Federal Register Vol. 82, No.42,

The Summer Food Service Program (SFSP) is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance under No. 10.559 and is subject to the provisions of Executive Order 12372, which requires intergovernmental consultation with State and local officials. (See 2 CFR part 415 and final rule-related notice published at 48 FR 29114, June 24, 1983.)

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3518, no new recordkeeping or reporting requirements have been included that are subject to approval from the Office of Management and Budget.

This notice is not a rule as defined by the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, and thus is exempt from the provisions of that Act. Additionally, this notice has been determined to be exempt from formal review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866.

The terms used in this notice have the meaning ascribed to them under 7 CFR part 225 of the SFSP regulations.

This notice informs the public of the annual adjustments to the reimbursement rates for meals served in SFSP. In accordance with sections 12(f) and 13, 42 U.S.C. 1760(f) and 1761, of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (NSLA) and SFSP regulations under 7 CFR part 225, the United States Department of Agriculture announces the adjustments in SFSP payments for meals served to participating children during calendar year 2017.

The 2017 reimbursement rates are presented as a combined set of rates to highlight simplified cost accounting procedures. Reimbursement is based solely on a “meals times rate” calculation, without comparison to actual or budgeted costs.

Sponsors receive reimbursement that is determined by the number of reimbursable meals served, multiplied by the combined rates for food service operations and administration. However, the combined rate is based on separate operating and administrative rates of reimbursement, each of which is adjusted differently for inflation.

The combined rates are constructed from individually authorized operating and administrative reimbursements. Simplified procedures provide flexibility, enabling sponsors to manage their reimbursements to pay for any allowable cost, regardless of the cost category. Sponsors remain responsible, however, for ensuring proper administration of the Program, while providing the best possible nutrition benefit to children.

The operating and administrative rates are calculated separately. However, the calculations of adjustments for both cost categories are based on the same set of changes in the Food Away From Home series of the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers, published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the United States Department of Labor. They represent a 2.3 percent increase in this series for the 12-month period, from November 2015 through November 2016 (from 258.805 in November 2015 to 264.699 in November 2016).

Presentation of the 2017 maximum per meal rates for meals served to children in SFSP combines the results from the calculations of operational and administrative payments, which are further explained in this notice. The total amount of payments to State agencies for disbursement to SFSP sponsors will be based upon these adjusted combined rates and the number of meals of each type served. These adjusted rates will be in effect from January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2017.

The portion of the SFSP rates for operating costs is based on payment amounts set in section 13(b)(1) of the NSLA, 42 U.S.C. 1761(b)(1). They are rounded down to the nearest whole cent, as required by section 11(a)(3)(B)(iii) of the NSLA, 42 U.S.C. 1759a(a)(3)(B)(iii).

The administrative cost component of the reimbursement is authorized under section 13(b)(3) of the NSLA, 42 U.S.C. 1761(b)(3). Rates are higher for sponsors of sites located in rural areas and for “self-prep” sponsors that prepare their own meals at the SFSP site or at a central facility instead of purchasing them from vendors. The administrative portion of SFSP rates are adjusted, either up or down, to the nearest quarter-cent.

Interested members of the public may listen to the discussion by calling the following toll-free conference call number: 1-888-684-1264 and conference call ID: 9702460. Please be advised that before placing them into the conference call, the conference call operator will 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: 1-888-684-1264 and conference call ID: 9702460.

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, faxed to (202) 376-7548, 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 https://database.faca.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=252; 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 meeting. 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.

The products covered by the order are all large residential washers and certain subassemblies thereof from Korea. The products are currently classifiable under subheadings 8450.20.0040 and 8450.20.0080 of the Harmonized Tariff System of the United States (HTSUS). Products subject to this order may also enter under HTSUS subheadings 8450.11.0040, 8450.11.0080, 8450.90.2000, and 8450.90.6000. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise subject to this scope is dispositive.1

Background

On December 8, 2016, the Department of Commerce (the Department) initiated an antidumping duty investigation of certain hardwood plywood products from the People's Republic of China.1 Section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1) state that the Department will make a preliminary determination no later than 140 days after the date of the initiation. Accordingly, the preliminary determination of this antidumping duty investigation is currently due no later than April 27, 2017.

On February 21, 2017, the Coalition for Fair Trade in Hardwood Plywood and its individual members (Petitioners), made a timely request, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.205(e), for postponement of the preliminary determination, in order to facilitate the Department's analysis of the data and questionnaire responses submitted by respondents.2 Because there are no compelling reasons to deny the request, in accordance with section 733(c)(1)(A) of the Act, the Department is postponing the deadline for the preliminary determination by 50 days.

For the reasons stated above, the Department, in accordance with section 733(c)(1)(A) of the Act, is postponing the deadline for the preliminary determination to no later than 190 days after the date on which the Department initiated this investigation. Therefore, the new deadline for the preliminary determination is June 16, 2017. In accordance with section 735(a)(1) of the Act, the deadline for the final determination of this investigation will continue to be 75 days after the date 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).

The products covered by the order are all large residential washers and certain subassemblies thereof from Mexico. The products are currently classifiable under subheadings 8450.20.0040 and 8450.20.0080 of the Harmonized Tariff System of the United States (HTSUS). Products subject to this order may also enter under HTSUS subheadings 8450.11.0040, 8450.11.0080, 8450.90.2000, and 8450.90.6000. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise subject to this scope is dispositive.1

The merchandise subject to the order is certain frozen warmwater shrimp.1 The product is currently classified under the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) item numbers: 0306.17.00.03, 0306.17.00.06, 0306.17.00.09, 0306.17.00.12, 0306.17.00.15, 0306.17.00.18, 0306.17.00.21, 0306.17.00.24, 0306.17.00.27, 0306.17.00.40, 1605.21.10.30, and 1605.29.10.10. Although the HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and for customs purposes, the written product description remains dispositive.

The Department is conducting this review in accordance with section 751(a)(2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Export price and constructed export price are calculated in accordance with section 772 of the Act. Normal value is calculated in accordance with section 773 of the Act.

For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov, and 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/. The signed and electronic versions of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content. A list of the topics discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is attached as the Appendix to this notice.

Among the companies under review, five companies properly filed statements reporting that they made no shipments of subject merchandise to the United States during the POR.2 Based on the certifications submitted by four of these companies and our analysis of CBP information, we preliminarily determine that the following companies had no reviewable transactions during the POR: (1) Calsonic Kansei (Thailand) Co., Ltd.; (2) Lucky Union Foods Co., Ltd.; (3) Marine Gold Products Ltd. (Marine Gold); 3 and (4) Thai Union Manufacturing Company Limited (Thai Union Manufacturing). The Department finds that it is not appropriate to preliminarily rescind the review with respect to these companies but, rather, to complete the review with respect to these companies and issue appropriate instructions to CBP based on the final results of this review.4

On September 8, 2016, the Department published a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain magnesia carbon bricks from the People's Republic of China for the POR.1 On November 9, 2016, based on a timely request for review by Petitioner,2 the Department published in the Federal Register a notice of initiation of an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain magnesia carbon bricks, covering the POR.3 On February 3, 2017, Petitioner withdrew its request for an administrative review of these companies in its entirety.4

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the Department will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if the party that requested the review withdraws its request within 90 days of the publication of the notice of initiation of the requested review. Petitioner withdrew its request within the 90-day deadline. No other party requested an administrative review of the antidumping duty order. As a result, we are rescinding the administrative review of certain magnesia carbon bricks from the People's Republic of China for the POR.

The Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. Because the Department is rescinding this administrative review in its entirety, the entries to which this administrative review pertained shall be assessed antidumping duties at rates equal to the cash deposit of estimated antidumping duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(1)(i). The Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the publication of this notice.

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

This notice also serves as a final reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. 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 violation which is subject to sanction.

This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).

In accordance with sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.210(c), on January 17, 2017, the Department published its final negative determination of sales at less-than-fair-value (LTFV) with respect to off-the-road tires from India.1 Pursuant to section 735(e) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.224(e), which provide for the correction of ministerial errors, on February 2, 2017, the Department published its affirmative amended final determination of sales at LTFV.2 On February 23, 2017, the ITC notified the Department of its final determination that an industry in the United States is materially injured within the meaning of section 735(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, by reason of the LTFV imports of off road tires from India.3

The products covered by this order are off road tires, which are tires with an off road tire size designation. For a complete description of the scope of the order, see Appendix I.

In accordance with sections 735(b)(1)(A)(i) and 735(d) of the Act, the ITC notified the Department of its final determination that the industry in the United States producing off road tires is materially injured by reason of the LTFV imports of off road tires from India.4 Therefore, in accordance with section 735(c)(2) of the Act, we are publishing this antidumping duty order.

As a result of the ITC's final determination, in accordance with section 736(a)(1) of the Act, the Department will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess, upon further instruction by the Department, antidumping duties equal to the amount by which the normal value of the merchandise exceeds the export price (or constructed export price) of the merchandise, for all relevant entries of off-road tires from India. Antidumping duties will be assessed on unliquidated entries of off road tires from India entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after February 2, 2017, the date of publication of the Amended Final Determination. 5

In accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, the Department will instruct CBP to continue to suspend liquidation on all relevant entries of off road tires from India. These instructions suspending liquidation will remain in effect until further notice.

We will also instruct CBP to require cash deposits equal to the estimated weighted-average dumping margins indicated below. Accordingly, effective on the date of publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determinations, CBP will require, at the same time as importers would normally deposit estimated duties on this subject merchandise, a cash deposit equal to the estimated weighted-average antidumping duty margins listed below.6 The all-others rate applies to all producers or exporters not specifically listed. For the purposes of determining cash deposit rates, the estimated weighted-average dumping margins for imports of subject merchandise from India have been adjusted for export subsidies found in the amended final determination of the companion countervailing duty investigation of this merchandise (i.e., 4.72 percent).7

The estimated weighted-average antidumping duty margin percentages are as follows:

This notice constitutes the antidumping duty order with respect to off road tires from India pursuant to section 736(a) of the Act. Interested parties can find a list of antidumping duty orders currently in effect at http://enforcement.trade.gov/stats/iastats1.html.

These orders are published in accordance with section 736(a) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.211(b).

On November 1, 2016, the Department initiated the first sunset review of the CVD order on MLWF from the PRC pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act) and 19 CFR 351.218(c).1 The Department received a notice of intent to participate in the review on behalf of the Coalition for American Hardwood Parity and its member companies, Cumberland Products Group, LLC, d/b/a American OEM Wood Floors, Mannington Mills, Inc., Mohawk Industries, Inc., Shaw Industries Group, Inc. (collectively, CAHP), within the deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i).2 CAHP claimed interested party status under section 771(9)(C) and (F) of the Act, as domestic producers of the domestic like product and an association comprised of domestic producers.

The Department received an adequate substantive response from the domestic industry within the 30-day deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i).3 The Department did not receive a substantive response from any government or respondent interested party to the proceeding. Because the Department received no response from the respondent interested parties, the Department conducted an expedited review of this CVD order, pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2).

The products covered by this order are certain multilayered wood flooring which are composed of an assembly of two or more layers or plies of wood veneer(s) 4 in combination with a core. Imports of the subject merchandise are provided for under the following subheadings of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS): 4412.31.0620; 4412.31.0640; 4412.31.0660; 4412.31.2610; 4412.31.2620; 4412.31.4140; 4412.31.4160; 4412.31.4175; 4412.31.5225; 4412.32.0640; 4412.32.0665; 4412.32.2610; 4412.32.2625; 4412.32.3225; 4412.32.5700; 4418.74.2000; 4418.74.9000; 4418.75.4000; 4418.75.7000; 4418.79.0100; 4412.31.0520; 4412.31.0540; 4412.31.0560; 4412.31.2510; 4412.31.2520; 4412.31.4040; 4412.31.4050; 4412.31.4060; 4412.31.4070; 4412.31.5125; 4412.31.5135; 4412.31.5155; 4412.31.5165; 4412.31.6000; 4412.31.9100; 4412.32.0520; 4412.32.0540; 4412.32.0560; 4412.32.2510; 4412.32.2520; 4412.32.3125; 4412.32.3135; 4412.32.3155; 4412.32.3165; 4412.32.3175; 4412.32.3185; 4412.32.5600; 4412.39.1000; 4412.39.3000; 4412.39.4011; 4412.39.4012; 4412.39.4019; 4412.39.4031; 4412.39.4032; 4412.39.4039; 4412.39.4051; 4412.39.4052; 4412.39.4059; 4412.39.4061; 4412.39.4062; 4412.39.4069; 4412.39.5010; 4412.39.5030; 4412.39.5050; 4412.94.1030; 4412.94.1050; 4412.94.3105; 4412.94.3111; 4412.94.3121; 4412.94.3131; 4412.94.3141; 4412.94.3160; 4412.94.3171; 4412.94.4100; 4412.94.5100; 4412.94.6000; 4412.94.7000; 4412.94.8000; 4412.94.9000; 4412.94.9500; 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; 4412.99.5100; 4412.99.5710; 4412.99.6000; 4412.99.7000; 4412.99.8000; 4412.99.9000; 4412.99.9500; 4418.71.2000; 4418.71.9000; 4418.72.2000; 4418.72.9500; and 9801.00.2500.5 Although the HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written product description remains dispositive. For a full description of the scope, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum, which is hereby adopted by this notice.6

The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at http://access.trade.gov and in the Central Records Unit, room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

All issues raised in this review are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. The issues discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum address the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of a countervailable subsidy, the net countervailable subsidy likely to prevail if the order were revoked, and the nature of the subsidy.

Pursuant to section 752(b)(1) and (3) of the Act, we determine that revocation of the CVD order on MLWF from the PRC would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of countervailable subsidies at the rates listed below:

This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely 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 which is subject to sanction.

The Department is issuing and publishing these final results and notice in accordance with sections 751(c), 752(b), and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218.

Background

In accordance with sections 705(d) and 777(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.210(c), on January 10, 2017, the Department published its final determinations in the countervailing duty investigations of off road tires from India and Sri Lanka.1 On February 23, 2017, the ITC notified the Department of its final determination that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of subsidized imports of subject merchandise from India and Sri Lanka within the meaning of section 705(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, and its determination that critical circumstances do not exist with respect to imports of subject merchandise from India and Sri Lanka that are subject to the Department's affirmative critical circumstances finding.2

The products covered by these orders are off road tires, which are tires with an off road tire size designation. For a complete description of the scope of the orders, see Appendix I.

On January 17, 2017, ATC Tires Private Limited (ATC) alleged that the Department made ministerial errors in the India Final Determination. 3 A ministerial error is defined as an error in addition, subtraction, or other arithmetic function, clerical error resulting from inaccurate copying, duplication, or the like, and any other similar type of unintentional error which the Secretary considers ministerial.4

The Department reviewed the record and agrees that the errors referenced in ATC's allegation constitute ministerial errors within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.224(f).5 Specifically, the Department double-counted the benefit ATC received through the Central Sales Tax Reimbursement Program and inadvertently treated a stamp duty exemption as a subsidy received during the POI when the record indicates it was received prior to the POI.6 Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.224(e), the Department is amending the India Final Determination to reflect the correction of the ministerial errors described above. Based on our correction, ATC's subsidy rate decreased from 4.90 percent to 4.72 percent.7 Because the “all-others” rate is based, in part, on ATC's subsidy rate, the “all-others” rate decreased from 5.06 percent to 4.94 percent.8

In accordance with sections 705(b)(1)(A)(i) and 705(d) of the Act, the ITC notified the Department of its final determinations that the industry in the United States producing off road tires is materially injured by reason of subsidized imports of off road tires from India and Sri Lanka and that critical circumstances do not exist with respect to imports of subject merchandise from India and Sri Lanka that are subject to the Department's affirmative critical circumstances findings. Therefore, in accordance with section 705(c)(2) of the Act, we are publishing these countervailing duty orders.

As a result of the ITC's final determination, in accordance with section 706(a) of the Act, the Department will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess, upon further instruction by the Department, countervailing duties on unliquidated entries of off road tires entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after June 20, 2016, the date on which the Department published its preliminary countervailing duty determinations in the Federal Register,9 and before October 18, 2016, the date on which the Department instructed CBP to discontinue the suspension of liquidation on subject merchandise from India and Sri Lanka in accordance with section 703(d) of the Act. Section 703(d) of the Act states that the suspension of liquidation pursuant to a preliminary determination may not remain in effect for more than four months. Therefore, entries of off road tires from India and Sri Lanka made on or after October 18, 2016, and prior to the date of publication of the ITC's final determination in the Federal Register are not liable for the assessment of countervailing duties due to the Department's discontinuation, effective October 18, 2016, for off road tires from India and Sri Lanka, of the suspension of liquidation.

In accordance with section 706 of the Act, the Department will direct CBP to reinstitute the suspension of liquidation of off road tires from India and Sri Lanka, effective the date of publication of the ITC's notice of final determination in the Federal Register, and to assess, upon further instruction by the Department pursuant to section 706(a)(1) of the Act, countervailing duties for each entry of the subject merchandise in an amount based on the net countervailable subsidy rates for the subject merchandise. On or after the date of publication of the ITC's final injury determination in the Federal Register, CBP must require, at the same time as importers would normally deposit estimated duties on this merchandise, a cash deposit equal to the rates noted below:

With regard to the ITC's negative critical circumstances determination on imports of off road tires from India and Sri Lanka, we will instruct CBP to lift suspension and to refund any cash deposits made to secure the payment of estimated countervailing duties with respect to entries of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after March 22, 2016 (i.e., 90 days prior to the date of the publication of the CVD Preliminary Determinations), but before June 20, 2016 (i.e., the date of publication of the CVD Preliminary Determinations).

This notice constitutes the countervailing duty orders with respect to off road tires from India and Sri Lanka, pursuant to section 706(a) of the Act. Interested parties can find a list of antidumping duty orders currently in effect at http://enforcement.trade.gov/stats/iastats1.html.

These orders are issued and published in accordance with section 706(a) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.211(b).

Background

On December 7, 2012, the Department published the AD order on solar cells from the PRC in the Federal Register.1 On February 18, 2015, the Department published the AD order on solar products from the PRC in the Federal Register.2 On September 8, 2016, the Department received a request on behalf of Q CELLS Hong Kong and Q CELLS Qidong for expedited CCRs to establish Q CELLS Hong Kong as the successor-in-interest to SolarOne Hong Kong and to establish Q CELLS Qidong as the successor-in-interest to SolarOne Qidong for purposes of the of the AD orders on solar cells and solar products from the PRC.3 On October 11, 2016, SolarWorld Americas, Inc. (“Petitioner”) submitted comments on Q CELLS Hong Kong and Q CELLS Qidong's CCR request.4

The merchandise covered by the Solar Cells Order is crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, and modules, laminates, and panels, consisting of crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not partially or fully assembled into other products, including, but not limited to, modules, laminates, panels, and building integrated materials.5 Imports of the merchandise subject to the Solar Cells Order are currently classified under the following subheadings of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”): 8501.61.0000, 8507.20.80, 8541.40.6020, 8541.40.6030, and 8501.31.8000.

The merchandise covered by the Solar Products Order is modules, laminates and/or panels consisting of crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not partially or fully assembled into other products, including building integrated materials. Subject merchandise includes modules, laminates and/or panels assembled in the PRC consisting of crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells produced in a customs territory other than the PRC.6 Imports of the merchandise subject to the Solar Products Order are currently classified under the following subheadings of the HTSUS: 8501.61.0000, 8507.20.8030, 8507.20.8040, 8507.20.8060, 8507.20.8090, 8541.40.6020, 8541.40.6030 and 8501.31.8000. These HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes; the written description of the scope of these orders is dispositive. For the full scopes of these orders, see the accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

Pursuant to section 751(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”) and 19 CFR 351.216(d), the Department will conduct a changed circumstances review upon receipt of information concerning, or a request from an interested party for a review of, an order which shows changed circumstances sufficient to warrant a review of the order. In the past, the Department has used changed circumstances reviews to consider the applicability of cash deposit rates after there have been changes in the name or structure of a respondent, such as a merger or spinoff (“successor-in-interest,” or “successorship,” determinations).7

While Q CELLS Hong Kong requested a CCR with respect to the solar cells proceeding in order to receive SolarOne Hong Kong's AD cash deposit rate, SolarOne Hong Kong did not receive its own cash deposit rate in the solar cells proceeding but was treated as part of the PRC-wide entity. Therefore, entries of its subject merchandise into the United States receive the PRC-wide entity cash deposit rate.8 Accordingly, for purposes of the Solar Cells Order, there is no separate rate for which Q CELLS Hong Kong could be eligible, thus, we have not initiated the requested review of Q CELLS Hong Kong with respect to the Solar Cells Order.

However, consistent with Department practice, the information submitted by Q CELLS Hong Kong with respect to the solar products proceeding and the information submitted by Q CELLS Qidong with respect to the solar cells and solar products proceedings, which includes information regarding a name change, demonstrates changed circumstances sufficient to warrant CCRs with respect to these companies and orders.9 In the case of the Solar Products Order, the CCR requests were filed less than 24 months after the date of publication of the notice of final determination in the solar products investigation. However, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.216(c), the Department finds that good cause exists to initiate these CCRs. In particular, we find that Q CELLS Hong Kong and Q CELLS Qidong have properly alleged and demonstrated good cause for initiating early CCRs in the case of solar products, along with the initiation with respect to Q CELLS Qidong in the case of solar cells, on the grounds of fairness and ease of administration.

Therefore, in accordance with section 751(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.216(d), the Department is initiating CCRs to determine whether Q CELLS Hong Kong is the successor-in-interest to SolarOne Hong Kong for purposes of the AD order on solar products from the PRC, and to determine whether Q CELLS Qidong is the successor-in-interest to SolarOne Qidong for purposes of the AD orders on solar cells and solar products from the PRC.

When it concludes that expedited action is warranted, the Department may combine the notice of initiation of the CCR and the preliminary results of the CCR in a single notice.10 The Department has combined the notice of initiation and the notice of preliminary results in successor-in-interest CCRs when sufficient documentation has been provided supporting the request for a CCR.11 In this instance, we have on the record the information necessary to make a preliminary finding with respect to Q CELLS Hong Kong and the Solar Products Order and Q CELLS Qidong and the Solar Cells and Solar Products Orders. Thus, we find that expedited action is warranted with respect to the CCR Requests regarding these companies and orders, and we are combining the notice of initiation and the notice of preliminary results in one notice, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(3)(ii).

In determining whether one company is the successor to another for purposes of AD cash deposits, the Department examines a number of factors including, but not limited to, changes in: (1) Management; (2) production facilities; (3) suppliers; and (4) customer base.12 While no one, or several, of these factors will necessarily provide a dispositive indication of succession, the Department will generally consider one company to be the successor to another company if its resulting operation is essentially the same as that of its predecessor.13 Thus, if the evidence demonstrates that, with respect to the production and sale of subject merchandise, the new company operates as essentially the same business entity as the prior company, the Department will assign the new company the cash deposit rate of its predecessor.14

In their September 8, 2016, CCR Requests, Q CELLS Hong Kong and Q CELLS Qidong provided evidence for the Department to determine preliminarily their status as successors-in-interest to SolarOne Hong Kong for purposes of the AD order on solar products from the PRC and SolarOne Qidong for purposes of the AD orders on solar products and solar cells from the PRC, respectively. Specifically, Q CELLS Hong Kong and Q CELLS Qidong demonstrated that their operations are essentially the same as when they operated under the names SolarOne Hong Kong and SolarOne Qidong, respectively.15

In February 2015, Hanwha SolarOne Co., Ltd. acquired 100 percent of the outstanding shares of another company named Q CELLS. Hanwha SolarOne Co., Ltd. is the parent entity of SolarOne Hong Kong and SolarOne Qidong. In connection with the transaction, the name of Hanwha SolarOne Co., Ltd. was changed to Hanwha Q CELLS Co., Ltd., SolarOne Hong Kong assumed the name Q CELLS Hong Kong, and SolarOne Qidong assumed the name Q CELLS Qidong. Other than the name changes, there were no significant changes to ownership, management, or operations of the companies.16 Q CELLS Hong Kong does not have production facilities; rather it purchased solar modules from Q CELLS Qidong. This was also the case when Q CELLS Hong Kong operated under the name SolarOne Hong Kong and purchased solar modules from SolarOne Qidong. Q CELLS Qidong has maintained the same production facilities that were previously under the name of its predecessor company, SolarOne Qidong.17 Q CELLS Hong Kong and Q CELLS Qidong also provided documentation showing that there have been no material changes in supplier relationships, or their customer bases as a result of the name changes.18 Based on the foregoing, which is explained in greater detail in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum, the Department preliminarily determines that Q CELLS Hong Kong is the successor-in-interest to SolarOne Hong Kong for purposes of the AD order on solar products from the PRC, and that Q CELLS Qidong is the successor-in-interest to SolarOne Qidong for purposes of the AD orders on solar cells and solar products from the PRC.

Should our final results of review remain the same as these preliminary results of review, effective the date of publication of the final results of review, we will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to suspend liquidation of entries of solar products exported by Q CELLS Hong Kong at the AD cash-deposit rate applicable to SolarOne Hong Kong, and to suspend liquidation of entries of solar products and solar cells exported by Q CELLS Qidong at the AD cash-deposit rates applicable to SolarOne Qidong.19

Interested parties may submit case briefs not later than 14 days after the date of publication of this notice.20 Rebuttal briefs, which must be limited to issues raised in case briefs, may be filed not later than seven days after the due date for case briefs.21 Parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in these CCRs are requested to submit with each argument: (1) A statement of the issues filed in the solar products and solar cells proceedings and (2) a brief summary of the arguments filed in the solar products and solar cells proceedings with electronic versions included.

Any interested party may request a hearing within 14 days of publication of this notice.22 Hearing requests should contain the following information: (1) The party's name, address, and telephone number; (2) the number of participants; and (3) a list of the issues to be discussed. Oral presentations at the hearing will be limited to issues raised in the briefs. If a request for a hearing is made, parties will be notified of the time and date for the hearing to be held at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230 in a room to be determined.23

All submissions, with limited exceptions, must be filed electronically using Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (“ACCESS”).24 An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by 5 p.m. Eastern Time (“ET”) on the due date. Documents excepted from the electronic submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form) with the APO/Dockets Unit in Room 18022 and stamped with the date and time of receipt by 5 p.m. ET on the due date.25

Consistent with 19 CFR 351.216(e), we intend to issue the final results of these CCRs no later than 270 days after the date on which these reviews were initiated or within 45 days if all parties agree to the outcome of the reviews.

We are issuing and publishing this initiation and preliminary results notice in accordance with sections 751(b)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.216 and 351.221(c)(3).

On November 1, 2016, the Department published a notice of initiation of the fourth sunset review of the antidumping duty order on cement and clinker from Japan.1 On November 16, 2016, the Department received a Notice of Intent to Participate in this review from the Committee for Fairly Traded Japanese Cement (Petitioners) within the deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i).2 Petitioners claimed interested-party status under section 771(9)(E) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), as a trade or business association, a majority of whose members manufacture, produce or wholesale a domestic like product in the United States.

We received a complete substantive response from Petitioners within the 30-day deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i).3 We received no responses from respondent interested parties. As a result, the Department conducted an expedited sunset review of the order, pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2).

The products covered by the order are cement and cement clinker from Japan. Cement is a hydraulic cement and the primary component of concrete. Cement clinker, an intermediate material produced when manufacturing cement, has no use other than grinding into finished cement. Microfine cement was specifically excluded from the antidumping duty order. Cement is currently classifiable under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) item number 2523.29 and cement clinker is currently classifiable under HTS item number 2523.10. Cement has also been entered under HTS item number 2523.90 as “other hydraulic cements.” The HTS item numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes. The written product description remains dispositive as to the scope of the product covered by the order.4

All issues raised in this review, including the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping in the event of revocation and the magnitude of the margins likely to prevail if the order were revoked, are addressed in the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum.5 The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at http://access.trade.gov, and to all parties in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Pursuant to sections 751(c) and 752(c)(1) and (3) of the Act, we determine that revocation of the antidumping duty order on cement and clinker from Japan would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping at weighted-average dumping margins up to 69.89 percent.

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

This sunset review and notice are in accordance with sections 751(c), 752(c), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

Background

On February 18, 2015, the Department issued a countervailing duty (CVD) order on solar products from the PRC.1 Several interested parties requested that the Department conduct an administrative review of the countervailing duty order, and on April 7, 2016, the Department published in the Federal Register a notice of initiation of an administrative review of the CVD Order for 31 producers/exporters for the POR.2

The products covered by the order are certain crystalline silicon photovoltaic products from the PRC. A full description of the scope of the order is contained in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.3

The Department is conducting this CVD review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). For each of the subsidy programs found countervailable, we determine that there is a subsidy, i.e., a financial contribution by an “authority” that confers a benefit to the recipient, and that the subsidy is specific.4 For a full description of the methodology underlying our preliminary conclusions, including our reliance, in part, on adverse facts available pursuant to sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.5 The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at http://access.trade.gov, and is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room 7046 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. The signed Preliminary Decision Memorandum and the electronic versions of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

For an administrative review to be conducted, there must be a reviewable, suspended entry to be liquidated at the newly calculated assessment rate.6 Thus, it is the Department's practice to rescind an administrative review when there are no reviewable entries of subject merchandise during the POR for which liquidation is suspended.7 We preliminarily find that BYD (Shangluo) Industrial Co., Ltd. had no reviewable entries subject to the CVD Order and, consistent with our practice, the Department intends to rescind its review of BYD, consistent with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3). We invite parties to comment on this preliminary intent to rescind and will consider any comments received for the final results.

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the Department will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if the parties that requested a review withdraw the request within 90 days of the date of publication of the notice of initiation. Yingli Energy (China) Co., Ltd., Baoding Tianwei Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd., Baoding Jiasheng Photovoltaic Technology Co. Ltd.;, Beijing Tianneng Yingli New Energy Resources Co. Ltd., Hainan Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd., Hengshui Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd., Lixian Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd., Tianjin Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd., Shenzhen Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd., and Yingli Green Energy International Trading Company Limited; Canadian Solar Inc., Canadian Solar International, Ltd., Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Changshu), Inc., Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Luoyang), Inc., and Canadian Solar (USA) Inc.; Jinko Solar Co., Ltd., JinkoSolar (U.S.) Inc., Jinko Solar Import and Export Co., Ltd., and Zhejiang Jinko Solar Co., Ltd.; Shanghai BYD Co., Ltd.; Shenzhen Jiawei Photovoltaic Lighting Co., Ltd.; and Wuxi Suntech Power Co., Ltd. timely withdrew their requests for review.8 No other party requested a review of these producers/exporters. Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the Department is rescinding this review of the CVD order on solar products from the PRC with respect to these companies.

As a result of this review, we preliminarily determine the countervailable subsidy rates to be:

The statute and the Department's regulations do not directly address the establishment of rates to be applied to companies not selected for individual examination where the Department limits its examination in an administrative review pursuant to section 777A(e)(2) of the Act. However, the Department normally determines the rates for non-selected companies in reviews in a manner that is consistent with section 705(c)(5) of the Act, which provides instructions for calculating the all-others rate in an investigation.

Section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act instructs the Department as a general rule to calculate an all others rate using the weighted average of the subsidy rates established for the producers/exporters individually examined, excluding any zero, de minimis, or rates based entirely on facts available. In this review, the preliminary subsidy rate calculated for Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd. and its cross-owned affiliates (Trina Solar) is above de minimis and is not based entirely on facts available. Therefore, for the companies for which a review was requested that were not selected as mandatory company respondents, and for which we did not receive a timely request for withdrawal of review, and which we are not finding to be cross-owned with the mandatory company respondents, we are preliminarily basing the subsidy rate on the subsidy rate calculated for Trina Solar. For a list of these non-selected companies, please see the Appendix II to this notice.

The Department intends to disclose to interested parties the calculations performed in connection with this preliminary determination within five days of publication of this notice in the Federal Register.11 Interested parties may submit case and rebuttal briefs, as well as request a hearing.12 Interested parties may submit written comments (case briefs) within 30 days of publication of the preliminary results and rebuttal comments (rebuttal briefs) within five days after the time limit for filing case briefs.13 Rebuttal briefs must be limited to issues raised in the case briefs.14 Parties who submit case or rebuttal briefs are requested to submit with the argument: (1) A statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities.15

Interested parties who wish to request a hearing must do so within 30 days of publication of these preliminary results by submitting a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, using Enforcement and Compliance's ACCESS system.16 Requests should contain the party's name, address, and telephone number, the number of participants, and a list of the issues to be discussed. If a request for a hearing is made, we will inform parties of the scheduled date for the hearing which will be held at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, at a time and location to be determined.17 Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and location of the hearing. Issues addressed at the hearing will be limited to those raised in the briefs.18 All briefs and hearing requests must be filed electronically and received successfully in their entirety through ACCESS by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date.

Unless the deadline is extended pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, we intend to issue the final results of this administrative review, including the results of our analysis of the issues raised by the parties in their comments, within 120 days after issuance of these preliminary results.

In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4)(i), we preliminarily assigned subsidy rates in the amounts shown above for the producer/exporters shown above. Upon issuance of the final results, the Department shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, CVDs on all appropriate entries covered by this review. We intend to issue instructions to CBP 15 days after publication of the final results of review.

Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act, the Department also intends to instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of estimated CVDs, in the amounts shown above for each of the respective companies shown above, on shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the final results of this review. For all non-reviewed firms, we will instruct CBP to continue to collect cash deposits at the most-recent company-specific or all-others rate applicable to the company, as appropriate. These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

These preliminary results are issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4).

The Council staff will brief the public on Reef Fish Amendment 36A—Modifications to Commercial Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) Programs. The amendment considers actions to improve program compliance, address non-activated accounts, and authority to retain annual allocation before a quota reduction. Staff will then open the meeting for questions and public comments. The schedule is as follows:

Wednesday, March 22, 2017, Webinar at 6 p.m. EST: Public Hearing: Reef Fish Amendment 36A—Modifications to Commercial IFQ Programs https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/8308877810229905155.

After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar.

Copies of the public hearing documents can be obtained by calling (813) 348-1630 or visiting www.GulfCouncil.org.

This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Kathy Pereira (see ADDRESSES), at least 5 working days prior to the meeting date.

The Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery Management Councils, in conjunction with NOAA Fisheries and the Atlantic and Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commissions, have implemented the Southeast Data, Assessment and Review (SEDAR) process, a multi-step method for determining the status of fish stocks in the Southeast Region. SEDAR is a three-step process including: (1) Data Workshop; (2) Assessment Process utilizing a workshop and/or webinars; and (3) Review Workshop. The product of the Data Workshop is a data report which compiles and evaluates potential datasets and recommends which datasets are appropriate for assessment analyses. The product of the Assessment Process is a stock assessment report which describes the fisheries, evaluates the status of the stock, estimates biological benchmarks, projects future population conditions, and recommends research and monitoring needs. The assessment is independently peer reviewed at the Review Workshop. The product of the Review Workshop is a summary documenting panel opinions regarding the strengths and weaknesses of the stock assessment and input data. Participants for SEDAR Workshops are appointed by the Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery Management Councils and NOAA Fisheries Southeast Regional Office, Highly Migratory Species Management Division, and Southeast Fisheries Science Center. Participants include: data collectors and database managers; stock assessment scientists, biologists, and researchers; constituency representatives including fishermen, environmentalists, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs); international experts; and staff of Councils, Commissions, and state and federal agencies.

The items of discussion at the Pre-Assessment webinar are as follows:

Participants will finalize data recommendations from the Data Workshop and provide early modeling advice.

Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the intent to take final action to address the emergency.

This meeting is accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for auxiliary aids should be directed to the SAFMC office (see ADDRESSES) at least 10 business days prior to the meeting.

Background

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

Authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking, other means of effecting the least practicable impact on the species or stock and its habitat, and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such takings are set forth. NMFS has defined “negligible impact” in 50 CFR 216.103 as “. . .an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival.”

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

On September 23, 2016 NMFS received an application from PISCO for the taking of marine mammals incidental to rocky intertidal monitoring surveys along the Oregon and California coasts. NMFS determined that the application was adequate and complete on October 9, 2016. NMFS has previously issued four IHAs for this ongoing project (77 FR 72327, December 5, 2012; 78 FR 79403, December 30, 2013; 79 FR 73048, December 9, 2014; 81 FR 7319, February 2, 2016).

The research group at UC Santa Cruz operates in collaboration with two large-scale marine research programs: PISCO and the Multi-agency Rocky Intertidal Network (MARINe). The research group at UC Santa Cruz (PISCO) is responsible for many of the ongoing rocky intertidal monitoring programs along the Pacific coast. Monitoring occurs at rocky intertidal sites, often large bedrock benches, from the high intertidal to the water's edge. Long-term monitoring projects include Community Structure Monitoring, Intertidal Biodiversity Surveys, Marine Protected Area Baseline Monitoring, Intertidal Recruitment Monitoring, and Ocean Acidification. Research is conducted throughout the year along the California and Oregon coasts and will continue indefinitely. Most sites are sampled one to two times per year over a 4-6 hour period during a negative low tide series. This IHA is effective for a 12-month period. The following specific aspects of the proposed activities are likely to result in the take of marine mammals: Presence of survey personnel near pinniped haulout sites and unintentional approach of survey personnel towards hauled out pinnipeds. Take, by Level B harassment only, of individuals of California sea lions (Zalophus californianus), harbor seals (Phoca vitulina richardii), and northern elephant seals (Mirounga angustirostris) is anticipated to result from the specified activity.

PISCO requested an IHA to continue rocky intertidal monitoring work that has been ongoing for 20 years. PISCO focuses on understanding the nearshore ecosystems of the U.S. west coast through a number of interdisciplinary collaborations. The program integrates long-term monitoring of ecological and oceanographic processes at dozens of sites with experimental work in the lab and field. A short description of project components is found below. A detailed description of the planned intertidal monitoring project was provided in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (82 FR 3727; January 12, 2017). Since that time, no changes have been made to the planned monitoring activities. Therefore, a detailed description is not provided here. Please refer to that Federal Register notice for the description of the specific activity.

PISCO's research is conducted throughout the year, but will begin no sooner than February 21, 2017 and end on February 20, 2018. Most sites are sampled one to two times per year over a 1-day period (4-6 hours per site) during a negative low tide series. Due to the large number of research sites, scheduling constraints, the necessity for negative low tides and favorable weather/ocean conditions, exact survey dates are variable and difficult to predict. Some sampling may occur in all months.

Sampling sites occur along the California and Oregon coasts. Community Structure Monitoring sites range from Ecola State Park near Cannon Beach, Oregon to Government Point located northwest of Santa Barbara, California. Biodiversity Survey sites extend from Ecola State Park south to Cabrillo National Monument in San Diego County, California. Exact locations of sampling sites can be found in Tables 1 and 2 of PISCO's application which may be found on our Web site at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/research.htm.

Community Structure Monitoring involves the use of permanent photoplot quadrats, which target specific algal and invertebrate assemblages (e.g., mussels, rockweeds, barnacles). Each photoplot is photographed and scored for percent cover. The Community Structure Monitoring approach is based largely on surveys that quantify the percent cover and distribution of algae and invertebrates that constitute these communities. This approach allows researchers to quantify both the patterns of abundance of targeted species, as well as characterize changes in the communities in which they reside. Such information provides managers with insight into the causes and consequences of changes in species abundance. There are 47 Community Structure sites, each of which is surveyed over a 1-day period during a low tide series one to two times a year.

Biodiversity Surveys are part of a long-term monitoring project and are conducted every 3-5 years across 140 established sites. Note that many, but not all, of the 47 Community Structure sites are also Biodiversity Survey sites. Thirty-eight of the Community Structure sites are utilized for Biodiversity Surveys, leaving nine sites that are only Biodiversity Survey locations. These Biodiversity Surveys involve point contact identification along permanent transects, mobile invertebrate quadrat counts, sea star band counts, and tidal height topographic measurements.

Sixteen Biodiversity Survey sites will be visited as part of this proposed IHA. Four of the Biodiversity Survey sites are also Community Structure sites, leaving 12 sites that are only Biodiversity Survey sites. As such, a total of 59 sites will be visited under the proposed IHA.

The intertidal zones where PISCO conducts intertidal monitoring are also areas where pinnipeds can be found hauled out on the shore at or adjacent to some research sites. Pinnipeds are likely to be observed at 17 out of the 59 survey sites. Accessing portions of the intertidal habitat at these locations may cause incidental Level B (behavioral) harassment of pinnipeds through some unavoidable approaches if pinnipeds are hauled out directly in the study plots or while biologists walk from one location to another. No motorized equipment is involved in conducting these surveys.

A notice of NMFS' proposal to issue an IHA was published in the Federal Register on January 12, 2017 (82 FR 3727). During the 30-day public comment period, the Marine Mammal Commission (Commission) submitted a letter on January 18, 2017. The letter is available on the Internet at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/research.htm. The Commission had no formal comments and concurred with NMFS's preliminary finding that recommended that NMFS issue an IHA to PISCO, subject to the inclusion of the mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures.

Several pinniped species can be found along the California and Oregon coasts. The three that are most likely to occur at some of the research sites are California sea lion, harbor seal, and northern elephant seal. PISCO researchers have seen very small numbers (i.e., five or fewer) of Steller sea lions at one of the sampling sites. However, these sightings are extremely rare. Species that may be found around monitoring locations are shown in Table 1.

A detailed description of the of the species likely to be affected by the monitoring project, including brief introductions to the species and relevant stocks as well as available information regarding population trends and threats, and information regarding local occurrence, were provided in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (82 FR 3727; January 12, 2017). Since that time, we are not aware of any changes in the status of these species and stocks; therefore, detailed descriptions are not provided here. Please refer to that Federal Register notice for these descriptions. Please also refer to NMFS' Web site (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/mammals/) for generalized species accounts.

The effect of stressors associated with the specified activity (e.g., pedestrian researchers) has the potential to result in behavioral harassment of marine mammals in the vicinity of the action areas. The Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (82 FR 3727; January 12, 2017) included a discussion of the effects of such disturbance on marine mammals, therefore that information is not repeated here.

NMFS described potential impacts to marine mammal habitat in detail in our Federal Register notice of proposed authorization (82 FR 3727; January 12, 2017). In summary, the project activities would not modify existing marine mammal habitat. Because of the short duration of the activities and the relatively small area of the habitat that may be affected, the impacts to marine mammal habitat are not expected to cause significant or long-term negative consequences for individual marine mammals or their populations

In order to issue an IHA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must, where applicable, set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to such activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on such species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on the availability of such species or stock for taking for certain subsistence uses (where relevant).

PISCO will implement several mitigation measures to reduce potential take by Level B (behavioral disturbance) harassment. Measures include the following:

• When possible, researchers will observe a site from a distance with binoculars to detect any marine mammals prior to approaching the site. Researchers will approach a site with caution (slowly and quietly) to avoid surprising any hauled-out individuals and to reduce stampeding of individuals towards the water.

• If possible, researchers will avoid pinnipeds along access ways to sites by locating and taking a different access way. Researchers will keep a safe distance from and not approach any marine mammal while conducting research, unless it is absolutely necessary to flush a marine mammal in order to continue conducting research (i.e., if a site cannot be accessed or sampled due to the presence of pinnipeds).

• Researchers will avoid making loud noises (i.e., using hushed voices) and keep bodies low to the ground in the visual presence of pinnipeds.

• Researches will monitor the offshore area for predators (such as killer whales and white sharks) and avoid flushing of pinnipeds when predators are observed in nearshore waters. Note that PISCO has never observed an offshore predator while researchers were present at any of the survey sites.

• Intentional flushing will be avoided if pups are present and nursing pups will not be disturbed.

• To avoid take of Steller sea lions, any site where they are present will not be approached and will be sampled at a later date. Note that observation of sea lions at survey sites is extremely rare.

• Researchers will promptly vacate sites at the conclusion of sampling.

The methodologies and actions noted in this section will be included as mitigation measures in the IHA to ensure that impacts to marine mammals are mitigated to the lowest level practicable. The primary method of mitigating the risk of disturbance to pinnipeds, which will be in use at all times, is the selection of judicious routes of approach to study sites, avoiding close contact with pinnipeds hauled out on shore, and the use of extreme caution upon approach. Each visit to a given study site will last for approximately 4-6 hours, after which the site is vacated and can be re-occupied by any marine mammals that may have been disturbed by the presence of researchers. By arriving before low tide, worker presence will tend to encourage pinnipeds to move to other areas for the day before they haul out and settle onto rocks at low tide.

NMFS has carefully reviewed mitigation measures to ensure these measures would have the least practicable impact on the affected marine mammal species and stocks and their habitat. Our evaluation of potential measures included consideration of the following factors in relation to one another:

• The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful implementation of the measure is expected to minimize adverse impacts to marine mammals;

• The proven or likely efficacy of the specific measure to minimize adverse impacts as planned; and

• The practicability of the measure for applicant implementation.

Any mitigation measure(s) prescribed by NMFS should be able to accomplish, have a reasonable likelihood of accomplishing (based on current science), or contribute to the accomplishment of one or more of the general goals listed below:

1. Avoidance or minimization of injury or death of marine mammals wherever possible (goals 2, 3, and 4 may contribute to this goal).

2. A reduction in the numbers of marine mammals (total number or number at biologically important time or location) exposed to activities expected to result in the take of marine mammals (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing harassment takes only).

3. A reduction in the number of times (total number or number at biologically important time or location) individuals would be exposed to activities expected to result in the take of marine mammals (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing harassment takes only).

4. A reduction in the intensity of exposures (either total number or number at biologically important time or location) to activities expected to result in the take of marine mammals (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing the severity of harassment takes only).

5. Avoidance or minimization of adverse effects to marine mammal habitat, paying special attention to the food base, activities that block or limit passage to or from biologically important areas, permanent destruction of habitat, or temporary destruction/disturbance of habitat during a biologically important time.

6. For monitoring directly related to mitigation—an increase in the probability of detecting marine mammals, thus allowing for more effective implementation of the mitigation.

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

In order to issue an ITA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA states that NMFS must, where applicable, set forth “requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of such taking.” The MMPA implementing regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for ITAs must include the suggested means of accomplishing the necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present in the proposed action area. PISCO has described their long-standing monitoring actions in Section 13 of the Application.

Monitoring measures prescribed by NMFS should accomplish one or more of the following general goals:

1. An increase in our understanding of the likely occurrence of marine mammal species in the vicinity of the action, i.e., presence, abundance, distribution, and/or density of species.

2. An increase in our understanding of how many marine mammals are likely to be exposed to levels of disturbance that we associate with specific adverse effects, such as behavioral harassment;

3. An increase in our understanding of how marine mammals respond to stimuli expected to result in take and how anticipated adverse effects on individuals (in different ways and to varying degrees) may impact the population, species, or stock (specifically through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival) through any of the following methods:

Behavioral observations in the presence of stimuli compared to observations in the absence of stimuli (need to be able to accurately predict received level, distance from source, and other pertinent information);

Physiological measurements in the presence of stimuli compared to observations in the absence of stimuli (need to be able to accurately predict received level, distance from source, and other pertinent information);

Distribution and/or abundance comparisons in times or areas with concentrated stimuli versus times or areas without stimuli;

4. An increased knowledge of the affected species; and

5. An increase in our understanding of the effectiveness of certain mitigation and monitoring measures.

PISCO will contribute to the knowledge of pinnipeds in California and Oregon by noting observations of: (1) Unusual behaviors, numbers, or distributions of pinnipeds, such that any potential follow-up research can be conducted by the appropriate personnel; (2) tag-bearing carcasses of pinnipeds, allowing transmittal of the information to appropriate agencies and personnel; and (3) rare or unusual species of marine mammals for agency follow-up.

Monitoring requirements in relation to PISCO's rocky intertidal monitoring will include observations made by the applicant. Information recorded will include species counts (with numbers of pups/juveniles when possible) of animals present before approaching, numbers of observed disturbances, and descriptions of the disturbance behaviors during the monitoring surveys, including location, date, and time of the event. For consistency, any reactions by pinnipeds to researchers will be recorded according to a three-point scale shown in Table 2. Note that only observations of disturbance Levels 2 and 3 should be recorded as takes.

In addition, observations regarding the number and species of any marine mammals observed, either in the water or hauled-out, at or adjacent to a site, are recorded as part of field observations during research activities. Information regarding physical and biological conditions pertaining to a site, as well as the date and time that research was conducted are also noted. This information will be incorporated into a monitoring report for NMFS. PISCO will also report observations of unusual behaviors, numbers, or distributions of pinnipeds, or of tag-bearing carcasses, to NMFS Southwest Fisheries Science Center (SWFSC).

If at any time the specified activity clearly causes the take of a marine mammal in a manner prohibited by this IHA, such as an injury (Level A harassment), serious injury, or mortality, PISCO shall immediately cease the specified activities and report the incident to the Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the Southwest Regional Stranding Coordinator, NMFS. The report must include the following information:

(1) Time and date of the incident;

(2) Description of the incident;

(3) Environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction, Beaufort sea state, cloud cover, and visibility);

(4) Description of all marine mammal observations in the 24 hours preceding the incident;

(5) Species identification or description of the animal(s) involved;

(6) Fate of the animal(s); and

(7) Photographs or video footage of the animal(s).

Activities shall not resume until NMFS is able to review the circumstances of the prohibited take. NMFS will work with PISCO to determine what measures are necessary to minimize the likelihood of further prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. PISCO may not resume the activities until notified by NMFS.

In the event that an injured or dead marine mammal is discovered and it is determined that the cause of the injury or death is unknown and the death is relatively recent (e.g., in less than a moderate state of decomposition), PISCO shall immediately report the incident to the Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the West Coast Regional Stranding Coordinator, NMFS. The report must include the same information identified in the paragraph above IHA. Activities may continue while NMFS reviews the circumstances of the incident. NMFS will work with PISCO to determine whether additional mitigation measures or modifications to the activities are appropriate.

In the event that an injured or dead marine mammal is discovered and it is determined that the injury or death is not associated with or related to the activities authorized in the IHA (e.g., previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced decomposition, or scavenger damage), PISCO shall report the incident to the Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the West Coast Regional Stranding Coordinator, NMFS, within 24 hours of the discovery. PISCO shall provide photographs or video footage or other documentation of the stranded animal sighting to NMFS. Activities may continue while NMFS reviews the circumstances of the incident.

A draft final report must be submitted to NMFS Office of Protected Resources within 60 days after the conclusion of the 2016-2017 field season or 60 days prior to the start of the next field season if a new IHA will be requested. The report will include a summary of the information gathered pursuant to the monitoring requirements set forth in the IHA. A final report must be submitted to the Director of the NMFS Office of Protected Resources and to the NMFS West Coast Regional Administrator within 30 days after receiving comments from NMFS on the draft final report. If no comments are received from NMFS, the draft final report will be considered to be the final report.

PISCO complied with the mitigation and monitoring that were required under the IHA issued in December 2014. In compliance with the IHA, PISCO submitted a report detailing the activities and marine mammal monitoring they conducted. The IHA required PISCO to conduct counts of pinnipeds present at study sites prior to approaching the sites and to record species counts and any observed reactions to the presence of the researchers.

From December 17, 2014, through December 16, 2015, PISCO researchers conducted rocky intertidal sampling at numerous sites in California and Oregon (see Table 1 and 2 in PISCO's 2014-2015 monitoring report). During this time no injured, stranded, or dead pinnipeds were observed. Tables 7, 8, and 9 in PISCO's monitoring report outline marine mammal observations and reactions. During this period there were 44 takes of harbor seals, 19 takes of California sea lions, and 4 takes of northern elephant seals. NMFS had authorized the take of 183 harbor seals, 60 California sea lions, and 30 Northern Elephant seals under the IHA.

Based on the results from the monitoring report, we conclude that these results support our original findings that the mitigation measures set forth in the 2014-2015 IHA effected the least practicable impact on the species or stocks. There were no stampede events this year and most disturbances were Level 1 and 2 from the disturbance scale (Table 2)—meaning the animal did not fully flush but observed or moved slightly in response to researchers. Those that did fully flush to the water did so slowly. Most of these animals tended to observe researchers from the water and then re-haulout farther upcoast or downcoast of the site within approximately 30 minutes of the disturbance.

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

All anticipated takes would be by Level B harassment, involving temporary changes in behavior. The mitigation and monitoring measures are expected to minimize the possibility of injurious or lethal takes such that take by injury, serious injury, or mortality is considered remote. Animals hauled out close to the actual survey sites may be disturbed by the presence of researchers and may alter their behavior or attempt to move away from the researchers.

As discussed earlier, NMFS considers an animal to have been harassed if it moved greater than two times its body length in response to the researcher's presence or if the animal was already moving and changed direction and/or speed, or if the animal flushed into the water. Animals that became alert without such movements were not considered harassed.

For the purpose of the issued IHA, only the Oregon and California sites that are frequently sampled and have a marine mammal presence during sampling were included in calculating take estimates. Sites where only Biodiversity Surveys are conducted did not provide enough data to confidently estimate takes since they are sampled infrequently (once every 3-5 years). A small number of harbor seal, northern elephant seal and California sea lion pup takes are anticipated as pups may be present at several sites during spring and summer sampling.

Take estimates are based on marine mammal observations from each site. Marine mammals are observed as part of PISCO site observations, which include taking notes on physical and biological conditions at the site. The maximum number of marine mammals, by species, seen at any given time throughout the sampling day is recorded at the conclusion of sampling. A marine mammal is counted if it is seen on access ways to the site, at the site, or immediately up-coast or down-coast of the site. Marine mammals in the water immediately offshore are also recorded. Any other relevant information, including the location of a marine mammal relevant to the site, any unusual behavior, and the presence of pups is also noted.

These observations formed the basis from which researchers with extensive knowledge and experience at each site estimated the actual number of marine mammals that may be subject to take. Take estimates for each species for which take would be authorized were based on the following equation:

Individual species' totals for each survey site were summed to arrive at a total estimated take. In most cases the number of takes is based on the maximum number of marine mammals that have been observed at a site throughout the history of the site (1-3 observation per year for 5-10 years or more) with additional input provided by the researchers with site-specific knowledge and experience. Section 6 in PISCO's application outlines the number of visits per year for each sampling site and the potential number of pinnipeds anticipated to be encountered at each site. Tables 3, 4, 5 in PISCO's application outlines the number of potential takes per site (see ADDRESSES).

Harbor seals are expected to occur at 16 locations in numbers ranging from 5 to 30 per visit (Table 3 in PISCO's application). It is anticipated that there will be 220 takes of adult harbor seals and 13 takes of weaned pups. Therefore, NMFS authorizes the take of up to 233 harbor seals.

California sea lions are expected to be present at five sites. Eighty-five adult and five pups are expected to be taken. Therefore, NMFS authorizes the take of 90 California sea lions.

Northern elephant seals are only expected to occur at one site this year, Piedras Blancs, which will experience two separate visits. Up to 20 adult and 40 pup takes are anticipated. Therefore, NMFS authorizes the take of up to 60 northern elephant seals.

PISCO researchers report that they have very rarely observed Steller sea lions at any research sites and none have been observed over the last several years. Therefore, PISCO has not requested, and NMFS did not authorize take of any Steller sea lions.

NMFS has authorized the take, by Level B harassment only, of 233 harbor seals, 90 California sea lions, and 60 northern elephant seals. These numbers are considered to be maximum take estimates. Therefore, actual take may be less if animals decide to haul out at a different location for the day or animals are out foraging at the time of the survey activities.

Negligible impact is “an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival” (50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-level effects). An estimate of the number of Level B harassment takes, alone, is not enough information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be “taken” through behavioral harassment, NMFS must consider other factors, such as the likely nature of any responses (their intensity, duration, etc.), the context of any responses (critical reproductive time or location, feeding, migration, etc.), as well as the number and nature of estimated Level A harassment takes, the number of estimated mortalities, effects on habitat, and the status of the species.

To avoid repetition, the discussion of our analyses applies generally to the three species for which take is authorized, given that the anticipated effects of these surveys on marine mammals are expected to be relatively similar in nature. Where there are species-specific factors that have been considered, they are identified below.

No injuries or mortalities are anticipated to occur as a result of PISCO's rocky intertidal monitoring surveys and none are proposed to be authorized. The risk of marine mammal injury, serious injury, or mortality associated with rocky intertidal monitoring increases somewhat if disturbances occur during breeding season. These situations present increased potential for mothers and dependent pups to become separated and, if separated pairs do not quickly reunite, the risk of mortality to pups (e.g., through starvation) may increase. Separately, adult male elephant seals may trample elephant seal pups if disturbed, which could potentially result in the injury, serious injury, or mortality of the pups. The risk of either of these situations is greater in the event of a stampede; however, as described previously, stampede is not considered likely to occur.

Very few pups are anticipated to be encountered during the proposed monitoring surveys. However, a small number of harbor seal, northern elephant seal, and California sea lion pups have been observed at several of the proposed monitoring sites during past years. Harbor seals are very precocious with only a short period of time in which separation of a mother from a pup could occur. Although elephant seal pups are occasionally present when researchers visit survey sites, risk of pup mortalities is very low because elephant seals are far less reactive to researcher presence compared to the other two species. Further, elephant seal pups are typically found on sand beaches, while study sites are located in the rocky intertidal zone, meaning that there is typically a buffer between researchers and pups. Finally, the caution used by researchers in approaching sites generally precludes the possibility of behavior, such as stampeding, that could result in extended separation of mothers and dependent pups or trampling of pups. No research would occur where separation of mother and her nursing pup or crushing of pups can become a concern.

Typically, even those reactions constituting Level B harassment would result at most in temporary, short-term disturbance. In any given study season, researchers will visit sites one to two times per year for a total of 4-6 hours per visit. Therefore, disturbance of pinnipeds resulting from the presence of researchers lasts only for short periods of time and is separated by significant amounts of time in which no disturbance occurs.

Some of the pinniped species may use some of the sites during certain times of year to conduct pupping and/or breeding. However, some of these species prefer to use offshore islands for these activities. At the sites where pups may be present, PISCO has proposed to implement certain mitigation measures, such as no intentional flushing if dependent pups are present, which will avoid mother/pup separation and trampling of pups.

Of the marine mammal species anticipated to occur in the proposed activity areas, none are listed under the ESA. Taking into account the planned mitigation measures, effects to marine mammals are generally expected to be restricted to short-term changes in behavior or temporary abandonment of haulout sites, pinnipeds are not expected to permanently abandon any area that is surveyed by researchers, as is evidenced by continued presence of pinnipeds at the sites during annual monitoring counts. Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into consideration the implementation of the proposed mitigation and monitoring measures, NMFS finds that the total marine mammal take from PISCO's rocky intertidal monitoring program will not adversely affect annual rates of recruitment or survival and, therefore, will have a negligible impact on the affected species or stocks.

Table 3 presents the abundance of each species or stock, the proposed take estimates, and the percentage of the affected populations or stocks that may be taken by Level B harassment. The numbers of animals authorized to be taken would be considered small relative to the relevant stocks or populations (0.75-0.94 percent for harbor seals, and <0.01 percent for California sea lions and northern elephant seals). Because these are maximum estimates, actual take numbers are likely to be lower, as some animals may not be present on survey days.

Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into consideration the implementation of the mitigation and monitoring measures, we find that small numbers of marine mammals will be taken relative to the populations of the affected species or stocks.

There are no relevant subsistence uses of marine mammals implicated by this action. Therefore, NMFS has determined that the total taking of affected species or stocks would not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such species or stocks for taking for subsistence purposes.

No species listed under the ESA are expected to be affected by these activities. Therefore, NMFS has determined that a section 7 consultation under the ESA is not required.

In 2012, NMFS prepared an EA analyzing the potential effects to the human environment from conducting rocky intertidal surveys along the California and Oregon coasts and issued a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) on November 26, 2012 on the issuance of an IHA for PISCO's rocky intertidal surveys in accordance with section 6.01 of the NOAA Administrative Order 216-6 (Environmental Review Procedures for Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act, May 20, 1999). We have reviewed the application for a renewed IHA for ongoing monitoring activities for 2017-18 as well as results from the 2014-15 monitoring report. Based on that review, we have determined that the action is very similar to that considered in the previous IHA. We conducted an environmental review and found no significant new circumstances or information relevant to environmental concerns have been identified. Thus, we have determined that the preparation of a new or supplemental NEPA document is not necessary. The 2012 NEPA documents are available for review at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/research.htm.

As a result of these determinations, we have issued an IHA to PISCO for conducting the described activities related to rocky intertidal monitoring surveys along the Oregon and Washington coasts from February 21, 2017 through February 20, 2018 provided the previously described mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated.

The Board's charter is being renewed under the provisions of 50 U.S.C. 1903 and in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) of 1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended) and 41 CFR 102-3.50(a). The Board's charter and contact information for the Board's Designated Federal Officer (DFO) can be found at http://www.facadatabase.gov/.

The Board shall consult on the National Security Scholarship, Fellowships, and Grants Program as described in more detail in 50 U.S.C. Ch. 37. The Secretary of Defense, pursuant to 50 U.S.C. 1906, shall submit to the President and to the Congressional Intelligence committees an annual report of the conduct of the Program required by 50 U.S.C. Ch. 37. In preparation of this annual report, the Secretary of Defense shall consult with the members of the Board, who shall each submit to the Secretary an assessment of their hiring needs in the areas of language and area studies and a projection of the deficiencies in such areas. The Secretary shall include all assessments in the annual report.

The Board consists of 14 members. All members of the Board are appointed to provide advice on behalf of the Government on the basis of their best judgment without representing any particular point of view and in a manner that is free from conflict of interest. All members are entitled to reimbursement for official Board-related travel and per diem.

The public or interested organizations may submit written statements to the Board membership about the Board's mission and functions. Written statements may be submitted at any time or in response to the stated agenda of planned meeting of the Board. All written statements shall be submitted to the DFO for the Board, and this individual will ensure that the written statements are provided to the membership for their consideration.

Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Regular Generic Clearance for the Collection of NGA Customer Satisfaction Strategy Survey; OMB Control Number 0704-XXXX.

Needs and Uses: The information collection requirement is necessary to garner qualitative and quantitative customer and stakeholder feedback in an efficient and timely manner and is motivated by the Administration's commitment to improving service delivery. This feedback will provide insights into customer or stakeholder perceptions, experiences and expectations, early warning of issues with service, and otherwise focus attention on areas where communication, training or changes in operations might improve delivery of products or services.

Current Actions: Processing New as Generic.

Type of Review: New.

Affected Public: Individuals and Households.

Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: 29,285.

Average Expected Annual Number of Activities: 12.

Below we provide projected average estimates for the next three years:

Average Number of Respondents per Activity: 500.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Annual Responses: 29,285.

Average Burden per Response: 14 minutes.

Annual Burden Hours: 244,061.

Frequency: On occasion.