measuring subsidies is January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2016.

    Scope of the Investigation

    The scope of the investigation covers biodiesel from the Republic of Argentina. The Department did not receive any scope comments and has not updated the scope of the investigation since the Preliminary Determination. For a complete description of the scope of this investigation, see Appendix II to this notice.

    Final Negative Determination of Critical Circumstances

    In the Preliminary Determination, the Department determined that critical circumstances exist with respect to LDC Argentina S.A. (LDC Argentina) and Vicentin S.A.I.C. (Vicentin), but do not exist with respect to imports from all other producers or exporters of biodiesel from Argentina.3 As discussed in the Final Decision Memorandum, in accordance with section 705(a)(2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department no longer finds critical circumstances with respect to imports from LDC Argentina and Vicentin. In addition, the Department continues to find that critical circumstances do not exist with respect to imports from all other producers or exporters of biodiesel from Argentina. Therefore, in accordance with section 705(a)(2) of the Act, the Department determines that critical circumstances do not exist with respect to LDC Argentina, Vicentin, and all other producers or exporters of subject merchandise.

    3See Preliminary Determination at 82 FR 40749 and PDM at 5-8.

    Analysis of Subsidy Programs and Comments Received

    The subsidy programs under investigation, and the issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs submitted by the interested parties in this proceeding, are discussed in the Final Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues raised by the parties and addressed by the Department in the Final Decision Memorandum is attached at Appendix I to this notice.

    Verification

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, during September 2017, the Department verified the subsidy information reported by the Government of Argentina (GOA), LDC Argentina, and Vicentin. We used standard verification procedures, including an examination of relevant accounting records and original source documents provided by the respondents.4

    4See Memorandum, “Countervailing Duty Investigation of Biodiesel from the Republic of Argentina: Verification of the Questionnaire Responses of the Government of the Republic of Argentina,” dated September 29, 2017; Memorandum, “Countervailing Duty Investigation of Biodiesel from the Republic of Argentina: Verification of the Questionnaire Responses of LDC Argentina SA.,” dated September 29, 2017; and Memorandum, “Countervailing Duty Investigation of Biodiesel from Argentina: Verification of the Questionnaire Responses of Vicentin S.A.I.C.,” dated September 29, 2017.

    Use of Adverse Facts Available

    If necessary information is not available on the record, or an interested party withholds information, fails to provide requested information in a timely manner, significantly impedes a proceeding by not providing information, or information provided cannot be verified, the Department will apply facts available, pursuant to section 776(a)(1) & (2) of the Act.

    For purposes of this final determination, the Department continued to rely, in part, on facts available. For the GOA and Vicentin,5 the Department is basing certain countervailability determinations and calculating subsidy rates for certain examined programs on facts otherwise available, pursuant to sections 776(a)(2)(A) and 776(a)(2)(C) and (D) of the Act. Further, because the GOA and Vicentin did not act to the best of their ability in this investigation in failing to provide necessary information requested by the Department, we determine that an adverse inference in selecting from among the facts available is warranted with respect to certain countervailable subsidy programs, pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act. The Department has therefore relied, in part, on adverse facts available (AFA) in its countervailability determination with respect to two programs, and in calculating the subsidy rate for certain Banco de la Nacion Argentina loan programs.

    5 Vicentin includes its cross-owned affiliates Oleaginosa San Lorenzo S.A. (San Lorenzo) and Los Amores S.A. (Los Amores).

    For further information on the Department's application of AFA, as summarized above, see the section titled, “Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences,” in the Final Decision Memorandum.

    Changes Since the Preliminary Determination

    Based on our analysis of the comments received from parties and the minor corrections presented, we made certain changes to the respondents' subsidy rate calculations set forth in the Preliminary Determination. For a discussion of these changes, see the Final Decision Memorandum and the Final Calculation Memoranda.6

    6See Final Decision Memorandum; see also See Memorandum, “Countervailing Duty Investigation of Biodiesel from Argentina: Final Calculations for LDC Argentina S.A.,” dated November 6, 2017 (LDC Argentina Final Calculation Memorandum); see also Memorandum, “Countervailing Duty Investigation of Biodiesel from Argentina: Final Calculations for Vicentin S.A.I.C. et Alia,” dated November 6, 2017 (Vicentin Final Calculation Memorandum).

    All-Others Rate

    In accordance with section 705(c)(1)(B)(i)(I) of the Act, the Department calculated a countervailable subsidy rate for the individually investigated exporters/producers of the subject merchandise. Consistent with sections 705(c)(1)(B)(i)(I) and 705(c)(5)(A) of the Act, the Department also calculated an estimated “all-others” rate for exporters and producers not individually investigated. Section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act provides that the “all-others” rate shall be an amount equal to the weighted-average of the countervailable subsidy rates established for individually investigated exporters and producers, excluding any rates that are zero or de minimis or any rates determined entirely under section 776 of the Act. In this investigation, the Department calculated individual estimated countervailable subsidy rates for LDC Argentina and Vicentin that are not zero, de minimis, or based entirely on facts otherwise available. Therefore, the Department calculated the all-others rate using a simple average of the individual estimated subsidy rates calculated for the examined respondents.7

    7 With two respondents under examination, the Department normally calculates (A) a weighted-average of the estimated subsidy rates calculated for the examined respondents; (B) a simple average of the estimated subsidy rates calculated for the examined respondents; and (C) a weighted-average of the estimated subsidy rates calculated for the examined respondents using each company's publicly-ranged U.S. sale quantities for the merchandise under consideration. The Department then compares (B) and (C) to (A) and selects the rate closest to (A) as the most appropriate rate for all other producers and exporters. See, e.g., Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof from France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, Final Results of Changed-Circumstances Review, and Revocation of an Order in Part, 75 FR 53661, 53663 (September 1, 2010). However, complete publicly ranged sales data are not available on the record of this investigation. Therefore, the Department has based the all-others rate on a simple average of the estimated subsidy rates calculated for the examined respondents. For a complete analysis of the data, please see the All-Others' Rate Calculation Memorandum.

    Final Determination

    The Department determines the total estimated countervailable subsidy rates to be:

    Company Subsidy rate
  • (percent)
  • LDC Argentina S.A 8 72.28 Vicentin S.A.I.C 9 71.45 All-Others 71.87
    Disclosure

    8 As discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum, the Department has found the following companies to be cross-owned with LDC Argentina S.A.: LDC Semillas S.A., Semillas del Rosario S.A.

    9 As discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum, the Department has found the following companies to be cross-owned with Vicentin S.A.I.C.: Oleaginosa San Lorenzo S.A, Los Amores S.A.

    The Department will disclose the calculations performed within five days of the date of publication of this notice to parties in this proceeding in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with sections 703(d) of the Act, the Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to continue to suspend liquidation of all appropriate entries of biodiesel from Argentina, which were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after August 28, 2017, the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination. Further, the Department will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit for such entries of merchandise. Because the Department finds critical circumstances no longer exist for LDC Argentina and Vicentin, the Department will terminate the retroactive suspension of liquidation ordered at the Preliminary Determination and release any cash deposits that were required during the period May 30, 2017 through August 27, 2017, consistent with section 705(c)(3) of the Act.

    International Trade Commission Notification

    In accordance with section 705(d) of the Act, we will notify the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) of the final affirmative determination of countervailable subsidies. Because the final determination in this proceeding is affirmative, in accordance with section 705(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 biodiesel from Argentina no later than 45 days after our final determination. If the ITC determines that material injury or threat of material injury does not exist, the proceeding will be terminated and all cash deposits will be refunded. If the ITC determines that such injury does exist, the Department will issue a CVD order directing CBP to assess, upon further instruction by the Department, countervailing duties on all imports of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the effective date of the suspension of liquidation, as discussed above in the “Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation” section.

    Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders

    This notice 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)(3). Timely written notification of return/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 is issued and published in accordance with sections 705(d) and 777(i) of the Act.

    Dated: November 6, 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 Final Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Period of Investigation IV. Scope Comments V. Scope of the Investigation VI. Final Determination of Critical Circumstances VII. Subsidies Valuation Information VIII. Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences IX. Analysis of Programs X. Discussion of the Issues Comment 1: Whether an Export Tax on Soybeans Is a Countervailable Subsidy Comment 2: Whether Benefits Associated With Purchases of Soybeans for LTAR Are Tied to Sales of Soybean-Based Products Comment 3: Whether the Department Should Add a Certain Expense to the Two-Tier Benchmark Comment 4: Whether the Department's Benchmark Relates to the Prevailing Market Conditions in Argentina Comment 5: Whether the Department Should Attribute Los Amores' Alleged Subsidies to Vicentin Comment 6: Whether the Department Should Apply AFA Regarding Certain BNA Preferential Loans Comment 7: Whether the Department Has the Authority to Investigate “All Other” Subsidies Comment 8: Whether To Apply AFA to Los Amores' Use of a Ten-Year Tax Exemption Provided by the Province of Santiago del Estero Comment 9: Whether the Department Correctly Calculated LDC Argentina's Benefit From the General Lagos DReI Convenio Comment 10: Whether “Pacto Fiscal” Confers Countervailable Benefits to LDC Argentina XI. Conclusion Appendix II Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is biodiesel, which is a fuel comprised of mono-alkyl esters of long chain fatty acids derived from vegetable oils or animal fats, including biologically-based waste oils or greases, and other biologically-based oil or fat sources. The investigation covers biodiesel in pure form (B100) as well as fuel mixtures containing at least 99 percent biodiesel by volume (B99). For fuel mixtures containing less than 99 percent biodiesel by volume, only the biodiesel component of the mixture is covered by the scope of the investigation.

    Biodiesel is generally produced to American Society for Testing and Materials International (ASTM) D6751 specifications, but it can also be made to other specifications. Biodiesel commonly has one of the following Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) numbers, generally depending upon the feedstock used: 67784-80-9 (soybean oil methyl esters); 91051-34-2 (palm oil methyl esters); 91051-32-0 (palm kernel oil methyl esters); 73891-99-3 (rapeseed oil methyl esters); 61788-61-2 (tallow methyl esters); 68990-52-3 (vegetable oil methyl esters); 129828-16-6 (canola oil methyl esters); 67762-26-9 (unsaturated alkylcarboxylic acid methyl ester); or 68937-84-8 (fatty acids, C12-C18, methyl ester).

    The B100 product subject to the investigation is currently classifiable under subheading 3826.00.1000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), while the B99 product is currently classifiable under HTSUS subheading 3826.00.3000. Although the HTSUS subheadings, ASTM specifications, and CAS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope is dispositive.

    [FR Doc. 2017-24857 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-469-817] Ripe Olives From Spain: Postponement of Preliminary Determination in the Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation AGENCY:

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

    DATES:

    Applicable November 16, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On July 12, 2017, the Department of Commerce (the Department) initiated a less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation of imports of ripe olives from Spain.1 Currently, the preliminary determination is due no later than November 29, 2017.

    1See Ripe Olives from Spain: Initiation of Investigation, 82 FR 33054 (July 19, 2017) (Initiation Notice).

    Postponement of Preliminary Determination

    Section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires the Department to issue the preliminary determination in a LTFV investigation within 140 days after the date on which the Department initiated the investigation. However, section 733(c)(1)(A)(b)(1) of the Act permits the Department to postpone the preliminary determination until no later than 190 days after the date on which the Department initiated the investigation if: (A) The petitioner 2 makes a timely request for a postponement; or (B) the Department concludes that the parties concerned are cooperating, that the investigation is extraordinarily complicated, and that additional time is necessary to make a preliminary determination. Under 19 CFR 351.205(e), the petitioner must submit a request for postponement 25 days or more before the scheduled date of the preliminary determination and must state the reasons for the request. The Department will grant the request unless it finds compelling reasons to deny the request.

    2 The petitioner is the Coalition for Fair Trade in Ripe Olives.

    On October 11, 2017, the petitioner submitted a timely request that the Department postpone the preliminary determination in the LTFV investigation.3 The petitioner stated that it requests postponement because the respondents selected for individual examination are still filing their response to the Department's questionnaire and the Department needs additional time to fully analyze the questionnaire responses, request any necessary clarifications, and determine antidumping margins.4

    3See Letter from the petitioner titled “Ripe Olives from Spain Request for Postponement of Preliminary Determination,” dated October 11, 2017.

    4Id.

    For the reasons stated above and because there are no compelling reasons to deny the request, the Department, in accordance with section 733(c)(1)(A) of the Act, is postponing the deadline for the preliminary determination by 50 days (i.e., 190 days after the date on which this investigation was initiated). As a result, the Department will issue its preliminary determination no later than January 18, 2018. In accordance with section 735(a)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(1), the deadline for the final determination of this investigation will continue to be 75 days after the date of publication of the preliminary determination, unless postponed at a later date.

    This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 733(c)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(f)(1).

    Dated: November 9, 2017. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24848 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XF785 Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act; General Provisions for Domestic Fisheries; Application for Exempted Fishing Permit AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS has determined that twelve exempted fishing permit (EFP) applications warrant further consideration and is requesting public comment on the applications. All EFP applicants request an exemption from a single prohibition (the use of unauthorized gear to harvest HMS) under the Fishery Management Plan for U.S. West Coast Fisheries for Highly Migratory Species (HMS FMP) to test the effects and efficacy of using deep-set buoy gear (DSBG) and deep-set linked buoy gear (DSLBG) to harvest swordfish and other highly migratory species (HMS) off of the U.S. West Coast.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted in writing by December 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments on this document, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2017-0130, by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2017-0130, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments. EFP applications will be available under Relevant Documents through the same link.

    Mail: Attn: Chris Fanning, NMFS West Coast Region, 501 W. Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802. Include the identifier “NOAA-NMFS-2017-0130” in the comments.

    Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period, may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address, etc.), confidential business information, or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily by the sender will be publicly accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter “N/A” in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Chris Fanning, NMFS, West Coast Region, 562-980-4198.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    DSBG fishing trials have occurred for the past seven years (2011-2015, research years; 2015-2017, EFP years) in the U.S. West Coast Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) off California. The data collected from this fishing activity have demonstrated DSBG to achieve about a 95% marketable catch composition (75% swordfish, 3% opah, and 17% marketable sharks). Non-marketable catch rates have remained low and all non-marketable catch were released alive. Due to DSBG being actively tended, strikes are capable of being detected within minutes of a hook on the line; as a result, all catches can be tended quickly, with catch brought onboard the vessel in good condition. To date, DSBG has had two interactions with protected species, both elephant seals which were not seriously injured and were released alive due to the strike detection of the gear. These species are protected by the Marine Mammal Protection Act, but are not listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act.

    DSLBG trials produced similar data to DSBG activities with DSLBG fishing activity occurring over a 40-day period in 2015-2016. Swordfish and other marketable species have represented about 90% of the catch (68% swordfish, 2% opah, 5% escolar, and 16% marketable sharks). Non-marketable species are released alive due to quick DSLBG strike detection and active gear tending. Fishing is still occurring with DSLBG; however, no reports have been submitted from the 2016-2017 year. To date, there have been no interactions with protected species using DSLBG.

    At its September 2017 meeting, the Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) received twelve additional applications for EFPs in time for review and recommended that NMFS consider issuing these EFPs to authorize use of DSBG and/or DSLBG (see Table 1).

    NMFS is requesting public comment on the twelve applications recommended for issuance by the Council. If all applications were approved, the EFPs would allow up to thirteen vessels to fish with DSBG and four vessels to fish with DSLBG, throughout the duration of each EFP, in the U.S. West Coast EEZ with permitted exemption from the prohibitions of the HMS FMP pertaining to non-authorized gear types. Aside from the exemption described above, vessels fishing under an EFP would be subject to all other regulations implemented in the HMS FMP, including measures to protect sea turtles, marine mammals, and seabirds. For up-to-date information on HMS EFPs, please visit NMFS West Coast Region's “Status of Exempted Fishing Permits” Web page (http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/fisheries/migratory_species/status_exempted_permits.html).

    Table 1—EFP Applications Recommended for Issuance by the Council [Council recommended EFPs] Name Date of council recommendation Number of vessels Deep-Set Buoy Gear Applicants: Lutoshkin, Aleksandr September 2017 1 Rynkevic, Ramunas September 2017 1 Sokolova, Tetyana September 2017 1 Ellis, Ron September 2017 1 Foster, John September 2017 1 Hall, John & Crivello, Frank III 1 September 2017 2 Porter, Joshua September 2017 1 Porter, Justin September 2017 2 Rasmussen, Andrew September 2017 1 Sidenko, Alexander September 2017 1 Tafoya, Mark September 2017 1 Deep-Set Linked Buoy Gear Applicants: Smith, Michael September 2017 2 Hall, John & Crivello, Frank III September 2017 2 1 One application with both DSBG and DSLBG gear configurations and activities requested.

    NMFS will consider all public comments submitted in response to this Federal Register Notice prior to issuance of any EFP. Additionally, NMFS will analyze the effects of issuing EFPs in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act and NOAA's Administrative Order 216-6, as well as for compliance with other applicable laws, including Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), which requires the agency to consider whether the proposed action is likely to jeopardize the continued existence and recovery of any endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: November 13, 2017. Emily H. Menashes, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24882 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION Fair Credit Reporting Act Disclosures AGENCY:

    Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.

    ACTION:

    Notice regarding charges for certain disclosures under the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

    SUMMARY:

    The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Bureau) announces that the ceiling on allowable charges under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) will remain unchanged at $12.00, effective for 2018. The Bureau is required to increase the $8.00 amount referred to in the FCRA on January 1 of each year, based proportionally on changes in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U), with fractional changes rounded to the nearest fifty cents. The CPI-U increased 53.11 percent between September 1997, when the FCRA amendments took effect, and September 2017. This increase in the CPI-U, and the requirement that any increase be rounded to the nearest fifty cents, result in a maximum allowable charge of $12.00.

    DATES:

    Effective January 1, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Monique Chenault, Paralegal Specialist, Office of Regulations, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 1700 G Street NW., Washington, DC 20552, at (202) 435-7700.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Section 612(f)(1)(A) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) provides that a consumer reporting agency may charge a consumer a reasonable amount for making a disclosure to the consumer pursuant to section 609 of the FCRA. Section 612(f)(1)(A) of the FCRA provides that, where a consumer reporting agency is permitted to impose a reasonable charge on a consumer for making a disclosure to the consumer pursuant to section 609 of the FCRA, the charge shall not exceed $8.00 and shall be indicated to the consumer before making the disclosure. Section 612(f)(2) of the FCRA states that the Bureau shall increase the $8.00 maximum amount on January 1 of each year, based proportionally on changes in the Consumer Price Index, with fractional changes rounded to the nearest fifty cents. The Bureau's calculations are based on the CPI-U, which is the most general Consumer Price Index and covers all urban consumers and all items.

    Section 612(a) of the FCRA gives consumers the right to a free disclosure upon request once every 12 months. The maximum allowable charge established by this notice does not apply to requests made under that provision. The charge does apply when a consumer who orders a file disclosure has already received a free annual disclosure and does not otherwise qualify for an additional free disclosure.

    The Bureau is using the $8.00 amount set forth in section 612(f)(1)(A)(i) of the FCRA as the baseline for its calculation of the increase in the ceiling on reasonable charges for certain disclosures made under section 609 of the FCRA. Since the effective date of section 612(a) was September 30, 1997, the Bureau calculated the proportional increase in the CPI-U from September 1997 to September 2017. The Bureau then determined what modification, if any, from the original base of $8.00 should be made effective for 2018, given the requirement that fractional changes be rounded to the nearest fifty cents.

    Between September 1997 and September 2017, the CPI-U increased by 53.11 percent from an index value of 161.2 in September 1997 to a value of 246.8 in September 2017. An increase of 53.11 percent in the $8.00 base figure would lead to a figure of $12.25. However, because the statute directs that the resulting figure be rounded to the nearest $0.50, the maximum allowable charge is $12.00. The Bureau therefore determines that the maximum allowable charge for the year 2018 will remain at $12.00, effective January 1, 2018.

    Dated: November 7, 2017. Richard Cordray, Director, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24855 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810-AM-P
    BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION Final Language Access Plan for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau AGENCY:

    Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.

    ACTION:

    Notice of final language access plan.

    SUMMARY:

    Consistent with Executive Order 13166 (Aug. 11, 2000), the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (Bureau or CFPB) is committed to providing persons with limited English proficiency (LEP) meaningful access to its programs and services. The Language Access Plan describes the Bureau's policy and how the Bureau's language access activities are implemented across the Bureau's operations, programs, and services.

    DATES:

    This information is current as of November 13, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For general inquiries or any additional information, please contact Monica Jackson, Office of the Executive Secretary, at 202-435-7275. For information about the Final Language Access Plan, please contact Meina Banh, Office of Financial Education, at 202-435-7892.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act 1 (Dodd-Frank Act) established the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection. Section 1021 of the Dodd-Frank Act provides that the purpose of the Bureau is to “implement, and where applicable, enforce Federal consumer financial law consistently for the purpose of ensuring that all consumers have access to markets for consumer financial products and services and that markets for consumer financial products and services are fair, transparent, and competitive.” 2

    1 Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010), https://www.treasury.gov/about/organizational-structure/offices/Documents/Dodd%20Frank%20Act.pdf.

    2 12 U.S.C. 5511(a).

    Listening and responding to consumers is central to the Bureau's purpose of ensuring that all consumers have access to consumer financial products and services. Since its inception, the Bureau has provided consumers with numerous ways to make their voices heard. Consumers nationwide have engaged with the Bureau through public field hearings, listening events, roundtables, town halls, online through the Web site ConsumerFinance.gov, and through the Bureau's Office of Consumer Response. The Bureau has also sought input from a range of stakeholders, including financial educators, community-based organizations, financial institutions, and others about challenges that consumers face, effective approaches to overcoming those challenges, and what the Bureau can do to improve the financial decision-making process of consumers to help them better navigate the marketplace of financial products and services to reach their own goals.3 This engagement informs the work of the Bureau.

    3 CFPB, Feedback from the Financial Education Field (2013), http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/201305_cfpb_OFE-request-for-information-report.pdf.

    This engagement would be incomplete without efforts to include limited English proficiency (LEP) persons. More than 65 million people, or about 21 percent of the U.S. population over the age of five, speak a language other than English at home.4 Of this, more than 26 million people in the U.S. have limited proficiency in English.5 Individuals are generally considered to have limited English proficiency if they speak a language other than English at home and speak English less than “very well.” 6 Spanish is the most commonly spoken non-English language at home with approximately 40 million speakers.7 Spanish speakers also constitute the largest share of the LEP population, followed by Chinese, Vietnamese, Korean, and Tagalog speakers. These five languages are spoken by more than 78 percent of LEP individuals. Studies by federal agencies and other stakeholders have highlighted that the receipt of materials in consumers' native languages is essential to increasing these consumers' knowledge about financial products and services.

    4 U.S. Census Bureau, 2016 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Language Spoken At Home by Ability to Speak English for the Population 5 Years and Over (“2016 ACS Home Language Data”), https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ACS_15_5YR_B16001&prodType=table.

    5Id.

    6See Paul Siegel et al., U.S. Census Bureau, Language Use and Linguistic Isolation: Historical Data and Methodological Issues (2001), https://www.census.gov/srd/papers/pdf/ssm2007-02.pdf.

    7 2016 ACS Home Language Data.

    The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation's (FDIC) biennial survey on unbanked and underbanked households consistently shows that households where Spanish is the only language spoken were unbanked at five times the rate of households where Spanish is not the only language spoken.8 The most recent survey found that 31 percent of Spanish-speaking households were unbanked compared to 6.5 percent of other households.9 Nearly a third of Spanish-speaking households in the survey were underbanked,10 compared to a fifth of other households. Household members who speak English as a second language, or who cannot read English, are particularly disadvantaged in their ability to review and understand financial documents and other important notifications.11 The CFPB conducted research on the financial education needs of immigrants, including those with limited English proficiency.12 The CFPB identified one of the challenges to be that many technical terms common to the U.S. financial system either do not have equivalent terms in languages other than English or do have equivalent terms that, when translated, may confuse LEP consumers. Further, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) examined the extent to which LEP individuals are impeded in their financial literacy and conduct of financial affairs.13 The GAO's report indicated that a lack of proficiency in English can create significant barriers to financial literacy and to conducting basic financial affairs.14

    8 “Unbanked households” means that “no one in the household had a checking or savings account.” Susan Burhouse et al., FDIC, 2015 FDIC National Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked Households (2016), https://www.fdic.gov/householdsurvey/2015/2015report.pdf.

    9 Susan Burhouse et al., FDIC, 2015 FDIC National Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked Households Appendix Tables (2016), https://www.fdic.gov/householdsurvey/2015/2015appendix.pdf.

    10 “Underbanked” means having an account at an insured institution but also obtaining financial services and products outside of the banking system. See id. at 8 n.13.

    11See id. at 8 n.14.

    12 CFPB, Financial Education Programs Serving Immigrant Populations (2016), https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/blog/immigrants-facing-unique-financial-challenges.

    13 GAO, Consumer Finance: Factors Affecting the Financial Literacy of Individuals with Limited English Proficiency (2010), http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-518.

    14See id. at n. 8.

    Consistent with Executive Order 13166 and the Bureau's mission, the Bureau adopts this Final Language Access Plan to provide LEP individuals meaningful access to the Bureau's services.

    II. Summary the Final Language Access Plan

    On October 8, 2014, the CFPB released a Proposed Language Access Plan for public comment.15 The comment period closed on January 6, 2015. The CFPB received 31 comments on the Proposed Language Access Plan. Commenters provided suggestions to the Bureau about improving outreach to LEP communities, including suggestions for improving the gathering of data about the linguistic needs and preferences of consumers accessing the CFPB's programs and resources; hiring multilingual staff; improving the Bureau's data collection on race and ethnicity; and suggestions for the Bureau to apply supervisory and enforcement authorities to language access-related activities.

    15 79 FR 60840 (Oct. 8, 2014), https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2014/10/08/2014-24122/proposed-language-access-plan-for-the-consumer-financial-protection-bureau.

    The Bureau considered the comments it received. Since the release of the Proposed Language Access Plan, the Bureau has made a number of additional efforts to provide LEP consumers meaningful access to information produced by the Bureau. The final plan is also informed by those efforts. The Bureau considered the following factors in drafting this Final Language Access Plan: (1) The number or proportion of LEP persons who would not receive the Bureau's services without efforts to remove language barriers; (2) the frequency and number of contacts by LEP persons with the Bureau's services; (3) the nature and importance of the services provided by the Bureau to people's financial lives; and (4) the resources available to the Bureau to provide services to LEP persons. Under the Language Access Plan, the Bureau provides LEP individuals access to information, services, activities, and programs by translating consumer-facing documents into select foreign languages and handling complaints from consumers about consumer financial products and services in more than 180 languages.

    III. Related Matters of Interest A. Language Access Task Force

    The Bureau has created a Language Access Task Force, an internal cross-divisional working group aimed at developing and executing a Bureau-wide strategy to provide LEP consumers meaningful access to information produced by the Bureau. The Language Access Task Force coordinates internally, ensures consistency within the Bureau in its communications with LEP individuals, and informs the Bureau's work to engage with LEP consumers.

    B. Handling Complaints From Consumers About Consumer Financial Products and Services

    The Bureau's Office of Consumer Response hears directly from consumers about the challenges they face in the marketplace and brings consumers' concerns to the attention of consumer financial product or service providers. The Office of Consumer Response currently accepts complaints about a wide variety of financial products and services and can assist consumers with complaints in more than 180 languages. Consumers have the choice to receive written communications in Spanish. The Bureau may also refer consumers to other regulators and resources, as needed.

    C. Incorporation of Translation and Interpretation in Bureau Supervision and Enforcement

    The Bureau utilizes translation and interpretation services, as appropriate, during the course of supervisory examinations and enforcement investigations. The Bureau may utilize these services when conducting interviews and consulting with LEP consumer witnesses, whistleblowers, and employees of regulated entities; when reviewing non-English documents and telephone call recordings; and when providing information to the public on matters that may affect LEP consumers, as appropriate.

    D. Informing and Educating Consumers in the Financial Marketplace

    One of the Bureau's goals is to give consumers practical, actionable information that they can use in pursuing their own financial goals and in making financial decisions. The Bureau offers information and tools to help consumers build the financial knowledge and skills that they need to make well-informed financial decisions for themselves and their families to serve their own financial goals. For the LEP community, this includes access in consumers' native languages to consumer financial education materials. The Bureau offers this information directly through its Web site and its Spanish-translated Web site and has also made it available to LEP consumers through community service channels and at community roundtables throughout the country.

    The Bureau offers free printed financial education materials translated into various languages for LEP consumers, which are distributed by both the Bureau and others who serve LEP consumers. To date, the CFPB has routinely translated its most frequently requested brochures into Spanish. Certain publications are also available in Chinese, French, Haitian Créole, Tagalog, Chinese, Korean, Vietnamese, Russian, and Arabic. For download or free bulk orders, interested persons can visit pueblo.thefederalregister.org/CFPBPubs/CFPBPubs.php.

    Web-Based Tools and Resources for Consumers

    Ask CFPB: An interactive online tool that gives consumers answers to questions about financial products and services, including credit cards, mortgages, student loans, bank accounts, credit reports, payday loans, and debt collection. Ask CFPB is available in Spanish at consumerfinance.gov/es/obtener-respuestas/.

    CFPB en Español: CFPB en Español provides Spanish-speaking consumers a central point of access to the CFPB's most-used consumer resources, translated into Spanish. This page offers Ask CFPB en Español; a consumer complaints page that highlights the complaint process and the phone number consumers can call to submit a complaint in Spanish; an “about us” page with Spanish-language videos and introductory content about how the CFPB works to protect consumers; and a home page that offers details on the CFPB's resources for consumers in search of a mortgage and those who already own a home. CFPB en Español can be found at consumerfinance.gov/es/.

    Submit a complaint: To submit a complaint about a consumer financial product or service, consumers can visit consumerfinance.gov/complaint/ or call toll-free at (855) 411-CFPB (2372). The CFPB accepts complaints in more than 180 languages. The CFPB forwards the complaint to the company and works to get a response from them—generally within 15 days. When the company responds, the consumer can review the response and give the CFPB feedback. If another government agency would be better able to assist, the CFPB forwards the complaint to that agency and lets the consumer know.

    Planning for Retirement: This is an interactive educational online tool designed to help consumers make an informed decision about when to claim their Social Security retirement benefits. The tool gives consumers a rough estimate of their monthly benefit, shows how their monthly benefit changes depending on the age at which they claim, estimates what they can expect to receive at different ages, and provides tips relevant to their situation. Planifique para su Jubilación is the Spanish version of Planning for Retirement, which can be found at consumerfinance.gov/retirement/before-you-claim/es/. The English version can be found at consumerfinance.gov/retirement/before-you-claim/.

    Your home loan toolkit: A step-by-step guide: The Dodd-Frank Act amended the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) to, among other things, provide that the Bureau's Director shall “prepare the booklet in various languages and cultural styles, as the Director determines to be appropriate, so that the booklet is understandable and accessible to homebuyers of different ethnic and cultural backgrounds.” 16 To support this mandate, the toolkit guides consumers through the process of shopping for a mortgage and buying a home and is available from the Bureau in both English and Spanish.17

    16 12 U.S.C. 2604(a).

    17 The booklet is available in English at http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/201503_cfpb_your-home-loan-toolkit-web.pdf and in Spanish at http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/201507_cfpb_your-home-loan-toolkit-web-spanish.pdf.

    Debt collection action letters: The Bureau published five different action letters in Spanish that provided consumers with instructions on how to send an English language version of the same letter to communicate with a debt collector which can be found here consumerfinance.gov/consumer-tools/debt-collection/.

    Web-Based Tools and Resources for Financial Educators and Others Who Work With Consumers

    Your Money, Your Goals: A financial empowerment toolkit that organizations can use to incorporate financial capability information and tools into their discussions with the people they serve to help them strengthen their financial capability and personal money management skills. The toolkit is available in English and Spanish at consumerfinance.gov/practitioner-resources/your-money-your-goals/.

    Money as You Grow: This is a Web site for parents and caregivers who want to help their children develop money skills. The Money as You Grow Web site identifies key stages of childhood financial development, based on the CFPB's developmental model for youth financial capability. The Web site offers practical, age-appropriate activities and conversation starters designed to help parents and caregivers learn techniques for encouraging their kids to develop positive financial knowledge, skills, and attitudes. The Web site is available in English at consumerfinance.gov/consumer-tools/money-as-you-grow/ and in Spanish at consumerfinance.gov/es/el-dinero-mientras-creces/.

    CFPB Brochures

    • The CFPB has created a range of publications for consumers that provide straightforward information about money management and other financial issues. These publications include brochures about checking a credit report, avoiding checking account fees, tax time savings, how to avoid foreclosure, what consumers can do when they are unable to pay credit card bills, and other topics. The CFPB makes many of these resources available in English, Spanish, and eight other languages and provides them for download or free bulk ordering at pueblo.thefederalregister.org/CFPBPubs/CFPBPubs.php.

    CFPB bookmarks: Two bookmarks highlight the Ask CFPB tool and encourage consumers to share their experiences with financial products through the CFPB's Tell Your Story tool. The bookmarks are also available in Spanish.

    Submit a complaint: This brochure explains how to submit a complaint to the CFPB. It covers contact information, the consumer financial products and services about which the CFPB takes complaints, and what happens after a consumer submits a complaint. This brochure is also available in Spanish.

    Accounts

    Newcomer's Guides to Managing Money: The guides provide information about ways to pay bills, receive money, open a bank account, and compare financial products. These guides are available in English, Spanish, Arabic, Chinese, Tagalog, Vietnamese, Korean, Russian, French and Haitian Créole.

    Know your overdraft options: This brochure explains debit card and ATM overdraft coverage and fees as well as tips and options to reduce or avoid fees. This brochure is also available in Spanish.

    Keep a lid on checking account fees: This brochure outlines six steps to help consumers reduce checking account fees and is also available in Spanish.

    Moving your checking account checklist: This brochure is a 10-step checklist to help consumers close their current checking account and open a new checking account. This brochure is also available in Spanish.

    Credit

    Act fast if you can't pay your credit cards: This brochure provides three steps consumers can take when they do not have enough money to pay their credit card bill and information about how to avoid debt-relief scams. This brochure is also available in Spanish.

    Credit discrimination is illegal: This brochure describes warning signs of credit discrimination and what consumers can do if they believe they have been discriminated against. This brochure is also available in Spanish.

    How to rebuild your credit: This brochure outlines steps that can help you recover from a financial challenge that hurt your credit and is also available in Spanish.

    Helping consumers understand credit discrimination: This brochure helps consumers better understand their rights under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA). This brochure is also available in Spanish for download only.

    Find the best credit card for you: This brochure highlights four steps to shopping for a credit card, provides definitions of credit card terms, and is also available in Spanish.

    How to stop mystery credit card fees: This consumer advisory educates consumers about credit card add-on services and is also available in Spanish.

    Check your credit report at least once a year: This brochure describes how consumers can check their credit reports from the three nationwide credit reporting companies for free to find and dispute mistakes, update personal information, and guard against identity theft. This brochure is also available in Spanish.

    You have a right to see specialty credit reports: Specialty credit reporting companies collect and report credit history information about consumers. This consumer advisory informs consumers about their right to get free reports from these companies every 12 months and is also available in Spanish.

    How to fix mistakes in your credit card bill: This brochure outlines five steps to dispute incorrect charges or fees on a credit card bill and is also available in Spanish.

    Know your rights when a debt collector calls: This brochure highlights steps consumers can take when a debt collector calls and explains what to ask and how consumers can protect themselves. This brochure is also available in Spanish.

    Understand your credit score: This brochure explains what factors determine a credit score, what consumers can do to raise their score, and how to check credit reports and fix mistakes. This brochure is also available in Spanish.

    Watch accounts closely when card data is hacked: This brochure describes how consumers can keep a close eye on account activity and report suspicious transactions quickly and is also available in Spanish.

    Money Management

    Save some & spend some: This brochure explains free and easy ways consumers can split their tax refunds between checking and savings accounts and purchase U.S. savings bonds so they can spend some and save some of their refunds. This brochure is also available in Spanish.

    How to spot frauds and scams: This brochure identifies common tactics that scammers use and is also available in Spanish.

    Your disaster checklist: This checklist helps consumers gather the financial information they would need after an emergency. It contains spaces for account information and customer service numbers as well as checklists of important documents they should have in case of an emergency. This checklist is also available in Spanish.

    Choosing your student loan: This brochure provides three steps to help guide consumers toward the student loans that are best for them and is also available in Spanish.

    Manage your college money: This brochure explains how to choose and manage an account for college money, so consumers can avoid unexpected fees and get financial aid disbursements quickly. This brochure is also available in Spanish.

    SAVED: Five steps for making financial decisions: This brochure provides five steps to help consumers find the best deal when buying a financial product or service. This brochure is also available in Spanish.

    Remittances

    The Bureau's first substantive rule provided important new consumer protections to users of international money transfers, or remittances. Many of these users are LEP consumers who send money to family and friends abroad. The Bureau developed a comprehensive outreach and education campaign to educate consumers about the protections for remittance transfers. These materials are available in English, Spanish, Haitian Créole, Chinese, and Tagalog.

    Remittance transfer rule factsheet for stakeholders: This fact sheet is designed to help stakeholders such as financial counselors, instructors, and others understand and explain the remittance transfer rule and its protections for consumers. It explains when the rule applies, who is subject to the rule, what information consumers should receive, and what consumers can do if errors occur.

    Send money abroad with more confidence flyer: This flyer tells senders of remittance transfers that protections are available to them and provides the CFPB's phone number and web address for more information.

    Send money abroad with more confidence poster: This poster tells senders of remittance transfers that consumer protections are available to them and provides the CFPB's phone number and Web site address for more information.

    Send money abroad with more confidence brochure: This brochure outlines the consumer protections available to senders of remittance transfers. It tells consumers that not all companies that transmit money abroad are covered by the Federal rule.

    Send money abroad with more confidence fact sheet: This fact sheet provides a more detailed explanation of the consumer protections that apply when consumers send remittance transfers covered by the CFPB's remittance transfer rule.

    Mortgages

    Shopping for a mortgage? What you can expect under Federal rules: This 18-page booklet explains the Federal rules that protect consumers when they are shopping for a new mortgage. This booklet is also available in Spanish, Chinese, French, Haitian Créole, Korean, and Tagalog.

    How to avoid foreclosure: This brochure explains steps to take when having trouble paying the mortgage and is also available in Spanish.

    Have a mortgage? What you can expect under Federal rules: This 11-page booklet explains the Federal rules that protect consumers as they manage their mortgage payments. This booklet is also available in Spanish, Chinese, French, Haitian Créole, Korean, and Tagalog.

    Considering a reverse mortgage?: This brochure explains how a reverse mortgage works and outlines important questions consumers can ask when talking to a housing counselor or other adviser about their reverse mortgage options and alternatives. The CFPB also offers a plain-language guide to reverse mortgages for consumers on the CFPB's Web site in Spanish.18 The guide highlights key decision points to help potential reverse mortgage borrowers assess the financial ramifications of securing a reverse mortgage.

    18 The Spanish guide can be found at http://www.consumerfinance.gov/f/201411_cfpb_guide_considering-reverse-mortgage-guide_spanish.pdf.

    Don't get scammed: How to spot and avoid mortgage assistance and foreclosure relief scams: This brochure explains mortgage relief scams, offers tips on how to spot and avoid them, explains how to get help, and is also available in Spanish.

    Ready to buy a home?: This checklist of questions helps consumers understand whether they are financially prepared for the responsibility of homeownership and is also available in Spanish.

    Should I refinance?: This brochure helps homeowners consider warning signs about their current mortgage situation, review financial goals and potential outcomes, and determine whether refinancing their mortgage makes sense. This brochure is also available in Spanish.

    Older Consumers

    Know your financial adviser: This brochure provides questions older consumers can ask to determine if their financial adviser is really an expert in senior financial planning and is also available in Spanish.

    Managing someone else's money: Guides for financial caregivers, particularly those who handle the finances of older Americans, to help them carry out their duties and responsibilities in managing someone else's money. This includes agents under power of attorney, court-appointed guardians and conservators, trustees, and government-benefit fiduciaries (Social Security representative payees and VA fiduciaries). The guides explain the duties and responsibilities of people acting in each of these fiduciary roles, how to watch out for scams and financial exploitation, what to do if a family member or friend is a victim, and where to go for help. Cómo Administar el Dinero de Otras Personas, the Spanish version, is a set of four guides for financial caregivers. These guides can be offered by community organizations around the country that interact with older adults, family members, or caregivers.19

    19 The English guides can be found at https://www.consumerfinance.gov/consumer-tools/managing-someone-elses-money/, and the Spanish guides can be found at https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/blog/resources-in-spanish-that-could-help-thousands-of-older-hispanics-spot-financial-exploitation-and-scams/.

    Money Smart for Older Adults: The CFPB and the FDIC collaborated to publish Money Smart for Older Adults, an instructor-led training about preventing and responding to elder financial exploitation such as scams and identity theft. It also includes resources on preparing financially for unexpected life events. This resource is available in English and in Spanish (Money Smart para Adultos Mayores).20

    20 The English guides can be found at https://www.fdic.gov/consumers/consumer/moneysmart/olderadult.html, and the Spanish guides can be found at https://www.fdic.gov/consumers/consumer/moneysmartsp/mayores.html.

    You have the right to be free from scams: This is a placemat with consumer protection tips. The placemat can be used in meal delivery services, congregate care facilities, or be shared with family and friends. This resource is also available in Spanish.

    Other

    Unwrapping gift cards: Know the terms and avoid surprises: This brochure explains the types of gift cards and the protections consumers have. It explains what consumers can do when they give or get gift cards in order to understand the terms and conditions. This brochure is also available in Spanish.

    E. Outreach and Stakeholder Engagement

    The Bureau works with key stakeholders within LEP communities, such as community-based organizations, to help make the consumers they serve aware of the Bureau's resources and tools. The Bureau holds meetings with consumer groups, community service organizations, and financial institutions to discuss the challenges LEP consumers face.

    Additional Bureau resources that can be utilized by all stakeholders include:

    Language glossaries: The Bureau published glossaries of financial terms translated from English into Spanish and Chinese as a resource tool. Stakeholders that may be interested in using this tool include financial educators, government agencies, financial service providers, and other organizations serving LEP consumers. The glossary of terms is not a mandate, guide, or a requirement.21

    21 The CFPB's Glossary of English-Spanish Financial Terms can be found at https://www.consumerfinance.gov/documents/5542/cfpb_adult-fin-ed_spanish-style-guide-glossary.pdf, and The CFPB's Glossary of English-Chinese Financial Terms can be found at https://www.consumerfinance.gov/documents/5540/cfpb_adult-fin-ed_chinese-style-guide-glossary.pdf.

    Field scan of financial education programs serving immigrant populations: The Office of Financial Education conducted a field scan of programs, practices, and initiatives that serve immigrant populations. The field scan helps inform the Bureau's financial-education initiatives and raises visibility about the financial education challenges that many immigrants face. The field scan also outlines promising financial education strategies that financial education providers can use to better serve immigrants who seek their services and are part of their communities. The ultimate goal is to help consumers achieve their own financial goals. The field scan was released in summer 2016 and can be found at consumerfinance.gov/data-research/research-reports/financial-education-programs-serving-immigrant-populations/.

    F. Language Access and Regulations

    A few of the Bureau's major rules address language access by, in accordance with pre-existing law, permitting required disclosures to be provided in a language other than English, as long as the disclosures are also made available in English.22 A few other Bureau rules provide more specific guidance about facilitating access for LEP consumers to markets for consumer financial products and services and helping ensure that such markets are fair, transparent, and competitive. For example, the Bureau's TILA-RESPA Integrated Disclosure (TRID) Rule explicitly permits creditors to translate certain mortgage disclosures into languages other than English and provides consumer-tested Spanish language translations of those mortgage disclosures.23 Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, the Bureau's Remittance Transfer Rule provides that certain advertising, soliciting, or marketing of remittance transfer services in a foreign language triggers the requirement to provide remittance disclosures in that language.24 The Bureau's Prepaid Rule, issued in October 2016, similarly provides that principally using a foreign language to, among other things, advertise, solicit, or market a prepaid account may trigger a requirement to provide certain disclosures in that language.25

    22See, e.g., 12 CFR 1002.4(e) (Regulation B), 1005.4(a)(2) (Regulation E), 1024.32(a)(2) (Regulation X), and 1026.27 (Regulation Z). Most Bureau regulations may be found at https://www.consumerfinance.gov/eregulations/.

    23See 12 CFR 1026.37(o)(5)(ii), 1026.38(t)(5)(viii), and appendix H-28.

    24See 12 CFR 1005.31(g).

    25See 81 FR 83934, 84334 (Nov. 22, 2016). This requirement may be found in Regulation E, 12 CFR 1005.18(b)(9), when the Prepaid Rule goes into effect.

    IV. Regulatory Requirements

    This Language Access Plan articulates the Bureau's commitment to providing LEP persons with meaningful access to its programs and services. It is therefore exempt from the notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act. See 5 U.S.C. 553(b).

    Because no notice of proposed rulemaking is required, the Regulatory Flexibility Act does not require an initial or final regulatory flexibility analysis. See 5 U.S.C. 603(a), 604(a).

    The Bureau has determined that this Language Access Plan does not impose any new or revise any existing recordkeeping, reporting, or disclosure requirements on covered entities or members of the public that would be collections of information requiring OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3521.

    Final Language Access Plan

    The text of the Final Language Access Plan follows:

    Consistent with Executive Order 13166 (Aug. 11, 2000), this document establishes the Language Access Plan of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (the Bureau or CFPB) for providing meaningful access to the CFPB's services to limited English proficiency (LEP) persons (individuals who do not speak English as their primary language and who have a limited ability to speak, write, or understand English).

    The CFPB is committed to the accessibility of its services to LEP persons. In developing this Language Access Plan, the CFPB engaged stakeholders in October 2014 by releasing a Proposed Language Access Plan for public comment to understand the opportunities to serve LEP persons and to ensure LEP individuals have access to the CFPB's programs and services.

    To ensure meaningful access, the Bureau considers the following factors: (1) The number or proportion of LEP persons who would not receive the Bureau's services without efforts to remove language barriers; (2) the frequency and number of contacts by LEP persons with the Bureau's services; (3) the nature and importance of the services provided by the Bureau to people's financial lives; and (4) the resources available to the Bureau (including cost-benefit analysis) to provide services to LEP persons.

    The CFPB provides LEP individuals with access to information, services, activities, and programs through the following activities:

    Offering Translated Consumer-Facing Brochures

    The Bureau translates selected consumer-facing brochures into the most frequently encountered languages, as established by U.S. Census Bureau data or based on specific issues affecting a particular group of LEP individuals. The Bureau publishes a wider range of consumer-facing brochures in Spanish, which accounts for the second-largest language group in the United States. Translating public-facing brochures into the languages most frequently encountered is important when reaching LEP individuals.26 Spanish speakers constitute nearly 64 percent of the LEP population, so the Bureau translates many consumer-facing materials into Spanish.27 The CFPB has also translated brochures, fact sheets, and other materials about certain topics into Chinese, French, French Créole, Korean, Tagalog, Vietnamese, Russian, and Arabic. The Bureau reviews translated materials to ensure quality and accuracy.

    26 Spanish, Chinese, Tagalog, Vietnamese, Arabic, French, Korean, and Russian are the most common languages other than English that are spoken in the United States. See 2016 ACS Home Language Data.

    27Id.

    Handling Complaints From Consumers About Consumer Financial Products and Services in Multiple Languages

    The Bureau's Office of Consumer Response hears directly from consumers about the challenges they face in the marketplace and brings consumers' complaints to the attention of consumer financial product or service providers. The CFPB currently accepts complaints about a wide variety of financial products and services and can assist consumers with complaints in more than 180 languages. Consumers have the choice to receive written communications in Spanish. The Bureau may also refer consumers to other regulators and resources, as needed.

    Dated: November 13, 2017. Richard Cordray, Director, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24854 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810-AM-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Submission of Data by State Educational Agencies; Submission Dates for State Revenue and Expenditure Reports for Fiscal Year 2017, Revisions to Those Reports, and Revisions to Prior Fiscal Year Reports AGENCY:

    National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, Department of Education.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Secretary announces dates for State educational agencies (SEAs) to submit expenditure and revenue data and average daily attendance statistics on ED Form 2447 (the National Public Education Financial Survey (NPEFS)) for fiscal year (FY) 2017, revisions to those reports, and revisions to reports for previous fiscal years. The Secretary sets these dates to ensure that data are available to serve as the basis for timely distribution of Federal funds. The U.S. Census Bureau is the data collection agent for this request of the Department of Education's National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). The data will be published by NCES and will be used by the Secretary in the calculation of allocations for FY 2019 appropriated funds.

    DATES:

    SEAs can begin submitting data on Wednesday, January 31, 2018. SEAs are urged to submit accurate and complete data by Friday, March 30, 2018, to facilitate timely processing. The deadline for the final submission of all data, including any revisions to previously submitted data for FY 2016 and FY 2017, is Wednesday, August 15, 2018. Any resubmissions of FY 2016 or FY 2017 data by SEAs in response to requests for clarification or reconciliation or other inquiries by NCES or the Census Bureau must be completed as soon as possible, but no later than Tuesday, September 4, 2018. All outstanding data issues must be reconciled or resolved by the SEAs, NCES, and the Census Bureau as soon as possible, but no later than September 4, 2018.

    Addresses and Submission Information: SEAs may mail ED Form 2447 to: U.S. Census Bureau, ATTENTION: Economic Reimbursable Surveys Division, 4600 Silver Hill Road, Suitland, MD 20746.

    If an SEA's submission is received by the Census Bureau after August 15, 2018, the SEA must show one of the following as proof that the submission was mailed on or before that date:

    1. A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service postmark.

    2. A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the U.S. Postal Service.

    3. A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial carrier.

    4. Any other proof of mailing acceptable to the Secretary.

    If the SEA mails ED Form 2447 through the U.S. Postal Service, the Secretary does not accept either of the following as proof of mailing:

    1. A private metered postmark.

    2. A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service.

    Note:

    The U.S. Postal Service does not uniformly provide a dated postmark. Before relying on this method, an SEA should check with its local post office.

    SEAs may submit data online using the interactive survey form on the NPEFS data collection Web site at: http://surveys.nces.ed.gov/ccdnpefs. The NPEFS interactive survey includes a digital confirmation page where a personal identification number (PIN) may be entered. A successful entry of the PIN serves as a signature by the authorizing official. Alternatively, a certification form also may be printed from the Web site, signed by the authorizing official, and mailed to the Economic Reimbursable Surveys Division of the Census Bureau at the Washington, DC address provided above, within five business days after submission of the NPEFS web interactive form.

    Alternatively, SEAs may hand-deliver submissions by 4:00 p.m. Washington, DC time on August 15, 2018, to: U.S. Census Bureau, Economic Reimbursable Surveys Division, 4600 Silver Hill Road, Suitland, MD 20746.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Stephen Q. Cornman, NPEFS Project Director, National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Telephone: (202) 245-7753 or by email: [email protected] You may also contact an NPEFS team member at the Census Bureau. Telephone: 1-800-437-4196 or (301) 763-1571 or by email: [email protected]

    If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service, toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under section 153(a)(1)(I) of the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002, 20 U.S.C. 9543(a)(1)(I), which authorizes NCES to gather data on the financing and management of education, NCES collects data annually from SEAs through ED Form 2447. The report from SEAs includes attendance, revenue, and expenditure data from which NCES determines a State's “average per-pupil expenditure” (SPPE) for elementary and secondary education, as defined in section 8101(2) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA) (20 U.S.C. 7801(2)).

    In addition to using the SPPE data as general information on the financing of elementary and secondary education, the Secretary uses these data directly in calculating allocations for certain formula grant programs, including, but not limited to, title I, part A of the ESEA, Impact Aid, and Indian Education programs. Other programs, such as the Education for Homeless Children and Youth program under title VII of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act and the Teacher Quality State Grants program (title II, part A of the ESEA), make use of SPPE data indirectly because their formulas are based, in whole or in part, on State title I, part A allocations.

    In January 2018, the Census Bureau, acting as the data collection agent for NCES, will email ED Form 2447 to SEAs, with instructions, and will request that SEAs commence submitting FY 2017 data to the Census Bureau on Wednesday, January 31, 2018. SEAs are urged to submit accurate and complete data by Friday, March 30, 2018, to facilitate timely processing.

    Submissions by SEAs to the Census Bureau will be analyzed for accuracy and returned to each SEA for verification. SEAs must submit all data, including any revisions to FY 2016 and FY 2017 data, to the Census Bureau no later than Wednesday, August 15, 2018. Any resubmissions of FY 2016 or FY 2017 data by SEAs in response to requests for clarification or reconciliation or other inquiries by NCES or the Census Bureau must be completed by Tuesday, September 4, 2018. Between August 15, 2018, and September 4, 2018, SEAs may also, on their own initiative, resubmit data to resolve issues not addressed in their final submission of NPEFS data by August 15, 2018. All outstanding data issues must be reconciled or resolved by the SEAs, NCES, and the Census Bureau as soon as possible, but no later than September 4, 2018.

    In order to facilitate timely submission of data, the Census Bureau will send reminder notices to SEAs in June and July of 2018.

    Having accurate, consistent, and timely information is critical to an efficient and fair Department of Education (Department) allocation process and to the NCES statistical process. To ensure timely distribution of Federal education funds based on the best, most accurate data available, the Department establishes, for program funding allocation purposes, Wednesday, August 15, 2018, as the final date by which the SEAs must submit data using either the interactive survey form on the NPEFS data collection Web site at: http://surveys.nces.ed.gov/ccdnpefs or ED Form 2447.

    Any resubmissions of FY 2016 or FY 2017 data by SEAs in response to requests for clarification or reconciliation or other inquiries by NCES or the Census Bureau must be completed through the interactive survey form on the NPEFS data collection Web site or ED Form 2447 by Tuesday, September 4, 2018. If an SEA submits revised data after the final deadline that result in a lower SPPE figure, the SEA's allocations may be adjusted downward, or the Department may direct the SEA to return funds. SEAs should be aware that all of these data are subject to audit and that, if any inaccuracies are discovered in the audit process, the Department may seek recovery of overpayments for the applicable programs.

    Note:

    The following are important dates in the data collection process for FY 2017 data and revisions to reports for previous fiscal years:

    January 31, 2018—SEAs can begin to submit accurate and complete data for FY 2017 and revisions to previously submitted data for FY 2016.

    March 30, 2018—Date by which SEAs are urged to submit accurate and complete data for FY 2016 and FY 2017.

    August 15, 2018—Mandatory final submission date for FY 2016 and FY 2017 data to be used for program funding allocation purposes.

    September 4, 2018—Mandatory final deadline for responses by SEAs to requests for clarification or reconciliation or other inquiries by NCES or the Census Bureau. All data issues must be resolved.

    Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) on request to: Mr. Stephen Q. Cornman, NPEFS Project Director, National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Telephone: (202) 245-7753 or by email: [email protected]

    Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System at: www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys.

    At this site you can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register, in text or Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at this site.

    You may also access documents of the Department published in the Federal Register by using the article search feature at: www.federalregister.gov.

    Specifically, through the advanced search feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published by the Department.

    Authority:

    20 U.S.C. 9543.

    Dated: November 9, 2017. Thomas Brock, Commissioner, National Center for Education Research Delegated the Duties of the Director for the Institute of Education Sciences.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24787 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket Nos. EL18-28-000; QF12-252-004] Elk Hills Power, LLC; Notice of Request for Waiver

    Take notice that on November 8, 2017, pursuant to section 292.205(c) of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) implementing the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978, as amended 18 CFR 292.205(c) (2017), Elk Hills Power, LLC (EHP) submitted a request for limited waiver of the operating standard set forth in section 292.205(a)(1) for the topping-cycle cogeneration facility owned and operated by EHP, as more fully explained in its request.

    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 Applicant.

    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 29, 2017.

    Dated: November 9, 2017. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24798 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket Nos. RD17-8-000] Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-725HH); Comment Request; Revision and Extension AGENCY:

    Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Notice of revised information collection and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or FERC) is soliciting public comment on revisions to the information collection, FERC-725HH (RF Reliability Standards) which will be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review of the information collection requirements.

    DATES:

    Comments on the collection of information are due January 16, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments identified by Docket Nos. RD17-8-000 by either of the following methods:

    eFiling at Commission's Web site: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.

    Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in accordance with submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For user assistance, contact FERC Online Support by email at [email protected], or by phone at: (866) 208-3676 (toll-free), or (202) 502-8659 for TTY.

    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and issuances in this docket may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ellen Brown may be reached by email at [email protected], telephone at (202) 502-8663, and fax at (202) 273-0873.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: FERC-725HH, RF Reliability Standards.

    OMB Control Number: 1902-0256.

    Type of Request: Three-year approval of the FERC-725HH information collection requirements, as modified by Docket No. RD17-8-000.

    Abstract: The information collected by the FERC-725HH is required to implement the statutory provisions of section 215 of the Federal Power Act (FPA) (16 U.S.C. 824o). Section 215 of the FPA buttresses the Commission's efforts to strengthen the reliability of the interstate grid through the grant of new authority by providing for a system of mandatory Reliability Standards developed by the Electric Reliability Organization (ERO). In July 2006, the Commission certified the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) as the ERO.1 Reliability Standards that the ERO proposes to the Commission may include Reliability Standards that are proposed to the ERO by a Regional Entity.2 A Regional Entity is an entity that has been approved by the Commission to enforce Reliability Standards under delegated authority from the ERO.3 On March 17, 2011, the Commission approved a regional Reliability Standard submitted by the ERO that was developed by the ReliabilityFirst Corporation (RF).4

    1North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116 FERC 61,062 (ERO Certification Order), order on reh'g & compliance, 117 FERC 61,126 (2006), aff'd sub nom. Alcoa, Inc. v. FERC, 564 F.3d 1342 (D.C. Cir. 2009).

    2 16 U.S.C. 824o(e)(4).

    3 16 U.S.C. 824o(a)(7) and (e)(4).

    4Planning Resource Adequacy Assessment Reliability Standard, Order No. 747, 134 FERC 61,212 (2011).

    RF promotes bulk electric system reliability in the Eastern Interconnection. RF is the Regional Entity responsible for compliance monitoring and enforcement in the RF region. In addition, RF provides an environment for the development of Reliability Standards and the coordination of the operating and planning activities of its members as set forth in the RF bylaws.

    There is one regional Reliability Standard in the RF region. The regional Reliability Standard requires planning coordinators within the RF geographical footprint to analyze, assess and document resource adequacy for load in the RF footprint annually, to utilize a “one day in ten years” loss of load criterion, and to document and post load and resource capability in each area or transmission-constrained sub-area identified.

    • BAL-502-RFC-02 (Planning Resource Adequacy Analysis, Assessment and Documentation) 5 establishes common criteria, based on “one day in ten year” loss of load expectation principles, for the analysis, assessment, and documentation of resource adequacy for load in the RF region.

    5 BAL-502-RFC-02 is included in the OMB-approved inventory for FERC-725H.

    The Commission's request to OMB reflects the following:

    • Implementing the regional Reliability Standard BAL-502-RF-03 and the retirement of regional Reliability Standard BAL-502-RFC-02 6 which is discussed below.

    6 Burden associated with BAL-502-RF-02 Reliability Standard was once contained in FERC-725H information collection (OMB Control No. 1902-0256). FERC-725H was discontinued on 3/6/2014. However, the requirements of BAL-502-RF-02 were still imposed on NERC entities. Those requirements are now being retired with no removal of burden (any associated burden was removed concurrent with the discontinuance).

    On September 7, 2017, NERC and RF filed a joint petition in Docket No. RD17-8-000 7 requesting Commission approval of: (a) Regional Reliability Standard BAL-502-RF-03 (Planning Resource Adequacy Analysis, Assessment and Documentation), and (b) the retirement of regional Reliability Standard BAL-502-RFC-02.6 The petition states: “Proposed regional Reliability Standard BAL-502-RF-03 establishes common criteria, based on “one day in ten year” loss of Load expectation principles, for the analysis, assessment, and documentation of Resource Adequacy for Load in the ReliabilityFirst region.” NERC's and RF's joint filing was noticed on September 8, 2017, with interventions, comments and protests due on or before October 10, 2017. In this document, we provide estimates of the burden and cost related to those revisions to FERC-725HH.

    7 The joint petition and exhibits are posted in the Commission's eLibrary system in Docket No. RD17-8-000.

    Type of Respondents: Planning coordinators.

    Estimate of Annual Burden:8 Details follow on the changes related to Docket No. RD17-8-000.

    8 Burden is defined as the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. For further explanation of what is included in the information collection burden, refer to 5 Code of Federal Regulations 1320.3.

    Estimate of Changes to Burden Due to Docket No. RD17-8: The joint petition requested Commission approval of regional Reliability Standard BAL-502-RF-03 and retirement of regional Reliability Standard BAL-502-RFC-02. The estimated effects on burden and cost 9 are as follows:

    9 For BAL-502-RF-03, the hourly cost (for salary plus benefits) uses the figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics for three positions involved in the reporting and recordkeeping requirements. These figures include salary (http://bls.gov/oes/current/naics2_22.htm) and benefits (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm) and are:

    • Manager (Occupation Code 11-0000): $81.52/hour.

    • Engineer (Occupation Code 17-2071): $68.12/hour.

    • File Clerk (Occupation Code 43-4071): $32.74/hour.

    The hourly cost for the reporting requirements ($60.79) is an average of the cost of a manager, an engineer, and a file clerk.

    10 The number of respondents is derived from the NERC Compliance Registry as of October 2, 2017 for the burden associated with the proposed regional Reliability Standard BAL-502-RF-03.

    FERC-725HH, RF Reliability Standards, Changes in Docket No. RD17-8-000 Entity Number of
  • respondents 10
  • Annual number
  • of responses
  • per respondent
  • Annual number
  • of responses
  • Average burden
  • hours and cost
  • per response
  • ($)
  • Total annual
  • burden hours
  • and total
  • annual cost
  • ($)
  • Cost per
  • respondent
  • ($)
  • (1) (2) (1) * (2) = (3) (4) (3) * (4) = (5) (5) ÷ (1) = (6) Proposed Regional Reliability Standard BAL-502-RF-03 Planning Coordinators 2 1 2 16 hrs.; $973 32 hrs.; $1,945 $973

    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden and cost of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Dated: November 9, 2017. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24802 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-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: ER17-2474-001.

    Applicants: Palmco Power DE, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Modify Tariff Language to be effective 11/13/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/9/17.

    Accession Number: 20171109-5139.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2476-001.

    Applicants: Palmco Power DC, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Modify Tariff Language to be effective 11/13/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/9/17.

    Accession Number: 20171109-5136.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2477-001.

    Applicants: Palmco Power MD, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Modify Tariff Language to be effective 11/13/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/9/17.

    Accession Number: 20171109-5153.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2481-001.

    Applicants: Palmco Power MA, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Modify Tariff Language to be effective 11/13/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/9/17.

    Accession Number: 20171109-5147.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2484-001.

    Applicants: Palmco Power CT, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Modify Tariff Language to be effective 11/13/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/9/17.

    Accession Number: 20171109-5134.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2485-001.

    Applicants: Palmco Power MI, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Modify Tariff Language to be effective 11/13/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/9/17.

    Accession Number: 20171109-5155.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2487-001.

    Applicants: Palmco Power ME, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Modify Tariff Language to be effective 11/13/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/9/17.

    Accession Number: 20171109-5154.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2488-001.

    Applicants: Palmco Power IL, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Modify Tariff Language to be effective 11/13/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/9/17.

    Accession Number: 20171109-5140.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2490-001.

    Applicants: Palmco Power CA, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Modify Tariff Language to be effective 11/13/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/9/17.

    Accession Number: 20171109-5133.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-18-000.

    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.

    Description: Report Filing: Supplement to Unexecuted NITS and NOA with Navopache to be effective N/A.

    Filed Date: 11/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20171108-5065.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-277-000.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: Limited Waiver Request of Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Filed Date: 11/9/17.

    Accession Number: 20171109-5100.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-278-000.

    Applicants: Gila River Power LLC.

    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Complete Cancellation of FERC Electric Tariff to be effective 11/9/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/9/17.

    Accession Number: 20171109-5123.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-279-000.

    Applicants: Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, New York Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Reimbursement Agreement No. 2386 between NMPC and MAIT to be effective 10/11/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/9/17.

    Accession Number: 20171109-5144.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/17.

    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 9, 2017. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24796 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 14856-000] America First Hydro, LLC; Notice of Intent To File License Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document (PAD), Denying Use of the Traditional Licensing Process, Commencement of Licensing Proceeding, Scoping, and Solicitation of Study Requests and Comments on the PAD and Scoping Document

    a. Type of Filing: Notice of Request To Use the Traditional Licensing Process.

    b. Project No.: 14856.

    c. Dated Filed: September 11, 2017.

    d. Submitted By: America First Hydro, LLC (America First Hydro).

    e. Name of Project: Lower Mousam Project.

    f. Location: On the Mousam River in York County, Maine. The project does not occupy federal land.

    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR 5.3 of the Commission's Regulations.

    h. Potential Applicant Contact: Ian Clark, Managing Member, America First Hydro, LLC; 826 Scarsdale Ave, Scarsdale, New York 10583, (914) 297-7645, or email at [email protected]

    i. FERC Contact: Michael Watts at (202) 502-6123, or email at [email protected]

    j. The current license for the Lower Mousam Project was issued to Kennebunk Light and Power District (Kennebunk Light) under Project No. 5362. On March 29, 2017, Kennebunk Light filed a notice stating that it does not intend to file an application for a subsequent license. In response to a solicitation issued by the Commission on May 15, 2017, America First Hydro filed a notice of intent to file an application for a license for the Lower Mousam Project and a Pre-Application Document (PAD), pursuant to 18 CFR 5.5 and 5.6 of the Commission's regulations. The licensing proceeding is commencing under Project No. 14856.

    k. America First Hydro filed a request to use the Traditional Licensing Process (TLP) on September 11, 2017, which the Commission denied on October 31, 2017. America First Hydro must use the Integrated Licensing Process to prepare a license application for the Lower Mousam Project.

    l. Cooperating agencies: Federal, state, local, and tribal agencies with jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to environmental issues that wish to cooperate in the preparation of the environmental document should follow the instructions for filing such requests described in item o below. Cooperating agencies should note the Commission's policy that agencies that cooperate in the preparation of the environmental document cannot also intervene. See 94 FERC ¶ 61,076 (2001).

    m. With this notice, we are initiating informal consultation with: (a) The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and NOAA Fisheries under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and the joint agency regulations thereunder at 50 CFR, part 402; (b) NOAA Fisheries under section 305(b) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and implementing regulations at 50 CFR 600.920; and (c) the Maine State Historic Preservation Officer, as required by section 106, National Historic Preservation Act, and the implementing regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation at 36 CFR 800.2.

    n. A copy of the PAD is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site (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 at [email protected], (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY). A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in paragraph h.

    Register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filing and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    o. With this notice, we are soliciting comments on the PAD and Commission staff's Scoping Document 1 (SD1), as well as study requests. All comments on the PAD and SD1, and study requests should be sent to the address above in paragraph h. In addition, all comments on the PAD and SD1, study requests, requests for cooperating agency status, and all communications to and from Commission staff related to the merits of the potential application must be filed with the Commission.

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file all documents 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] 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-14856-000.

    All filings with the Commission must bear the appropriate heading: “Comments on Pre-Application Document,” “Study Requests,” “Comments on Scoping Document 1,” “Request for Cooperating Agency Status,” or “Communications to and from Commission Staff.” Any individual or entity interested in submitting study requests, commenting on the PAD or SD1, and any agency requesting cooperating status must do so within 60 days of the issuance date of this notice.

    p. At this time, the Commission intends to prepare an environmental assessment (EA).

    Scoping Meetings

    Commission staff will hold two scoping meetings in the vicinity of the project at the time and place noted below. The daytime meeting will focus on resource agency, Indian tribes, and non-governmental organization concerns, while the evening meeting is primarily for receiving input from the public. We invite all interested individuals, organizations, and agencies to attend one or both of the meetings, and to assist staff in identifying particular study needs, as well as the scope of environmental issues to be addressed in the environmental document. The times and locations of these meetings are as follows:

    Daytime Scoping Meeting

    Date: Monday, December 11, 2017.

    Time: 1:00 p.m.

    Location: Kennebunk Town Hall Auditorium, 1 Summer Street, Kennebunk, ME 04043.

    Phone: (207) 985-3311.

    Evening Scoping Meeting

    Date: Monday, December 11, 2017.

    Time: 6:00 p.m.

    Location: Kennebunk Town Hall Auditorium, 1 Summer Street, Kennebunk, ME 04043.

    Phone: (207) 985-3311.

    Scoping Document 1 (SD1), which outlines the subject areas to be addressed in the environmental document, was mailed to the individuals and entities on the Commission's mailing list. Copies of SD1 will be available at the scoping meetings, or may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov, using the “eLibrary” link. Follow the directions for accessing information in item n above. Based on all oral and written comments, a Scoping Document 2 (SD2) may be issued. SD2 may include a revised process plan and schedule, as well as a list of issues, identified through the scoping process.

    Environmental Site Review

    The potential applicant, the existing licensee, and Commission staff will conduct an Environmental Site Review of the project on Tuesday, December 12, 2017, starting at 9:00 a.m. All participants should meet in the parking lot, located next to the Kesslen Dam on Berry Court Road, Kennebunk, ME 04043. All participants are responsible for their own transportation. Anyone with questions about the site visit should contact Mr. Todd Shea of Kennebunk Light and Power District at (207) 985-3311 on or before December 12, 2017.

    Meeting Objectives

    At the scoping meetings, staff will: (1) Initiate scoping of the issues; (2) review and discuss existing conditions and resource management objectives; (3) review and discuss existing information and identify preliminary information and study needs; (4) review and discuss the process plan and schedule for pre-filing activity that incorporates the time frames provided for in Part 5 of the Commission's regulations and, to the extent possible, maximizes coordination of federal, state, and tribal permitting and certification processes; and (5) discuss the appropriateness of any federal or state agency or Indian tribe acting as a cooperating agency for development of an environmental document.

    Meeting participants should come prepared to discuss their issues and/or concerns. Please review the PAD in preparation for the scoping meetings. Directions on how to obtain a copy of the PAD and SD1 are included in item n of this document.

    Meeting Procedures

    The meetings will be recorded by a stenographer and will be placed in the public records of the project.

    Dated: November 8, 2017. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24793 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP18-11-000] East Cheyenne Gas Storage, LLC; Notice of Application

    Take notice that on October 27, 2017, East Cheyenne Gas Storage, LLC (East Cheyenne), 10370 Richmond Avenue, Suite 510, Houston, Texas 77042, filed in the above referenced docket an application pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), and Part 157 of the Commission's regulations requesting authorization to amend its certificate of public convenience and necessity issued by the Commission in Docket No. CP10-34-000, as amended in Docket Nos. CP11-40-000, CP12-35-000, CP12-124-000, CP14-486-000, and CP16-25-000, to: (i) Consolidate the working gas capacity and cushion gas capacity of the West Peetz and Lewis Creek portions of the East Cheyenne Gas Storage Project (Project) into one working gas capacity and one cushion gas capacity, (ii) allow a unified maximum bottom-hole pressure for the Project reservoir, (iii) reallocate the storage gas capacity in the Project by increasing the working gas capacity and decreasing the cushion gas capacity of the Project by 3.6 billion cubic feet (Bcf) each, (iv) reconfigure certain facilities in the Lewis Creek portion of the Project, and (v) expand the buffer zone of the Project. Also, East Cheyenne requests the Commission to issue an order reaffirming its market-based rate authorization in light of the increase in working gas capacity of the Project, all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. The filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site 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 TYY, (202) 502-8659.

    Any questions concerning this application may be directed to James Hoff, Vice President, Reservoir Engineering, East Cheyenne Gas Storage, LLC, 10370 Richmond Avenue, Suite 510, Houston, Texas 77042, at (713) 403-6467.

    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 seven 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 7 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on November 29, 2017.

    Dated: November 8, 2017. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24797 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP18-141-000.

    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Non-Conforming—Virginia Southside II to be effective 12/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/2/17.

    Accession Number: 20171102-5001.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/14/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-142-000.

    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate—Chesapeake to Eco-Energy 8948627 to be effective 11/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/2/17.

    Accession Number: 20171102-5003.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/14/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-143-000.

    Applicants: Equitrans, L.P.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Capacity Release Agreements—11/01/2017 to be effective 11/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/2/17.

    Accession Number: 20171102-5071.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/14/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-144-000.

    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Access South and Adair SW—NRAs and NC Agreements to be effective 11/7/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/2/17.

    Accession Number: 20171102-5105.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/8/17.

    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 3, 2017. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24860 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER18-266-000] 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 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 28, 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 8, 2017. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24792 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. NJ18-1-000] City of Vernon, California; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on October 30, 2017, City of Vernon, California submitted its tariff filing: 2018 Transmission Revenue Requirement and Transmission Revenue Balancing Account Adjustment, to be effective 1/1/2018.

    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 Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding.

    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 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.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on November 20, 2017.

    Dated: November 9, 2017. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24800 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP18-12-000] Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America LLC; Notice of Application

    Take notice that on October 31, 2017, Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America LLC (Natural), 3250 Lacey Road, Downers Grove, Illinois 60515-7918, filed in Docket No. CP18-12-000 an application pursuant to section 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), and Part 157 of the Commission's regulations requesting authority to abandon Natural's Herscher Northwest Storage Field (HNW Storage Field) located in Kankakee County, Illinois. Natural states that its HNW Storage Field is an aquifer type gas storage field that has been under-performing and is no longer needed by Natural to provide storage services for its customers or to operate its system.

    Specifically, Natural proposes to: (i) Plug and permanently abandon 19 injection and withdrawal (I/W) wells (and to retain one I/W well as an observation (OBS) well; (ii) abandon in place 16.15 miles of 4-inch-diameter to 16-inch-diameter field laterals, (iii) abandon by removal Compressor Station 202, a 330 horsepower compressor station, located in the HNW Storage Field; and (iv) abandon in place approximately 15.3 Bcf of non-recoverable cushion gas. Additionally, Natural plans to plug and permanently abandon 13 OBS wells (one would be retained for continued observation purposes) and a salt water disposal well. Natural would also remove all auxiliary surface facilities, all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. The filing may also be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at [email protected] or call toll-free, (866) 208-3676 or TYY, (202) 502-8659.

    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to Bruce H. Newsome, Vice President, Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America LLC, 3250 Lacey Road, Suite 700, Downers Grove, Illinois 60515-7918; by telephone (630) 725-3070; or by email at [email protected]

    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules (18 CFR 157.9), within 90 days of this Notice, the Commission staff will either: Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of the EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's EA.

    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit five copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding.

    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the protest.

    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order.

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and five copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    Comment Date: November 29, 2017.

    Dated: November 8, 2017. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24790 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket Nos. EL18-27-000, QF86-968-015] EF Oxnard LLC, Notice of Request for Waiver

    Take notice that on November 7, 2017, pursuant to section 292.205(c) of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) implementing the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978, as amended 18 CFR 292.205(c) (2017), EF Oxnard LLC (EF Oxnard) submitted a request for limited waiver of the efficiency standard set forth in section 292.205(a)(2) for the topping-cycle cogeneration facility owned and operated by EF Oxnard, as more fully explained in its request.

    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 Applicant.

    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 28, 2017.

    Dated: November 8, 2017. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24791 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP18-145-000.

    Applicants: Texas Gas Transmission, LLC.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Cap Rel Neg Rate Agmt Filing (XTO 29061 to XTO 36615) to be effective 11/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/3/17.

    Accession Number: 20171103-5027.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/15/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-146-000.

    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: 2017 Cleanup Filing—ConEd NJNY Releases to be effective 12/4/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/3/17.

    Accession Number: 20171103-5031.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/15/17.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and § 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: November 6, 2017. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24856 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG18-14-000.

    Applicants: Panda Hummel Station LLC.

    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status of Panda Hummel Station LLC.

    Filed Date: 11/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20171108-5100.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/17.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER17-615-002.

    Applicants: Albany Green Energy, LLC.

    Description: Compliance filing: Tariff Revisions for Exelon MBR Entities to be effective 11/9/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20171108-5013.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2201-002.

    Applicants: Exelon FitzPatrick, LLC.

    Description: Compliance filing: Tariff Revisions of the Exelon MBR Entities to be effective 11/9/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20171108-5012.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2470-001.

    Applicants: Red Dirt Wind Project, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Red Dirt Wind Project, LLC MBR Tariff to be effective 10/15/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20171108-5154.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-261-000.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc., Ameren Illinois Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2017-11-07_SA 3028 Ameren IL-Prairie Power Project#7 Elvaston to be effective 11/8/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/7/17.

    Accession Number: 20171107-5246.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/28/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-262-000.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Reliability Pricing Model Offer Cap Tariff Revision—2018 Base Residual Auction to be effective 1/8/2018.

    Filed Date: 11/7/17.

    Accession Number: 20171107-5247.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/28/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-263-000.

    Applicants: ISO New England Inc.

    Description: ISO New England Inc., et. al. submits Installed Capacity Requirement, Hydro Quebec Interconnection Capability Credits and Related Values for the 2021/2022 Capacity Commitment Period.

    Filed Date: 11/7/17.

    Accession Number: 20171107-5248.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/28/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-264-000.

    Applicants: ISO New England Inc.

    Description: ISO New England Inc. submits Informational filing for Qualification in the Forward Capacity Market.

    Filed Date: 11/7/17.

    Accession Number: 20171107-5259.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-265-000.

    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 1067R8 East Texas Electric Cooperative NITSA and NOA to be effective 11/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20171108-5011.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-266-000.

    Applicants: Southern Partners, INC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Southern Partners, INC MBR Application to be effective 11/8/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20171108-5104.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-267-000.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation of WMPA SA No. 3148; Queue No. X1-021 to be effective 12/26/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20171108-5119.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/17.

    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 8, 2017. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24789 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. EL18-29-000] Citizens Energy Corporation; Notice of Petition for Declaratory Order

    Take notice that on November 9, 2017, pursuant to Rule 207 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice and Procedure,1 section 219 of the Federal Power Act,2 and Order No. 679,3 Citizens Energy Corporation (Citizens or Petitioner) on behalf of itself and its wholly owned subsidiary Citizens Sycamore-Penasquitos Transmission, filed a petition for declaratory order requesting approval of two rate treatments, in connection with a new high voltage transmission project that Citizens is partnering with San Diego Gas & Electric Company to develop and finance, all as more fully explained in the petition.

    1 18 CFR 385.207.

    2 16 U.S.C. 791a-828c, 824s.

    3Promoting Transmission Investment Through Pricing Reform, Order No. 679, 116 FERC ¶ 61,057, order on reh'g, 117 FERC 61,345 (2006), order on reh'g, 119 FERC ¶ 61,062 (2007) (Order No. 679).

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in this proceeding 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) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. 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 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 proceeding are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also 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] call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on December 11, 2017.

    Dated: November 9, 2017. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24799 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 2114-293] Public Utility District No. 2 of Grant County; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:

    a. Application Type: Non-Project Use of Project Lands.

    b. Project No.: 2114-293.

    c. Date Filed: April 7, 2017.

    d. Applicant: Public Utility District No. 2 of Grant County (Grant PUD).

    e. Name of Project: Priest Rapids Hydroelectric Project.

    f. Location: The proposed non-project use is located on the mid-Columbia River in Kittitas County, Washington.

    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.

    h. Applicant Contact: Ross Hendrick, License Compliance Manager, Grant PUD, 30 C St. SW., Ephrata, WA 98823-0878, (509) 793-1468.

    i. FERC Contact: Hillary Berlin, (202) 502-8915, [email protected]

    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and protests: December 9, 2017.

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file comments, motions to intervene, and protests 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-2114-293. Comments emailed to Commission staff are not considered part of the Commission record.

    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person whose name appears 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. Description of Request: The licensee filed a request to authorize a non-project use on the Wanapum Reservoir for the existing Vantage Riverstone Marina to expand from a ten-slip facility to a commercial marina with capacity for 17 watercraft. The location and footprint of the three existing docks will not change.

    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public Reference Room, located at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426, or by calling (202) 502-8371. This filing may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or email [email protected], for TTY, call (202) 502-8659. A copy may also be obtained by contacting the applicant as specified in item (h) above.

    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.

    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214, respectively. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application.

    o. Filing and Service of Documents: Any filing must (1) bear in all capital letters the title COMMENTS, PROTEST, or MOTION TO INTERVENE as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the name of the applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the person commenting, protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their evidentiary basis. Any filing made by an intervenor 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 385.2010.

    Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24801 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2924-011; ER10-2480-010; ER10-2718-027; ER10-2719-026; ER10-2934-010; ER10-2950-010; ER10-2959-011; ER10-2961-011; ER10-3193-011; ER11-2041-012; ER11-2042-012; ER14-2498-006; ER14-2500-006; ER16-2462-005.

    Applicants: Berkshire Power Company, LLC, Cogen Technologies Linden Venture, L.P., East Coast Power Linden Holding, L.L.C., Newark Energy Center, LLC, EIF Newark, LLC, Kleen Energy Systems, LLC, Chambers Cogeneration, Limited Partnership, Logan Generating Company, L.P., Spruance Genco, LLC, Edgecombe Genco, LLC, Brooklyn Navy Yard Cogeneration Partners, Innovative Energy Systems, LLC, Seneca Energy II, LLC, Oregon Clean Energy, LLC.

    Description: Confirmation Letter to the June 29, 2016 MBR Triennial Filings of Kleen Energy Systems, LLC, et al.

    Filed Date: 11/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20171108-5082.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-649-005.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Entergy Services, Inc.

    Description: Report Filing: 2017-11-09_Revised Entergy Refund Report pursuant to Settlement to be effective N/A.

    Filed Date: 11/9/17.

    Accession Number: 20171109-5067.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2457-001.

    Applicants: Rock Creek Wind Project, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Rock Creek Wind Project, LLC MBR Tariff to be effective 9/15/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20171108-5160.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-105-001.

    Applicants: 65HK 8me LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: 65HK 8me LLC Hayworth Shared Facilities Agreement to be effective 10/20/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20171108-5195.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-106-001.

    Applicants: 87RL 8me LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: 87RL 8me LLC Woodmere SFA to be effective 10/20/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20171108-5198.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-107-001.

    Applicants: 65HK 8me LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: 65HK 8me LLC Hayworth Co-Tenancy Agreement to be effective 10/20/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20171108-5196.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-108-001.

    Applicants: 87RL 8me LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: 87RL 8me LLC Woodmere Co-Tenancy Agreement to be effective 10/20/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/8/17.

    Accession Number: 20171108-5197.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-268-000.

    Applicants: Southern Partners, INC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Southern Partners, INC MBR Application to be effective 11/9/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/9/17.

    Accession Number: 20171109-5003.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-269-000.

    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: LGIA SunPower Corporations, Systems—Rosamond South East Project to be effective 11/10/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/9/17.

    Accession Number: 20171109-5004.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-270-000.

    Applicants: Southwestern Electric Power Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: AECC Wedington Delivery Point Agreement to be effective 10/13/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/9/17.

    Accession Number: 20171109-5045.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-271-000.

    Applicants: AEP Texas Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: AEP TX-Mozart Wind Interconnection Agreement First Amend & Restated to be effective 10/12/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/9/17.

    Accession Number: 20171109-5046.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-272-000.

    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 3375 WAPA & Basin Electric Power Interconnection Agr to be effective 10/25/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/9/17.

    Accession Number: 20171109-5064.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-273-000.

    Applicants: Public Service Company of New Mexico.

    Description: Initial rate filing: Executed 38 MW Transmission Service Agreement between PNM and El Cabo Wind, LLC to be effective 10/31/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/9/17.

    Accession Number: 20171109-5069.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-274-000.

    Applicants: Public Service Company of New Mexico.

    Description: Initial rate filing: Executed 170 MW Transmission Service Agreement between PNM and El Cabo Wind, LLC to be effective 10/31/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/9/17.

    Accession Number: 20171109-5070.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-275-000.

    Applicants: Alabama Power Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Tri-State II Solar Project LGIA Filing to be effective 10/30/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/9/17.

    Accession Number: 20171109-5082.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-276-000.

    Applicants: Panda Hummel Station LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: FERC Electric Tariff, Volume No. 1 (market-based rate application) to be effective 1/9/2018.

    Filed Date: 11/9/17.

    Accession Number: 20171109-5094.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/17.

    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 9, 2017. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24795 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION [NOTICE 2017-13] Filing Dates for the Pennsylvania Special Election in the 18th Congressional District AGENCY:

    Federal Election Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice of filing dates for special election.

    SUMMARY:

    Pennsylvania has scheduled a special general election on March 13, 2018, to fill the U.S. House of Representatives seat in the 18th Congressional District vacated by Representative Tim Murphy.

    Committees required to file reports in connection with the Special General Election on March 13, 2018, shall file a 12-day Pre-General Report, and a 30-day Post-General Report.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Elizabeth S. Kurland, Information Division, 999 E Street NW., Washington, DC 20463; Telephone: (202) 694-1100; Toll Free (800) 424-9530.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Principal Campaign Committees

    All principal campaign committees of candidates who participate in the Pennsylvania Special General Election shall file a 12-day Pre-General Report on March 1, 2018; and a Post-General Report on April 12, 2018. (See chart below for the closing date for each report.)

    Note that these reports are in addition to the campaign committee's regular quarterly filings. (See chart below for the closing date for each report).

    Unauthorized Committees (PACs and Party Committees)

    Political committees filing on a quarterly basis in 2018 are subject to special election reporting if they make previously undisclosed contributions or expenditures in connection with the Pennsylvania Special General Election by the close of books for the applicable report(s). (See chart below for the closing date for each report.)

    Committees filing monthly that make contributions or expenditures in connection with the Pennsylvania Special General Election will continue to file according to the monthly reporting schedule.

    Additional disclosure information in connection with the Pennsylvania Special General Election may be found on the FEC Web site at https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/dates-and-deadlines/.

    Disclosure of Lobbyist Bundling Activity

    Principal campaign committees, party committees and Leadership PACs that are otherwise required to file reports in connection with the special elections must simultaneously file FEC Form 3L if they receive two or more bundled contributions from lobbyists/registrants or lobbyist/registrant PACs that aggregate in excess of the lobbyist bundling disclosure threshold during the special election reporting periods (See chart below for closing date of each period.) 11 CFR 104.22(a)(5)(v), (b).

    The lobbyist bundling disclosure threshold for calendar year 2017 is $17,900. This threshold amount may increase in 2018 based upon the annual cost of living adjustment (COLA). Once the adjusted threshold amount becomes available, the Commission will publish it in the Federal Register and post it on its Web site. 11 CFR 110.17(e)(2). For more information on these requirements, see Federal Register Notice 2009-03, 74 FR 7285 (February 17, 2009).

    Calendar of Reporting Dates for Pennsylvania Special General Election Report Close of books 1 Reg./cert. & overnight
  • mailing
  • deadline
  • Filing deadline
    Committees Involved in the Special General (03/13/18) Must File Pre-General 02/21/18 02/26/18 03/01/18 Post-General 04/02/18 04/12/18 04/12/18 April Quarterly —WAIVED— July Quarterly 06/30/18 07/15/18 07/15/18 2 1 The reporting period always begins the day after the closing date of the last report filed. If the committee is new and has not previously filed a report, the first report must cover all activity that occurred before the committee registered as a political committee up through the close of books for the first report due. 2 Notice that this filing deadline falls on a weekend or federal holiday. Filing deadlines are not extended when they fall on nonworking days. Accordingly, reports filed by methods other than registered, certified or overnight mail must be received by close of business on the last business day before the deadline.
    Dated: November 3, 2017.

    On behalf of the Commission,

    Steven T. Walther, Chairman, Federal Election Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24748 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6715-01-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 15, 2017.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (David L. Hubbard, Senior Manager) P.O. Box 442, St. Louis, Missouri 63166-2034. Comments can also be sent electronically to [email protected]:

    1. M&P Community Bancshares, Inc., 401(k) Employee Stock Ownership Plan, Newport, Arkansas; to acquire additional voting shares, for a total of up to 38 percent, of M&P Community Bancshares, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire Merchants & Planters Bank all of Newport, Arkansas.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, November 13, 2017. Michele Taylor Fennell, Assistant Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24835 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding Company

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

    The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than November 29, 2017.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas (Robert L. Triplett III, Senior Vice President) 2200 North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 75201-2272:

    1. Ginne Cook Davis Trust under the Cook 2017 Children's Trust Agreement, Byron C. Cook, Trustee, and the Katie L. Cook Trust under the Cook 2017 Children's Trust Agreement, Byron C. Cook, Trustee, to join the Cook Family Group, to retain voting shares of Community Bank Holdings of Texas, Inc. and thereby indirectly retain shares of Community National Bank & Trust of Texas, all of Corsicana, Texas.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, November 9, 2017. Yao-Chin Chao, Assistant Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24739 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Board of Scientific Counselors, National Center for Health Statistics (BSC, NCHS) AGENCY:

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the CDC, announces the following meeting for BSC, NCHS. This meeting is open to the public; however, visitors must be processed in accordance with established federal policies and procedures. For foreign nationals or non-U.S. citizens, pre-approval is required (please contact Gwen Mustaf, 301-458-4500, [email protected], or Charles Rothwell, [email protected] at least 10 days in advance for requirements). All visitors are required to present a valid form of picture identification issued by a state, federal or international government. As required by the Federal Property Management Regulations, all persons entering in or on Federal controlled property and their packages, briefcases, and other containers in their immediate possession are subject to being x-rayed and inspected. Federal law prohibits the knowing possession or the causing to be present of firearms, explosives and other dangerous weapons and illegal substances. The meeting room accommodates approximately 78 people.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on January 11, 2018, 11:00 a.m.-5:30 p.m., EDT, and January 12, 2018, 8:30 a.m.-1:00 p.m., EDT.

    ADDRESSES:

    NCHS Headquarters, 3311 Toledo Road, Hyattsville, Maryland 20782.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Charles J. Rothwell, Director, NCHS/CDC, 3311 Toledo Road, Room 2627, Hyattsville, Maryland 20782, telephone (301) 458-4500, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Purpose: This committee is charged with providing advice and making recommendations to the Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services; the Director, CDC; and the Director, NCHS, regarding the scientific and technical program goals and objectives, strategies, and priorities of NCHS.

    Matters to be Considered: The agenda includes welcome remarks by NCHS leadership; update of Legislation Relating to the Evidence Based Policy Commission; update on National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys Reports and Activities; update on Division of Health Care Statistics Reports and Activities; update on Vital Statistics activities; and update on International Activities of NCHS.

    Requests to make oral presentations should be submitted in writing to the contact person listed below. All requests must contain the name, address, telephone number, and organizational affiliation of the presenter. Written comments should not exceed five single-spaced typed pages in length and must be received by December 26, 2017. Agenda items are subject to change as priorities dictate.

    The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.

    Elaine L. Baker, Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24871 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-19-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [60Day-17-17BAN; Docket No. CDC-2017-0081] 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 “Strengthening United States Response to Resistant Gonorrhea (SURRG).” The goal of the study is to strengthen the U.S response to resistant gonorrhea by enhancing state and local public health surveillance and program infrastructure, build capacity to support rapid detection and public health response to antibiotic-resistant gonorrhea, and advance the understanding of epidemiological factors contributing to antibiotic-resistant gonorrhea.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be received on or before January 16, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CDC-2017-0081 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

    Strengthening U.S. Response to Resistant Gonorrhea (SURRG)—New—National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention (NCHHSTP), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    Background and Brief Description

    The purposes of Strengthening U.S. Response to Resistant Gonorrhea (SURRG) are to: (1) Improve national capacity to detect, monitor, and respond to emerging antibiotic-resistant gonorrhea; (2) understand trends in and factors contributing to antibiotic-resistant gonorrhea; and (3) build a robust evidence base for public health action. This information collection is important because: (1) Effective treatment of gonorrhea is critical to gonorrhea control and prevention; (2) untreated or inadequately treated gonorrhea can cause serious reproductive health complications, such as infertility; (3) Neisseria gonorrhoeae (the bacterium that causes gonorrhea) has consistently demonstrated the ability to develop resistance to the antibiotics used for treatment and may be developing resistance to the last remaining treatment option recommended by the CDC; and (4) antibiotic-resistant gonorrhea is extremely difficult to detect without enhanced surveillance and public health activities, such as SURRG, because healthcare providers rarely perform or have access to resistance testing for individual patients.

    SURRG will support rapid detection of resistant gonorrhea and get actionable information into the hands of healthcare providers (to support appropriate treatment of individual patients) and local health departments (to support rapid public health response to slow the spread of resistant infections).

    Jurisdictions participating in SURRG applied as part of a competitive process and will participate voluntarily. As an overview of SURRG, healthcare providers at participating clinics (sexually transmitted disease [STD] clinics affiliated with a single public health department or other participating non-STD clinic sites) will collect specimens for N. gonorrhoeae culture testing from men and women seeking care for possible gonorrhea. Specimens that demonstrate N. gonorrhoeae (called “isolates”) will undergo antibiotic resistance testing within several days at the local public health laboratory. Laboratory results demonstrating resistance be rapidly communicated by the laboratory to the healthcare provider and designated health department staff member, who will initiate a field investigation.

    Researchers will interview the patient (from whom the resistant specimen was collected) about risk factors and recent contacts, and will re-test to ensure cure. The health department will interview recent contacts and test them for gonorrhea. The participating health departments will collect and transmit to CDC, demographic and clinical data about persons tested for and diagnosed with gonorrhea in the participating clinics, results of local antibiotic resistance testing, and information about field investigations.

    None of the data transmitted to CDC will contain any personally identifiable information. CDC will use the data to monitor resistance, understand risk factors for resistance, and identify new approaches to prevent the spread of resistance. CDC will receive transmitted data through its Secure Access Management Services (SAMS).

    SAMS is an approved federal information technology system that provides authorized and validated users secure and encrypted access to CDC file transfer applications. The encrypted data will be stored in a secure CDC server with strictly controlled and restricted access rights.

    Researchers will ship isolates each month to one of four Antibiotic Resistance Regional Laboratory Network (ARLN) laboratories for confirmatory antibiotic susceptibility testing and molecular characterization.

    Under the SURRG protocol, the local SURRG data managers from each of the funded jurisdictions will abstract STD clinic data for patients tested for gonorrhea, receive data from non-STD clinic healthcare sites about persons tested for gonorrhea, receive resistance testing laboratory results from local public health laboratories, abstract data about field investigations, and will merge the data. Every two months, the local SURRG data manager will clean the data, remove personally identifiable information, and transmit the data to CDC. We estimate these data processes will take 16 hours every two months. Annually, the local SURRG data manager will send a final cumulative data file. Seven data transmissions/responses will occur.

    Every two months, data managers at each of the participating non-STD clinic health centers will abstract and clean data and securely transmit the data to the local SURRG data manager. We estimate that it will take three hours each time data managers at each non-STD SURRG location abstract, clean, and transmit SURRG data.

    Microbiologists at public health laboratories from each of the nine SURRG funded jurisdictions will conduct antibiotic resistance testing on all N. gonorrhoeae isolates from all STD clinic sites and non-STD clinic sites participating in SURRG. Each test takes approximately 10 minutes of staff time, and testing of control strains will also be conducted approximately twice per week at each laboratory. On average, each jurisdiction will conduct approximately 600 resistance tests per year for patient care, plus 100 control strains per year for quality assurance. Thus, each grantee will perform approximately 700 tests per year. Every two months, a laboratory data manager will abstract test results and securely send the data file to the local SURRG data manager. We estimate that laboratory data managers will spend approximately one hour each time they abstract, clean, and transmit project data.

    Health department staff will interview any person diagnosed with antibiotic-resistant gonorrhea or have a case of gonorrhea of public health significance index case, a diagnosed person's social and sexual contacts, and the sexual contacts of the index case's sexual contacts.

    On average, each jurisdiction will identify four drug-resistant isolates each month. These isolates will spur field investigations, which will result in six additional interviews each month. We estimate 120 interviews will occur annually at each site (annual 1,080 interviews for the 9 sites). Each interview will take 30 minutes.

    The total estimated annual burden hours are 2,976. Respondents receive federal funds to participate in this project. There are no additional costs to respondents other than their time.

    Estimate of Annualized Burden Hours Type of
  • respondent
  • Form name Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (hours)
  • Total burden
  • hours
  • Local SURRG data manager Facility, Laboratory and field Elements 9 7 16 1,008 Data manager at non-STD clinic health centers Non-STD clinic Elements 18 6 3 324 Public Health Laboratory Microbiologist Laboratory Testing 9 700 10/60 1,050 Public Health Laboratory Data Manager Laboratory Elements 9 6 1 54 Gonorrhea Patients, Social and Sexual Contacts Field Investigation Elements 1,080 1 30/60 540 Total 2,976
    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. 2017-24804 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services [Document Identifier: CMS-10237] Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is announcing an opportunity for the public to comment on CMS' intention to collect information from the public. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), federal agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information, and to allow a second opportunity for public comment on the notice. Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including the necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions, the accuracy of the estimated burden, ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden.

    DATES:

    Comments on the collection(s) of information must be received by the OMB desk officer by December 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    When commenting on the proposed information collections, please reference the document identifier or OMB control number. To be assured consideration, comments and recommendations must be received by the OMB desk officer via one of the following transmissions: OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention: CMS Desk Officer, Fax Number: (202) 395-5806 OR, Email: [email protected]

    To obtain copies of a supporting statement and any related forms for the proposed collection(s) summarized in this notice, you may make your request using one of following:

    1. Access CMS' Web site address at Web site address at https://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-Guidance/Legislation/PaperworkReductionActof1995/PRA-Listing.html.

    2. Email your request, including your address, phone number, OMB number, and CMS document identifier, to [email protected]

    3. Call the Reports Clearance Office at (410) 786-1326.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    William Parham at (410) 786-4669.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. The term “collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires federal agencies to publish a 30-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, CMS is publishing this notice that summarizes the following proposed collection(s) of information for public comment:

    1. Type of Information Collection Request: Revision of a currently approved collection; Title of Information Collection: Applications for Part C Medicare Advantage, 1876 Cost Plans, and Employer Group Waiver Plans to Provide Part C Benefits; Use: This information collection includes the process for organizations wishing to provide healthcare services under MA and/or MA-PD plans must complete an application annually, file a bid, and receive final approval from CMS. The application process has two options for applicants that include: Request for new MA product or request for expanding the service area of an existing product. This collection process is the only mechanism for MA and/or MA-PD organizations to complete the required application process. CMS utilizes the application process as the means to review, assess and determine if applicants are compliant with the current requirements for participation in the Medicare Advantage program and to make a decision related to contract award. Form Number: CMS-10237 (OMB control number: 0938-0935); Frequency: Yearly; Affected Public: Private sector (Business or other For-profits and Not-for-profit institutions); Number of Respondents: 380; Total Annual Responses: 380; Total Annual Hours: 6,246. (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Stacy Davis at 410-786-7813.)

    Dated: November 13, 2017. William N. Parham, III, Director, Paperwork Reduction Staff, Office of Strategic Operations and Regulatory Affairs.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24816 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4120-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services [Document Identifiers: CMS-10401] Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is announcing an opportunity for the public to comment on CMS' intention to collect information from the public. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), federal agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information, and to allow a second opportunity for public comment on the notice. Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including the necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions, the accuracy of the estimated burden, ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden.

    DATES:

    Comments on the collection(s) of information must be received by the OMB desk officer by December 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    When commenting on the proposed information collections, please reference the document identifier or OMB control number. To be assured consideration, comments and recommendations must be received by the OMB desk officer via one of the following transmissions: OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention: CMS Desk Officer, Fax Number: (202) 395-5806 OR Email: OIRA_omb.eop.gov.

    To obtain copies of a supporting statement and any related forms for the proposed collection(s) summarized in this notice, you may make your request using one of following:

    1. Access CMS' Web site address at Web site address at https://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-Guidance/Legislation/PaperworkReductionActof1995/PRA-Listing.html.

    2. Email your request, including your address, phone number, OMB number, and CMS document identifier, to [email protected]

    3. Call the Reports Clearance Office at (410) 786-1326.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    William Parham at (410) 786-4669.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. The term “collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires federal agencies to publish a 30-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, CMS is publishing this notice that summarizes the following proposed collection(s) of information for public comment:

    1. Type of Information Collection Request: Extension of a currently approved collection; Title of Information Collection: Standards Related to Reinsurance, Risk Corridors, and Risk Adjustment; Use: Extension of data collection required to run Reinsurance, Risk Corridors, and Risk Adjustment programs pending complete revision in near future to update and remove obsolete programs.; Form Number: CMS-10401 (OMB control number: 0938-1155); Frequency: Annually; Affected Public: Health Insurance Issuers; Number of Respondents: 2,400; Total Annual Responses: 15,600,081,744; Total Annual Hours: 19,281,600. (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Ernest Ayukawa at 301-492-5213.)

    Dated: November 13, 2017. William N. Parham, III, Director, Paperwork Reduction Staff, Office of Strategic Operations and Regulatory Affairs.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24883 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4120-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families Proposed Information Collection Activity; Comment Request

    Proposed Projects: None.

    Title: Interstate Administrative Subpoena and Notice of Interstate Lien.

    OMB No.: 0970-0152.

    Description: Section 452(a)(11) of the Social Security Act requires the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services to promulgate a form for administrative subpoenas and imposition of liens used by State child support enforcement (Title IV-D) agencies. The Interstate Administrative Subpoena is used to collect information for the establishment, modification and enforcement of child support orders in interstate cases. Section 454(9)(E) of the Social Security Act requires each State to cooperate with any other State in using the federal form for issuance of administrative subpoenas and imposition of liens in interstate child support cases. Tribal IV-D agencies are not required to use this form but may choose to do so.

    Respondents: State, local or Tribal agencies administering a child support enforcement program under title IV-D of the Social Security Act.

    Annual Burden Estimates Instrument Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden hours
  • per response
  • Total burden
  • hours
  • Administrative Subpoena 31,344 1 0.50 15,038 Notice of Lien 1,916,891 1 0.50 946,037

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 961,709.

    In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, 44 U.S.C. Chap 35), the Administration for Children and Families is soliciting public comment on the specific aspects of the information collection described above. Copies of the proposed collection of information can be obtained and comments may be forwarded by writing to the Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, 330 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20201. Attn: ACF Reports Clearance Officer. Email address: [email protected] All requests should be identified by the title of the information collection.

    The Department specifically requests comments on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted within 60 days of this publication.

    Robert Sargis, Reports Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24830 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2017-D-6209] Assessing User Fees Under the Biosimilar User Fee Amendments of 2017; Draft Guidance for Industry; Availability AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled “Assessing User Fees Under the Biosimilar User Fee Amendments of 2017.” This draft guidance concerns FDA's implementation of the Biosimilar User Fee Amendments of 2017 (BsUFA II) and certain intended changes in policies and procedures surrounding its application.

    DATES:

    Submit either electronic or written comments on the draft guidance by January 16, 2018 to ensure that the Agency considers your comment on this draft guidance before it begins work on the final version of the guidance.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time as follows:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social Security number, or confidential business information, such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.

    • If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

    Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    • For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. FDA-2017-D-6209 for “Assessing User Fees Under the Biosimilar User Fee Amendments of 2017.” Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    • Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of your comments and you must identify this information as “confidential.” Any information marked as “confidential” will not be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access the information at: https://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR 10.115(g)(5)).

    Submit written requests for single copies of the draft guidance to the Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10001 New Hampshire Ave., Hillandale Building, 4th Floor, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002; or to the Office of Communication, Outreach, and Development, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 3128, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing your requests. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic access to the draft guidance document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Beena Alex, Division of User Fee Management and Budget Formulation, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10001 New Hampshire Ave., Rm. 2185, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-7900, [email protected]; or to Stephen Ripley, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-402-7911.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled “Assessing User Fees Under the Biosimilar User Fee Amendments of 2017.” This draft guidance concerns the implementation of BsUFA II, including an explanation about the new fee structure and types of fees for which entities are responsible. BsUFA II extends FDA's authority to collect user fees from fiscal year 2018 to 2022 and introduces a number of technical revisions that affect what fees are collected and how fees are collected. Fees authorized by this legislation help fund the process for the review of biosimilar biological product applications and have played an important role in expediting the review and approval process.

    BsUFA II authorizes biosimilar biological product development program fees (BPD fees), biosimilar biological product application fees, and biosimilar biological product program fees. This draft guidance describes when these fees are incurred and the process by which applicants can submit payments. The draft guidance also provides information on consequences of failing to pay BsUFA II fees and the processes for submitting reconsideration and appeal requests.

    This draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when finalized, will represent the current thinking of FDA on assessing user fees under BsUFA II. 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

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection of information set forth in this document.

    With respect to the collection of information associated with this document, FDA invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

    Assessing User Fees Under the Biosimilar User Fee Amendments of 2017: Draft Guidance for Industry OMB Control Number 0910—NEW

    This information collection supports “Assessing User Fees Under the Biosimilar User Fee Amendments of 2017: Draft Guidance for Industry.” The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act as amended by the Biosimilar User Fee Act of 2012 and recently renewed in 2017 (BsUFA II) under the FDA Reauthorization Act of 2017, authorizes FDA to assess and collect user fees from companies that produce biosimilar biological products in conjunction with the review of biosimilar biological product applications. The draft guidance includes processing and policies for the initial and the annual BPD fees; the BPD discontinuation process requirements and BPD reactivation fees; process and policies for biosimilar biological product application fees including exceptions to the application fees and refund of fees; process and policies for the small business waiver of the biosimilar application fee; and implementation of the biosimilar biological product program fee.

    The burdens associated with requesting a small business waiver of BsUFA fees and the associated burdens for new activities as noted in the draft guidance are listed in table 1.

    FDA estimates the annual burden of these new collections of information as follows:

    Table 1—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden 1 Activity Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Total
  • annual
  • responses
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (hours)
  • Total
  • hours
  • Request for discontinuation from BPD program 2 1 2 1 2 Request to move products to discontinued section of the biosimilar list 5 1 5 .5 2.5 Small business waiver of the BsUFA application fee 1 1 1 16 16 —Reconsiderations 1 1 1 24 24 —Appeals 1 1 1 12 12 Annual Fee Determination Survey 35 1 35 1 35 Annual BsUFA Fees Correspondence 35 1 35 2 70 Total 161.5 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

    This draft guidance also refers to previously approved collections of information found in FDA forms developed to support its user fee program. Specifically, the draft guidance refers to Form FDA 3792, Form FDA 3913, and Form FDA 3971, which have been approved under OMB control numbers 0910-0718, 0910-0805, and 0910-0693, respectively. The draft guidance also refers to previously approved collections of information found in FDA regulations. The collections of information in 21 CFR part 312 are currently approved under OMB control number 0910-0014; the collections of information regarding new drug applications and biologics license applications are approved under OMB control numbers 0910-0001 and 0910-0338, respectively.

    III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the Internet may obtain the draft guidance at either https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm, https://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm, or https://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: November 13, 2017. Anna K. Abram, Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Planning, Legislation, and Analysis.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24831 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-1981-N-0245 (Formerly 81N-0080)] Mepergan Fortis Capsules; Final Decision on Proposal To Refuse Approval of Supplemental New Drug Application; Availability of Final Decision AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration; HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) is announcing that the Initial Decision of the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), to refuse approval of the supplemental new drug application (sNDA) for Mepergan Fortis Capsules (MFC) (meperidine HCl, promethazine HCl), is the final decision of the Commissioner by operation of law. In the Initial Decision, the ALJ found that MFC had not been shown to be supported by substantial evidence consisting of adequate and well-controlled studies to be effective for sedation and analgesia in patients with concurrent moderate pain and apprehension, such as postoperative and post-trauma patients with those symptoms; that the drug did not satisfy the combination drug policy; and that it is a “new drug.” The sNDA applicant filed exceptions to the ALJ's Initial Decision. FDA recently requested that the current owner of the sNDA application affirm its desire to pursue the appeal of the ALJ's Initial Decision; however, the applicant did not affirm its desire to pursue the appeal within the specified timeframe. Accordingly, FDA now deems those exceptions as withdrawn. Consequently, the proceeding is in the same procedural position as if no exceptions to the ALJ's Initial Decision had been filed; therefore, the ALJ's Initial Decision has become the final decision of the Commissioner by operation of law.

    DATES:

    This final decision is effective November 16, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    For access to the docket, 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 between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. Publicly available submissions may be seen in the docket.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rachael Vieder Linowes, Office of Scientific Integrity, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 1, Rm. 4206, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 240-402-5931.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    In 1962, the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) was amended by the Drug Amendments Act of 1962, and these amendments provided that new drugs could no longer be approved unless both safety and efficacy had been established for them. As amended, the FD&C Act also required FDA to evaluate drugs approved as safe between 1938 and 1962 to determine whether such drugs were effective and to withdraw approval for any new drug application (NDA) where there was not substantial evidence of the drug's effectiveness. The person contesting the withdrawal of the approval had the burden of coming forward with evidence of effectiveness for the drug. FDA's review of these pre-1962 drugs is known as the Drug Efficacy Study Implementation (DESI) program.

    In a document published in the Federal Register of April 20, 1972 (37 FR 7827), after evaluating reports received from the National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council, Drug Efficacy Study Group, and other available evidence, FDA classified MFC as “possibly effective” for moderate to moderately severe pain. This document also stated that no NDA had been approved or deemed approved for MFC and that additional evidence needed to be submitted to FDA to establish MFC's effectiveness. Thereafter, Wyeth, a division of American Home Products (Wyeth), submitted a supplement to its approved NDA 11-730 (Mepergan Injection) for MFC (NDA 11-730, S-003). In a document published in the Federal Register of September 18, 1981 (46 FR 46404), the Director of the Bureau of Drugs (now the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research) proposed to refuse approval of the sNDA and offered Wyeth the opportunity for a hearing.

    Wyeth submitted its request for a hearing and, by a document published in the Federal Register of December 31, 1984 (49 FR 50788), the Office of the Commissioner granted the hearing request. Following the submission of written testimony and documentary evidence, an ALJ, Daniel J. Davidson, conducted a hearing from January 14 to 17, 1986. He issued his Initial Decision on December 4, 1987. The ALJ found that: (1) The effectiveness of MFC had not been proven by substantial evidence of adequate and well-controlled clinical trials, (2) the requirements of the combination drug policy had not been met, and (3) MFC is a new drug under 21 U.S.C. 321(p). Wyeth timely appealed the ALJ's Initial Decision by filing exceptions with the Commissioner under 21 CFR 12.125.

    On August 23, 2017, FDA sent a letter to West-Ward Pharmaceuticals Corporation (West-Ward), successor to Wyeth, to determine whether West-Ward remained interested in pursuing its appeal of the ALJ's Initial Decision. FDA informed the company that if it did not respond and affirm its desire to pursue its appeal by September 21, 2017, the Office of the Commissioner would conclude that West-Ward no longer wishes to pursue the appeal of the ALJ's Initial Decision and will proceed as if the appeal has been withdrawn. The Office of the Commissioner did not receive a response from West-Ward by the given date; therefore, the Commissioner now deems the exceptions withdrawn.

    II. Conclusion and Order

    Given that the exceptions have been deemed withdrawn, this proceeding is now in the same procedural posture as if no exceptions had ever been filed. When parties do not file exceptions to the ALJ's Initial Decision, and the Commissioner does not file a notice of review, the ALJ's Initial Decision becomes the final decision of the Commissioner (see 21 CFR 12.120(e)). FDA will publish a notice in the Federal Register when an initial decision becomes the final decision of the Commissioner without appeal to or review by the Commissioner (see 21 CFR 12.120(f)).

    Therefore, the ALJ's Initial Decision is the final decision of the Commissioner effective November 16, 2017. Pursuant to the findings in the ALJ's Initial Decision, under section 505(d) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 355(d)) and under the authority delegated by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, the Commissioner finds that there is a lack of substantial evidence that MFC will have the effect it purports or is represented to have under the conditions of use prescribed, recommended, or suggested in its labeling for sedation and analgesia in patients with concurrent moderate pain and apprehension, such as postoperative and post-trauma patients with those symptoms. The Commissioner further finds that MFC does not meet the combination drug policy in 21 CFR 300.50 and that it is a “new drug” within the meaning of 21 U.S.C. 321(p). Therefore, approval of the sNDA for MFC is denied. Distribution of products subject to the ALJ's Initial Decision in interstate commerce without an approved application is prohibited and subject to regulatory action (see, e.g., sections 505(a) and 301(d) (21 U.S.C. 331(d)) of the FD&C Act).

    The full text of the ALJ's Initial Decision may be seen in the Dockets Management Staff and in this docket (see ADDRESSES).

    Dated: November 7, 2017. Denise Hinton, Acting Chief Scientist.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24806 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2017-N-6292] Bone, Reproductive and Urologic Drugs Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting; Establishment of a Public Docket; Request for Comments AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice; establishment of a public docket; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) announces a forthcoming public advisory committee meeting of the Bone, Reproductive and Urologic Drugs Advisory Committee. The general function of the committee is to provide advice and recommendations to the Agency on FDA's regulatory issues. The meeting will be open to the public. FDA is establishing a docket for public comment on this document.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on January 10, 2018, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    College Park Marriott Hotel and Conference Center, Chesapeake Ballroom, 3501 University Blvd. East, Hyattsville, MD 20783. The conference center's telephone number is 301-985-7300. Answers to commonly asked questions about FDA Advisory Committee meetings may be accessed at: https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm408555.htm.

    FDA is establishing a docket for public comment on this meeting. The docket number is FDA-2017-N-6292. The docket will close on January 9, 2018. Submit either electronic or written comments on this public meeting by January 9, 2018. Please note that late, untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments must be submitted on or before January 9, 2018. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until midnight Eastern Time at the end of January 9, 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.

    Comments received on or before December 22, 2017, will be provided to the committee. Comments received after that date will be taken into consideration by the Agency.

    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-N-6292 for “Bone, Reproductive and Urologic Drugs Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting; Establishment of a Public Docket; Request for Comments.” Received comments, those filed in a timely manner (see ADDRESSES), will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    • Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of your comments and you must identify this information as “confidential.” Any information marked as “confidential” will not be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access the information at: https://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kalyani Bhatt, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31, Rm. 2417, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-9001, Fax: 301-847-8533, email: [email protected], or FDA Advisory Committee Information Line, 1-800-741-8138 (301-443-0572 in the Washington, DC area). A notice in the Federal Register about last minute modifications that impact a previously announced advisory committee meeting cannot always be published quickly enough to provide timely notice. Therefore, you should always check the Agency 02BC;s Web site at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm and scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting link, or call the advisory committee information line to learn about possible modifications before coming to the meeting.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Agenda: The committee will discuss new drug application (NDA) 208088, oral testosterone undecanoate capsules, submitted by Lipocine Inc. for the proposed indication of testosterone replacement in males for conditions associated with a deficiency or absence of endogenous testosterone: primary hypogonadism (congenital or acquired) and hypogonadotropic hypogonadism (congenital or acquired).

    FDA intends to make background material available to the public no later than 2 business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post the background material on its Web site prior to the meeting, the background material will be made publicly available at the location of the advisory committee meeting, and the background material will be posted on FDA 02BC;s Web site after the meeting. Background material is available at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/default.htm. Scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting link.

    Procedure: Interested persons may present data, information, or views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee. All electronic and written submissions submitted to the Docket (see the ADDRESSES section) on or before December 22, 2017, will be provided to the committee. Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled between approximately 1 p.m. and 2 p.m. Those individuals interested in making formal oral presentations should notify the contact person and submit a brief statement of the general nature of the evidence or arguments they wish to present, the names and addresses of proposed participants, and an indication of the approximate time requested to make their presentation on or before December 14, 2017. Time allotted for each presentation may be limited. If the number of registrants requesting to speak is greater than can be reasonably accommodated during the scheduled open public hearing session, FDA may conduct a lottery to determine the speakers for the scheduled open public hearing session. The contact person will notify interested persons regarding their request to speak by December 15, 2017.

    Persons attending FDA's advisory committee meetings are advised that the Agency is not responsible for providing access to electrical outlets.

    FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with disabilities. If you require special accommodations due to a disability, please contact Kalyani Bhatt at least 7 days in advance of the meeting.

    FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory committee meetings. Please visit our Web site at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm111462.htm for procedures on public conduct during advisory committee meetings.

    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2).

    Dated: November 13, 2017. Anna K. Abram, Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Planning, Legislation, and Analysis.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24832 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Government-Owned Inventions; Availability for Licensing AGENCY:

    National Institutes of Health, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The inventions listed below are owned by an agency of the U.S. Government and are available for licensing in the U.S.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Licensing information and copies of the patent applications listed below may be obtained by emailing the indicated licensing contact at the National Heart, Lung, and Blood, Office of Technology Transfer and Development Office of Technology Transfer, 31 Center Drive Room 4A29, MSC2479, Bethesda, MD 20892-2479; telephone: 301-402-5579. A signed Confidential Disclosure Agreement may be required to receive copies of the patent applications.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice is in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR part 404 to achieve commercialization of results of federally-funded research and development. Foreign patent applications are filed on selected inventions to extend market coverage for companies and may also be available for licensing. A description of the technology follows.

    Chimeric Antibodies Against Hepatitis B e-Antigen

    Description of Technology: The invention relates to recombinant chimeric rabbit/human monoclonal antibody fragments (Fabs) against hepatitis B Virus e-antigen (HBeAg). Viral hepatitis is the seventh leading cause of death worldwide. Hepatitis B core antigen (HBcAg) forms an icosahedral structure containing the viral genome. Both the HBcAg and the HBeAg of interest here are expressed by two different start codons of the viral C gene. Unlike the related HBcAg which activates type 1 T helper (Th1) cells leading to immune attack, the HBeAg activates Th2 cells which promote immune tolerance. The long-term persistence of HBeAg is associated with the development of hepatocellular carcinoma. Conversely, HBeAg seroconversion (from HBeAg carrier to anti-HBeAg carrier) is a marker for successful therapy of chronically infected patients. The presently phage display engineered antibody has potential for anti-hepatitis B virus therapeutic interventions.

    Potential Commercial Applications:

    • Hepatitis B therapy.

    • Hepatocellular carcinoma prophylaxis.

    Development Stage:

    • In vitro data available.

    Inventors: Paul Winfield, Norman Watts, Alasdair Steven (all of NIAMS).

    Intellectual Property: HHS Reference No. E-192-2017/0-US-01.

    • U.S. Provisional Patent Application 62/534,603 filed July 19, 2017.

    Licensing Contact: Michael Shmilovich, Esq, CLP; 301-435-5019; [email protected].

    Collaborative Research Opportunity: The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences seeks statements of capability or nterest from parties interested in collaborative research to further develop and evaluate, please contact Cecilia Pazman, Ph.D., Technology Development Specialist, Office of Technology Transfer, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Phone: (301) 594-4273; [email protected] .

    Dated: November 6, 2017. Michael Shmilovich, Senior Licensing and Patenting Manager, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Office of Technology Transfer and Development.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24773 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Allergy and Infectious 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 Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel, Dysregulation of Immune Cell Regulatory Pathways by MTB in the Context of HIV Infection (R61/R33).

    Date: December 11-12, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: J. Bruce Sundstrom, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, Room 3G11A, National Institutes of Health/NIAID, 5601 Fishers Lane, MSC 9823, Bethesda, MD 20892-9823, 240-669-5045, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel, Global Infectious Disease Research Administration Development Award For Low-And Middle-Income Country Institutions (G11).

    Date: December 13, 2017.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Dharmendar Rathore, Ph.D., Senior Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, Room 3G30, National Institutes of Health/NIAID, 5601 Fishers Lane, MSC 9823, Bethesda, MD 20892-9823, 240-669-5058, [email protected].

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: November 9, 2017. Natasha M. Copeland, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24762 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Submission for OMB Review; 30-Day Comment Request; NCI Cancer Genetics Services Directory Web-Based Application and Update Mailer (National Cancer Institute) AGENCY:

    National Institutes of Health, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request for review and approval of the information collection listed below.

    DATES:

    Comments regarding this information collection are best assured of having their full effect if received within 30-days of the date of this publication.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the item(s) contained in this notice, especially regarding the estimated public burden and associated response time, should be directed to the: Office of Management and Budget, Office of Regulatory Affairs, [email protected] or by fax to 202-395-6974, Attention: Desk Officer for NIH.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request more information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the data collection plans and instruments, contact: Margaret Beckwith, Office of Cancer Content, Office of Communications and Public Liaison (OCPL), 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD 20892 or call non-toll-free number 240-276-6600 or email your request, including your address to: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register on September 5, 2017 page 41971 (82 FR 41971) and allowed 60 days for public comment. No public comments were received. The purpose of this notice is to allow an additional 30 days for public comment. The National Cancer Institute (NCI), National Institutes of Health, may not conduct or sponsor, and the respondent is not required to respond to, an information collection that has been extended, revised, or implemented on or after October 1, 1995, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    In compliance with Section 3507(a)(1)(D) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request for review and approval of the information collection listed below.

    Proposed Collection: NCI Cancer Genetics Services Directory Web-Based Application and Update Mailer, 0925-0639, Exp., date 10/31/2017, Reinstatement without change, National Cancer Institute (NCI), National Institutes of Health (NIH).

    Need and Use of Information Collection: The Office of Communications and Public Liaison has created the NCI Cancer Genetics Services Directory on NCI's Web site Cancer.gov. This directory is a searchable collection of information about professionals who provide services related to cancer genetics. These services include cancer risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic susceptibility testing. The professionals have applied to be in the directory using an online application form and have met basic criteria outlined on the form.

    There are currently 552 genetics professionals listed in the directory. Approximately 30-60 new professionals are added to the directory each year. The applicants are nurses, physicians, genetic counselors, and other professionals who provide services related to cancer genetics. The information collected on the application form includes name, professional qualifications, practice locations, and the area of specialization. The information is updated annually using a Web-based update mailer that mirrors the application form.

    The NCI Cancer Genetics Services Directory is a unique resource for cancer patients and their families who are looking for information about their family risk of cancer and genetic counseling. Collecting applicant information and verifying it annually by using the NCI Cancer Genetics Services Directory Web-based Application Form and Update Mailer is important for providing this information to the public and for keeping it current.

    OMB approval is requested for 3 years. There are no costs to respondents other than their time. The total estimated annualized burden hours are 180.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Form name Type of
  • respondent
  • Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden
  • per response
  • (in hours)
  • Total annual
  • burden hours
  • Web-based Application Form Genetics Professional 60 1 30/60 30 Web-based Update Mailer Genetics Professional 600 1 15/60 150 Totals 660 660 180
    Dated: November 7, 2017. Karla Bailey, Project Clearance Liaison, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24786 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Submission for OMB Review; 30-Day Comment Request; Generic Clearance To Support the Safe To Sleep® Campaign (Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development); Correction AGENCY:

    National Institutes of Health, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice; correction.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health published a Notice in the Federal Register on November 9, 2017. That Notice inadvertently contained an error in the Supplementary Information section.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. Jennifer Guimond, Project Clearance Liaison, Office of Science Policy, Reporting, and Program Analysis, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, 31 Center Drive, Room 2A18, Bethesda, Maryland 20892 or call non-toll-free number (301) 496-1877 or Email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On November 9, 2017, the Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health published a Notice in the Federal Register on page 52062 (82 FR 52062) that inadvertently did not contain the expiration date within the Supplementary Information section regarding Proposed Collection:. The purpose of this notice is to insert the expiration date and should read; Proposed Collection: Generic Clearance to Support the Safe to Sleep® Campaign 0925-0701, Expiration Date 07/31/2017, REINSTATEMENT WITH CHANGE at the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute for Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), National Institutes of Health (NIH).

    Dated: November 9, 2017. Jennifer Guimond, Project Clearance Liaison, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24776 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Submission for OMB Review; 30-Day Comment Request; Generic Clearance for the Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery (Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development); Correction AGENCY:

    National Institutes of Health, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice; correction.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health published a Notice in the Federal Register on November 9, 2017. That Notice inadvertently contained an error in the Supplementary Information section.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. Jennifer Guimond, Project Clearance Liaison, Office of Science Policy, Reporting, and Program Analysis, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, 31 Center Drive, Room 2A18, Bethesda, Maryland 20892 or call non-toll-free number (301) 496-1877 or Email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On November 9, 2017, the Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health published a Notice in the Federal Register on page 52067 (82 FR 52067) that inadvertently contained an error in the date of expiration. The purpose of this notice is to correct the expiration date to read: 10/31/2017.

    Dated: November 9, 2017. Jennifer Guimond, Project Clearance Liaison, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24775 Filed 11-15-17; 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; PAR 16-433: Support of NIGMS Program Project Grants.

    Date: November 29, 2017.

    Time: 1:00 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: Eduardo A. Montalvo, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5108, MSC 7852, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-1168, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Conflict: AIDS and Related Research.

    Date: December 1, 2017.

    Time: 3:00 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Robert Freund, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5216, MSC 7852, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1050, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR Panel: AIDS and AIDS-Related Research.

    Date: December 7, 2017.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Robert Freund, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5216, MSC 7852, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1050, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Conflict: Developmental Abnormalities of the Nervous System.

    Date: December 8, 2017.

    Time: 2:00 p.m. to 6:00 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: Suzan Nadi, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5217B, MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1259, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR17-031: Role of Age-Associated Metabolic Changes in Alzheimer's Disease.

    Date: December 13, 2017.

    Time: 1:00 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 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Alessandra C Rovescalli, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, National Institutes of Health, Center for Scientific Review, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Rm. 5205, MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-1021, [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 9, 2017. Melanie J. Pantoja, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24759 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; 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 Division of Intramural Research Board of Scientific Counselors, NIAID. The meeting will be closed to the public as indicated below in accordance with the provisions set forth in section 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended for the review, discussion, and evaluation of individual intramural programs and projects conducted by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, including consideration of personnel qualifications and performance, and the competence of individual investigators, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Division of Intramural Research Board of Scientific Counselors, NIAID.

    Date: December 11-13, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate personal qualifications and performance, and competence of individual investigators.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Building 50, 1227/1233, 50 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Steven M. Holland, MD, Ph.D., Chief, Laboratory of Clinical Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health/NIAID, Hatfield Clinical Research Center, Bethesda, MD 20892-1684, 301-402-7684, [email protected].

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: November 9, 2017. Natasha M. Copeland, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24761 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Prospective Grant of Exclusive Patent Commercialization License: Direct Reading Detection Kits for Surface Contamination by Antineoplastic Drugs AGENCY:

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institutes of Health.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, an institute of the National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, on behalf of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Department of Health and Human Services, is contemplating the grant of an exclusive patent commercialization license to Becton, Dickinson and Company, located in Franklin Lakes, New Jersey, to practice the inventions embodied in the patent applications listed in the Supplementary Information section of this notice.

    DATES:

    Only written comments and/or applications for a license which are received by the Technology Transfer and Intellectual Property Office, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases on or before December 1, 2017 will be considered.

    ADDRESSES:

    Requests for copies of the patent applications, inquiries, and comments relating to the contemplated exclusive patent commercialization license should be directed to: Karen Surabian, Licensing and Patenting Manager, Technology Transfer and Intellectual Property Office, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 5601 Fishers Lane, Suite 2G, MSC9804, Rockville, MD 20852-9804, phone number 301-594-9719, or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The following represents the intellectual property to be licensed under the prospective agreement: HHS Reference No. E-162-2013/0-US-01, United States Provisional Patent Application Serial Number 61/672,059, filed 07/16/2012; HHS Reference No. E-162-2013/0-PCT-02, PCT Patent Application Serial Number PCT/US2013/050688, filed 07/16/2013; HHS Reference No. E-162-2013/0-US-03, United States Patent Application Serial Number 13/943,430, filed 07/16/2013; HHS Reference No. E-162-2013/0-EP-04, European Patent Application Serial Number 13819718.1, filed 02/05/2015; and HHS Reference No. E-162-2013/0-JP-05, Japanese Patent Application Serial Number 2015-523183, filed 01/08/2015. All rights in these inventions have been assigned to the Government of the United States of America.

    The prospective exclusive patent commercialization license territory may be worldwide and the field of use may be limited to: “Use of the licensed patent rights for the development, manufacture, and sale of a lateral flow device for detection of antineoplastic drugs from surfaces”.

    Many types of cancers are treated with antineoplastic drugs, also known as anti-cancer drugs or chemotherapy. Exposure of healthcare workers to these hazardous drugs from contaminated surfaces may cause acute and long-term effects. Approximately eight (8) million United States healthcare workers are potentially exposed to these hazardous drugs. Although there are potential therapeutic benefits of hazardous drugs that outweigh the risks of side effects for ill patients, healthcare workers are exposed to the risk with the same side effects with no therapeutic benefit. Occupational exposures to hazardous drugs can lead to skin rashes and major reproductive effects, which include increased fetal loss, congenital malformations, low birth weight, congenital abnormalities, and infertility. The risk of cancer is also increased after exposure to these drugs.

    This invention, developed within the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, describes a lateral flow assay-based antineoplastic drug detection method that utilizes antibodies specific for individual drugs. It uses detectors for the assessment of drug residues on surfaces, which can be incorporated into small, portable drug detection devices that allow healthcare workers to sample surfaces in near real time, avoiding the need to take samples back to the laboratory to be tested.

    This notice is made in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR part 404. The prospective exclusive patent commercialization license will be royalty bearing and may be granted unless within fifteen (15) days from the date of this published notice, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases receives written evidence and argument that establishes that the grant of the license would not be consistent with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR part 404.

    Complete applications for a license in the prospective field of use that are timely filed in response to this notice will be treated as objections to the grant of the contemplated exclusive patent commercialization license. Comments and objections submitted in response to this notice will not be made available for public inspection and, to the extent permitted by law, will not be released under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552.

    Dated: November 9, 2017. Suzanne Frisbie, Deputy Director, Technology Transfer and Intellectual Property Office, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24774 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Eye 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 Board of Scientific Counselors, National Eye Institute.

    The meeting will be closed to the public as indicated below in accordance with the provisions set forth in section 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended for the review, discussion, and evaluation of individual grant applications conducted by the NATIONAL EYE INSTITUTE, including consideration of personnel qualifications and performance, and the competence of individual investigators, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Board of Scientific Counselors, National Eye Institute.

    Date: December 3-5, 2017.

    Time: 6:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Building 31, Conference Room 6C6, 31 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Sheldon S. Miller, Ph.D., Scientific Director, National Institutes of Health, National Eye Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 451-6763.

    Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page: www.nei.nih.gov, where an agenda and any additional information for the meeting will be posted when available.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.867, Vision Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: November 9, 2017. Natasha M. Copeland, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24760 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4344-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001] California; Amendment No. 5 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of California (FEMA-4344-DR), dated October 10, 2017, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    This amendment was issued November 7, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given that the incident period for this disaster is closed effective October 31, 2017.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant. Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24910 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4339-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001] Puerto Rico; Amendment No. 5 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice amends the notice of a major disaster for the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (FEMA-4339-DR), dated September 20, 2017, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    This amendment was issued November 2, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given that, in a letter dated November 2, 2017, the President amended the cost-sharing arrangements regarding Federal funds provided under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the “Stafford Act”), in a letter to Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security, under Executive Order 12148, as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico resulting from Hurricane Maria beginning on September 17, 2017, and continuing, is of sufficient severity and magnitude that special cost-sharing arrangements are warranted regarding Federal funds provided under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the “Stafford Act”).

    Due to the extraordinary level of impact to the Commonwealth's infrastructure caused by Hurricane Maria as well as a debt burden of more than $120 billion subject to court-supervised debt restructuring, and recognizing the Commonwealth's election on October 30, 2017, to participate in alternative procedures for all large project funding for Public Assistance Categories C-G pursuant to section 428 of the Stafford Act, I amend my declarations of September 20, 2017 and September 26, 2017, to authorize Federal funds for all categories of Public Assistance at 90 percent of total eligible costs, except for assistance previously approved at 100 percent, subject to the following grant conditions, which I direct you to reflect in the agreement between the Commonwealth and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA):

    1. The Commonwealth establish a Commonwealth grant oversight authority, supported by third-party experts, to perform as the grant recipient for Public Assistance and Hazard Mitigation funding to ensure sound project management and enhanced, centralized control and oversight over the distribution of FEMA grant funds;

    2. All large project funding for Public Assistance Categories C-G be obligated by FEMA only through alternative procedures as FEMA shall establish under section 428 of the Stafford Act, including third-party independent expert validation of estimates for projects exceeding a threshold FEMA shall establish consistent with law; and

    3. Hazard Mitigation grant funding available under section 404 of the Stafford Act be prioritized toward protecting Federal investments in Puerto Rico's public infrastructure.

    This adjustment to Commonwealth and local cost sharing applies only to Public Assistance costs and direct Federal assistance eligible for such adjustments under the law. The Stafford Act specifically prohibits a similar adjustment for funds provided for Other Needs Assistance (section 408) and the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (section 404). These funds will continue to be reimbursed at 75 percent of total eligible costs.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

    Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24908 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4346-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001] South Carolina; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of South Carolina (FEMA-4346-DR), dated October 16, 2017, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    This amendment was issued November 1, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of South Carolina is hereby amended to include the following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of October 16, 2017.

    Abbeville, Newberry, and Saluda Counties for Public Assistance.

    Aiken, Calhoun, Cherokee, Chester, Chesterfield, Clarendon, Darlington, Dillon, Fairfield, Florence, Greenville, Greenwood, Horry, Kershaw, Lancaster, Laurens, Lee, Lexington, Marion, Marlboro, Orangeburg, Richland, Spartanburg, Sumter, Union, Williamsburg, and York Counties and the Catawba Indian Nation for emergency protective measures [Category B] under the Public Assistance program.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.
    Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24909 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4339-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001] Puerto Rico; Amendment No. 4 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (FEMA-4339-DR), dated September 20, 2017, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    This amendment was issued November 2, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The notice of a major disaster declaration for the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico is hereby amended to include permanent work under the Public Assistance program for those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of September 20, 2017.

    All municipalities in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico for Public Assistance [Categories C-G] (already designated for Individual Assistance and assistance for debris removal and emergency protective measures [Categories A and B], including direct federal assistance, under the Public Assistance program).

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.
    Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24907 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement [OMB Control Number 1653-0049] Agency Information Collection Activities: Comment Request; Extension of an Information Collection AGENCY:

    U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    30-Day notice.

    The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (USICE) is submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The information collection notice was previously published in the Federal Register on August 22, 2017, Vol. 82 FR 39899, allowing for a 60-day public comment period. USICE did not receive any comment relating to the 60-day notice. The purpose of this notice is to allow an additional 30 days for public comments.

    Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the items contained in this notice, especially regarding the estimated public burden and associated response time, must be directed to the OMB Desk Officer for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security and sent via electronic mail to [email protected] All submissions received must include the agency name and the OMB Control Number 1653-0049.

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points:

    (1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

    (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    (4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    Overview of This Information Collection

    (1) Type of Information Collection: Extension of a currently approved information collection.

    (2) Title of the Form/Collection: Suspicious/Criminal Activity Tip Reporting.

    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department of Homeland Security sponsoring the collection: U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individual or Households. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) tip reporting capability will facilitate the collection of information from the public and law enforcement partners regarding allegations of crimes enforced by DHS.

    (5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: 122,723 responses at 10 minutes (.166) per response.

    (6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: 20,372 annual burden hours.

    Dated: November 13, 2017. Scott Elmore, PRA Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24819 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-28-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services [OMB Control Number 1615-0034] Agency Information Collection Activities; Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved Collection: Notice of Appeal of Decision Under Section 210 or 245A AGENCY:

    U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    60-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration (USCIS) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment upon this proposed extension. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, the information collection notice is published in the Federal Register to obtain comments regarding the nature of the information collection, the categories of respondents, the estimated burden (i.e. the time, effort, and resources used by the respondents to respond), the estimated cost to the respondent, and the actual information collection instruments.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until January 16, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    All submissions received must include the OMB Control Number 1615-0034 in the body of the letter, the agency name and Docket ID USCIS-2007-0014. To avoid duplicate submissions, please use only one of the following methods to submit comments:

    (1) Online. Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal Web site at http://www.regulations.gov under e-Docket ID number USCIS-2007-0014;

    (2) Mail. Submit written comments to DHS, USCIS, Office of Policy and Strategy, Chief, Regulatory Coordination Division, 20 Massachusetts Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20529-2140.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    USCIS, Office of Policy and Strategy, Regulatory Coordination Division, Samantha Deshommes, Chief, 20 Massachusetts Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20529-2140, telephone number 202-272-8377 (This is not a toll-free number. Comments are not accepted via telephone message). Please note contact information provided here is solely for questions regarding this notice. It is not for individual case status inquiries. Applicants seeking information about the status of their individual cases can check Case Status Online, available at the USCIS Web site at http://www.uscis.gov, or call the USCIS National Customer Service Center at 800-375-5283 (TTY 800-767-1833).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Comments

    You may access the information collection instrument with instructions, or additional information by visiting the Federal eRulemaking Portal site at: http://www.regulations.gov and enter USCIS-2007-0014 in the search box. Regardless of the method used for submitting comments or material, all submissions will be posted, without change, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, and will include any personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting this information makes it public. You may wish to consider limiting the amount of personal information that you provide in any voluntary submission you make to DHS. DHS may withhold information provided in comments from public viewing that it determines may impact the privacy of an individual or is offensive. For additional information, please read the Privacy Act notice that is available via the link in the footer of http://www.regulations.gov.

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points:

    (1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the 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 submission of responses.

    Overview of This Information Collection

    (1) Type of Information Collection: Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved Collection.

    (2) Title of the Form/Collection: Notice of Appeal of Decision Under Section 210 or 245A.

    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the DHS sponsoring the collection: I-694; USCIS.

    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals or households. USCIS uses the information provided on Form I-694 in considering the appeal from a finding that an applicant is ineligible for legalization under section 210 and 245A of the Act or is ineligible for a related waiver of inadmissibility.

    (5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: The estimated total number of respondents for the information collection I-694 is 15 and the estimated hour burden per response is 1.5 hours.

    (6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The total estimated annual hour burden associated with this collection is 22.5 hours.

    (7) An estimate of the total public burden (in cost) associated with the collection: The estimated total annual cost burden associated with this collection of information is $1,893.75.

    Dated: November 13, 2017. Samantha Deshommes, Chief, Regulatory Coordination Division, Office of Policy and Strategy, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24847 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-97-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Indian Affairs [189A2100DD/AAKC001030/A0A501010.999900 253G; OMB Control Number 1076-0169] Agency Information Collection Activities; Probate of Indian Estates, Except for Members of the Osage Nation and Five Civilized Tribes AGENCY:

    Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Information Collection; request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) is proposing to renew an information collection.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before January 16, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send your comments on the information collection request (ICR) by mail to Ms. Charlene Toledo, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Office of Trust Services, Division of Probate Services 2600 N Central Ave., STE MS 102, Phoenix, AZ 85004: or email to [email protected] Please reference OMB Control Number 1076-0169 in the subject line of your comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request additional information about this ICR, contact Ms. Charlene Toledo by telephone at (505) 563-3371.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we provide the general public and other Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand our information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format.

    We are soliciting comments on the proposed ICR that is described below. We are especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is the collection necessary to the proper functions of the BIA (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the BIA enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the BIA minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology.

    Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of public record. We will include or summarize each comment in our request to OMB to approve this ICR. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    Abstract: The Secretary of the Interior probates the estates of individual Indians owning trust or restricted property in accordance with 25 U.S.C. 372-373. In order to compile the probate file, the BIA must obtain the family heirship data regarding the deceased from individuals and the tribe. This section contains the procedures that the Secretary of the Interior follows to initiate the probate of the trust estate for a deceased person who owns an interest in trust or restricted property. The Secretary must perform the necessary research of family heirship data collection requests in this part to obtain the information necessary to compile an accurate and complete probate file. This file will be forwarded to the Office of Hearing and Appeals (OHA) for disposition. Responses to these information collection requests are required to create a probate file for the decedent's estate so that OHA can determine the heirs of the decedent and order distribution of the trust assets in the decedent's estate.

    Title of Collection: Probate of Indian Estates, Except for Members of the Osage Nation and Five Civilized Tribes.

    OMB Control Number: 1076-0169.

    Form Number: N/A.

    Type of Review: Extension without change of currently approved collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: Indians, businesses, and tribal authorities.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: 65,751.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 76,695.

    Estimated Completion Time per Response: Ranges from 0.5 hours to 45.5 hours (see table below).

    CFR Section Description of info collection requirement Hours per
  • response
  • 15.9 File affidavit to self-prove will, codicil, or revocation 0.5 15.9 File supporting affidavit to self-prove will, codicil, or revocation 0.5 15.104 Reporting req.- death certificate 5 15.105 Provide probate documents 45.5 15.203 Provide tribal information for probate file 2 15.301 Reporting funeral expenses 2 15.305 Provide info on creditor claim (6 per probate) 0.5

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 1,037,513 hours.

    Respondent's Obligation: A response is required to obtain a benefit.

    Frequency of Collection: One per respondent each year with the exception of tribes that may be required to provide enrollment information on an average of approximately 10 times/year.

    Total Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden Cost: $0.

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    The authority for this action is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq).

    Elizabeth K. Appel, Director, Office of Regulatory Affairs and Collaborative Action—Indian Affairs.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24879 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4337-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-D-COS-POL-24137; PPWODIREP0] [PPMPSPD1Y.YM0000] National Park System Advisory Board; Request for Nominations AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Park Service (NPS), U.S. Department of the Interior (Department), is seeking nominations for individuals to be considered for appointment to the National Park System Advisory Board (Board). The Board advises the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) and the Director of the National Park Service (Director) on matters relating to the National Park Service (NPS), the National Park System, and programs administered by the NPS. The Board is a discretionary committee established by authority of the Secretary under 54 U.S.C. 100906 and regulated by the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA).

    DATES:

    Nominations must be postmarked by December 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Nominations should be sent to Shirley Sears, Office of Policy, National Park Service, 1849 C Street NW., Mail Stop 2659, Washington, DC 20240.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Shirley Sears, Office of Policy, National Park Service, 1849 C Street NW., Mail Stop 2659, Washington, DC 20240; by telephone at 202-354-3955; or by email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The purpose of the Board is to provide advice to the Secretary and the Director on matters relating to the NPS, the National Park System, and programs administered by the NPS, including programs administered pursuant to 54 U.S.C. 320101; designation of National Historic Landmarks and National Natural Landmarks; and the national historic significance of proposed National Historic Trails pursuant to the National Trails System Act (16 U.S.C. 1244(b)(3)). The Board may also advise on matters submitted by the Director. The Board is comprised of no more than 12 members who are citizens of the United States and have a demonstrated commitment to the mission of the NPS. Members are selected to represent various geographic regions, including each of the administrative regions of the NPS. At least 6 members must have outstanding expertise in one or more of the following fields: History, archeology, anthropology, historical or landscape architecture, biology, ecology, marine sciences, or social science. At least 4 members must have outstanding expertise in the management of national or state parks or protected areas, or natural or cultural resources management. The remaining members must have outstanding expertise in another professional or scientific discipline important to the mission of the NPS, such as financial management, recreation use management, land use planning, or business management. At least one of the members must be a locally elected official from an area adjacent to a park. Members are appointed by the Secretary for terms not to exceed 4 years. The Director designates one member to be Chair. All members serve at the discretion of the Secretary.

    We currently are seeking to appoint 3 members to the Board and are requesting nominations in the fields of anthropology, archaeology, historical architecture, landscape architecture, biology, ecology, geology, history, and social science; and for a locally elected official adjacent to a park.

    Nominations should be typed, and must include a resume providing an adequate description of the nominee's qualifications, including information that would enable the Department to make an informed decision regarding meeting the membership requirements of the Board and permit the Department to contact a potential member.

    Members of the Board serve as special Government employees (SGEs), and are required to have ethics training annually and to file a Confidential Financial Disclosure Report. Members serve without compensation. However, while away from their homes or regular places of business in the performance of services for the Board as approved by the Designated Federal Officer, members are allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, in the same manner as persons employed intermittently in Government service are allowed such expenses under 5 U.S.C. 5703.

    Individuals who are federally registered lobbyists are ineligible to serve on all FACA and non-FACA boards, committees, or councils in an individual capacity. The term “individual capacity” refers to individuals who are appointed to exercise their own individual best judgment on behalf of the Government, such as when they are designated SGEs, rather than being appointed to represent a particular interest.

    Public availability of comments. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your nomination/comment, you should be aware that your entire nomination/comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your nomination/comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    Authority:

    54 U.S.C. 100906; 5 U.S.C. Appendix 2.

    Alma Ripps, Chief, Office of Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24827 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-52-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement [Docket ID BSEE-2017-0005; 189E1700D2 ET1SF0000.PSB000 EEEE500000; OMB Control Number 1014-0016] Agency Information Collection Activities; Pipelines and Pipeline Rights-of-Way AGENCY:

    Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of information collection; request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we, the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) are proposing to renew an information collection with revisions.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before January 16, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send your comments on this information collection request (ICR) by either of the following methods listed below:

    • Electronically go to http://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter BSEE-2017-0005 then click search. Follow the instructions to submit public comments and view all related materials. We will post all comments.

    • Email [email protected], fax (703) 787-1546, or mail or hand-carry comments to the Department of the Interior; Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement; Regulations and Standards Branch; ATTN: Nicole Mason; 45600 Woodland Road, Sterling, VA 20166. Please reference OMB Control Number 1014-0016 in the subject line of your comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request additional information about this ICR, contact Nicole Mason by email at [email protected] or by telephone at (703) 787-1607.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we provide the general public and other Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand our information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format.

    We are soliciting comments on the proposed ICR that is described below. We are especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is the collection necessary to the proper functions of BSEE; (2) Will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) Is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) How might BSEE enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) How might BSEE minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology.

    Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of public record. We will include or summarize each comment in our request to OMB to approve this ICR. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    Abstract: The regulations under 30 CFR 250, Subpart J, pertain to pipelines and pipeline rights-of-way (ROWs), forms, and related Notices to Lessees (NTLs) and Operators.

    We use the information to ensure that lessees and pipeline ROW holders design the pipelines that they install, maintain, and operate in a safe manner. BSEE needs information concerning the proposed pipeline and safety equipment, inspections and tests, and natural and manmade hazards near the proposed pipeline route. BSEE uses the information to review pipeline designs prior to approving an application for a ROW or lease term pipeline to ensure that the pipeline, as constructed, will provide for safe transportation of minerals through the submerged lands of the OCS. BSEE reviews proposed pipeline routes to ensure that the pipelines would not conflict with any State requirements or unduly interfere with other OCS activities. BSEE reviews proposals for taking pipeline safety equipment out of service to ensure alternate measures are used that will properly provide for the safety of the pipeline and associated facilities (platform, etc.). BSEE reviews notifications of relinquishment of ROW grants and requests to decommission pipelines for regulatory compliance and to ensure that all legal obligations are met. BSEE monitors the records concerning pipeline inspections and tests to ensure safety of operations and protection of the environment and to schedule witnessing trips and inspections. Information is also necessary to determine the point at which the DOI or Department of Transportation (DOT) has regulatory responsibility for a pipeline and to be informed of the identified operator if not the same as the pipeline ROW holder.

    We use the information in Form BSEE-0149, Assignment of Federal OCS Pipeline Right-of-Way Grant, to track pipeline ROW holders; as well as use this information to update the corporate database that is used to determine what leases are available for a Lease Sale and the ownership of all OCS leases.

    We are adding a new Form BSEE-0135, Designation of Right-of-Way Operator, to identify who has the authority to act on the ROW grant holder's behalf to fulfill obligations under the OCS Lands Act; as well as, BSEE may provide to the designated ROW operator written or oral instructions in securing compliance with the ROW grant in accordance with applicable laws and regulations.

    Title of Collection: 30 CFR part 250, subpart J, Pipelines and Pipeline Rights-of-Way (ROW).

    OMB Control Number: 1014-0016.

    Form Number: BSEE-0149—Assignment of Federal OCS Pipeline Right-of-Way Grant, and Form BSEE-0135—Designation of Right-of-Way Operator.

    Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: Potential respondents comprise Federal OCS oil, gas, and sulfur lessees/operators and holders of pipeline rights-of-way.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: Not all of the potential respondents will submit information in any given year, and some may submit multiple times.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 3,031.

    Estimated Completion Time per Response: Varies from 30 minutes to 107 hours, depending on activity.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 36,546.

    Respondent's Obligation: Most responses are mandatory, while others are required to obtain or retain benefits.

    Frequency of Collection: On occasion and varies by section.

    Total Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden Cost: This IC request includes seven non-hour cost burdens, all of which are the cost recovery fees required under 30 CFR 250, subpart J. The total of the non-hour cost burden (cost recovery fees) in this IC request is an estimated $1,508,968.

    The non-hour cost burdens required in 30 CFR 250, subpart J (and respective cost-recovery fee amount per transaction) are required under:

    § 250.1000(b)—New Pipeline Application (lease term)—$3,541 § 250.1000(b)—Pipeline Application Modification (lease term)—$2,056 § 250.1000(b)—Pipeline Application Modification (ROW)—$4,169 § 250.1008(e)—Pipeline Repair Notification—$388 § 250.1015(a)—Pipeline ROW Grant Application—$2,771 § 250.1015(a)—Pipeline Conversion from Lease Term to ROW—$236 § 250.1018(b)—Pipeline ROW Assignment—$201

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    The authority for this action is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq).

    Dated: September 27, 2017. Lakeisha Harrison, Chief, Regulations and Standards Branch.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24817 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-VH-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement [Docket ID BSEE-2017-0006; 189E1700D2 ET1SF0000.PSB000 EEEE500000; OMB Control Number 1014-0021] Agency Information Collection Activities; Operations in the Outer Continental Shelf for Minerals Other Than Oil, Gas, and Sulphur AGENCY:

    Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of information collection; request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we, the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) are proposing to renew an information collection with revisions.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before January 16, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send your comments on this information collection request (ICR) by either of the following methods listed below:

    • Electronically go to http://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter BSEE-2017-0006 then click search. Follow the instructions to submit public comments and view all related materials. We will post all comments.

    • Email [email protected], fax (703) 787-1546, or mail or hand-carry comments to the Department of the Interior, Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement, Regulations and Standards Branch, ATTN: Nicole Mason; 45600 Woodland Road, Sterling, VA 20166. Please reference OMB Control Number 1014-0021 in the subject line of your comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request additional information about this ICR, contact Nicole Mason by email at [email protected] or by telephone at (703) 787-1607.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we provide the general public and other Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand our information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format.

    We are soliciting comments on the proposed ICR that is described below. We are especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is the collection necessary to the proper functions of BSEE; (2) Will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) Is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) How might BSEE enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) How might BSEE minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology.

    Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of public record. We will include or summarize each comment in our request to OMB to approve this ICR. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    Abstract: BSEE will use the information required by 30 CFR 282 to determine if lessees are complying with the regulations that implement the mining operations program for minerals other than oil, gas, and sulphur. Specifically, BSEE will use the information:

    • To ensure that operations for the production of minerals other than oil, gas, and sulphur in the OCS are conducted in a manner that will result in orderly resource recovery, development, and the protection of the human, marine, and coastal environments.

    • To ensure that adequate measures will be taken during operations to prevent waste, conserve the natural resources of the OCS, and to protect the environment, human life, and correlative rights.

    • To determine if suspensions of activities are in the national interest, to facilitate proper development of a lease including reasonable time to develop a mine and construct its supporting facilities, and to allow for the construction or negotiation for use of transportation facilities.

    • To identify and evaluate the cause(s) of a hazard(s) generating a suspension, the potential damage from a hazard(s) and the measures available to mitigate the potential for damage.

    • For technical evaluations that provide a basis for BSEE to make informed decisions to approve, disapprove, or require modification of the proposed activities.

    Title of Collection: 30 CFR part 282—Operations in the Outer Continental Shelf for Minerals Other than Oil, Gas, and Sulphur.

    OMB Control Number: 1014-0021.

    Form Number: None.

    Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: Potential respondents comprise Federal OCS oil, gas, and sulphur lessees/operators.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: As there are no active respondents, we estimated the potential annual number of respondents to be one.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 16.

    Estimated Completion Time per Response: Varies from 1 hour to 20 hours, depending on activity.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 56.

    Respondent's Obligation: Most responses are mandatory, while others are required to obtain or retain benefits, or are voluntary.

    Frequency of Collection: On occasion and varies by section.

    Total Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden Cost: We have identified one non-hour cost burden. Pursuant to § 282.13(e)(1), a site-specific study to determine and evaluate hazards that results in a suspension of operation would have a non-hour cost burden. Since this has not been done to date, we estimated that the cost of such a study for industry would be approximately $100,000 to comply with the requirement. We have not identified any other non-hour cost burdens associated with this collection of information.

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    The authority for this action is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

    Dated: October 11, 2017. Doug Morris, Chief, Office of Offshore Regulatory Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24815 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-VH-P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337-TA-1071] Certain Wireless Audio Systems and Components Thereof; Commission Determination Not To Review an Initial Determination Granting Complainant's Motion for Leave To Amend the Complaint AGENCY:

    U.S. International Trade Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined not to review an initial determination (“ID”) (Order No. 9) of the presiding administrative law judge (“ALJ”), granting complainant's motion for leave to amend the complaint in the above-captioned investigation

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Cathy Chen, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2392. Copies of non-confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation are or will be available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server at https://www.usitc.gov. The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on (202) 205-1810.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Commission instituted this investigation on September 15, 2017, based on a complaint filed by Broadcom Limited of San Jose, California; and Avago Technologies General IP (Singapore) Pte. Ltd. of Singapore (collectively, “Broadcom”). 82 FR 43404 (Sep. 15, 2017). The complaint, as supplemented, alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain wireless audio systems and components thereof by reason of infringement of claim 20 of U.S. Patent No. 6,684,060. The complaint further alleges that an industry in the United States exists as required by 19 U.S.C. 1337(a)(2). The notice of investigation named DTS, Inc. of Calabasas, California; Phorus, Inc. of Calabasas, California; MartinLogan, Ltd. of Lawrence, Kansas; Paradigm Electronics Inc. of Ontario, Canada; Anthem Electronics, Inc. of Ontario, Canada; Wren Sound Systems, LLC of Phoenixville, Pennsylvania; McIntosh Laboratory, Inc. of Binghamton, New York; Definitive Technology of Owings Mills, Maryland; and Polk Audio Inc. of Vista, California, as respondents. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations is also a party in this investigation.

    On September 20, 2017, Broadcom filed a motion for leave to file a second amended complaint. Broadcom sought to amend the complaint to: (1) Incorporate additional information that was set forth in a pre-institution letter to the Commission on August 29, 2017; (2) correct the names for certain respondents; and (3) add an additional domestic industry claim related to another licensee of the asserted patent. On October 2, 2017, Respondents filed a response opposing only the addition of a new domestic industry claim. The ALJ issued the subject ID granting the motion on October 24, 2017. The ALJ found that Broadcom has shown good cause to amend the complaint under Commission Rule 210.14(b)(1). See Order No. 9 at 2-3 (Oct. 24, 2017).

    No petitions for review were filed. The Commission has determined not to review the ID.

    The authority for the Commission's determination is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, and in Part 210 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR part 210.

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: November 13, 2017. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24824 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation Nos. 701-TA-588 and 731-TA-1392-1393 (Preliminary)] Polytetrafluoroethylene (“PTFE”) Resin From China and India Determinations

    On the basis of the record 1 developed in the subject investigations, the United States International Trade Commission (“Commission”) determines, pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”), that there is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of imports of PTFE resin from China and India, provided for in statistical reporting numbers 3904.61.0010 and 3904.61.0090 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, that are alleged to be sold in the United States at less than fair value (“LTFV”) and by reason of imports of PTFE resin from India that are alleged to be subsidized by the government of India.

    1 The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)).

    Commencement of Final Phase Investigations

    Pursuant to section 207.18 of the Commission's rules, the Commission also gives notice of the commencement of the final phase of its investigations. The Commission will issue a final phase notice of scheduling, which will be published in the Federal Register as provided in section 207.21 of the Commission's rules, upon notice from the Department of Commerce (“Commerce”) of affirmative preliminary determinations in the investigations under sections 703(b) or 733(b) of the Act, or, if the preliminary determinations are negative, upon notice of affirmative final determinations in those investigations under sections 705(a) or 735(a) of the Act. Parties that filed entries of appearance in the preliminary phase of the investigations need not enter a separate appearance for the final phase of the investigations. Industrial users, and, if the merchandise under investigation is sold at the retail level, representative consumer organizations have the right to appear as parties in Commission antidumping and countervailing duty investigations. The Secretary will prepare a public service list containing the names and addresses of all persons, or their representatives, who are parties to the investigations.

    Background

    On September 28, 2017, The Chemours Company FC LLC, Wilmington, Delaware, filed petitions with the Commission and Commerce, alleging that an industry in the United States is materially injured or threatened with material injury by reason of LTFV and subsidized imports of PTFE resin from India and LTFV imports of PTFE resin from China. Accordingly, effective September 28, 2017, the Commission, pursuant to sections 703(a) and 733(a) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1671b(a) and 1673b(a)), instituted countervailing duty investigation No. 701-TA-588 and antidumping duty investigation Nos. 731-TA-1392 and 1393 (Preliminary).

    Notice of the institution of the Commission's investigations and of a public conference to be held in connection therewith was given by posting copies of the notice in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, Washington, DC, and by publishing the notice in the Federal Register of October 4, 2017 (82 FR 46284). The conference was held in Washington, DC, on October 19, 2017, and all persons who requested the opportunity were permitted to appear in person or by counsel.

    The Commission made these determinations pursuant to sections 703(a) and 733(a) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1671b(a) and 1673b(a)). It completed and filed its determinations in these investigations on November 13, 2017. The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication 4741 (November 2017), entitled Polytetrafluoroethylene (“PTFE”) Resin from China and India: Investigation Nos. 701-TA-588 and 731-TA-1392-1393 (Preliminary).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: November 13, 2017. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2017-24875 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation Nos. 332-562 and 332-563] Global Digital Trade 2: The Business-to-Business Market, Key Foreign Trade Restrictions, and U.S. Competitiveness; and Global Digital Trade 3: The Business-to-Consumer Market, Key Foreign Trade Restrictions, and U.S. Competitiveness; Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Global Digital Trade Questionnaire AGENCY:

    United States International Trade Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the U.S. International Trade Commission (Commission) hereby gives notice that it plans to submit a request for approval of a questionnaire to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and requests public comment on its draft proposed collection.

    DATES:

    To ensure consideration, written comments must be submitted on or before January 15, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    The project leaders for these investigations are Dan Kim and Alissa Tafti (Inv. No. 332-562) and Ricky Ubee and Christopher Robinson (Inv. No. 332-563). Please direct all written comments to the project leaders via email at [email protected] or via U.S. mail at U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436.

    Additional Information: Copies of the draft questionnaire and other supplementary documents may be downloaded from the USITC Web site at https://www.usitc.gov/globaldigitaltrade. For any questions about these investigations, email [email protected] or call 202-205-3225 or 202-205-3342. 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 Web site (http://www.usitc.gov).

    Purpose of Information Collection: The information requested by the questionnaire is for use by the Commission in connection with Investigation No. 332-562, Global Digital Trade 2: The Business-to-Business Market, Key Foreign Trade Restrictions, and U.S. Competitiveness, and Investigation No. 332-563, Global Digital Trade 3: The Business-to-Consumer Market, Key Foreign Trade Restrictions, and U.S. Competitiveness, instituted under the authority of section 332(g) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1332(g)). These investigations were requested by the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) on January 13, 2017. These investigations were initiated on May 1, 2017 and notice was published on May 8, 2017 (82 FR 21404). USTR's request includes a component that requires a survey of U.S. firms to gather detailed information on the impact of foreign regulatory and policy measures on their ability to develop and/or supply business-to-business and business-to-consumer digital products and services abroad. This questionnaire is the