Federal Register Vol. 82, No.58,

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 58 (March 28, 2017)

Page Range15281-15456
FR Document

82_FR_58
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
82 FR 15344 - Sunshine Act Notice; Notice of Public Hearing AgendaPDF
82 FR 15316 - Notice of Request for Revision to and Extension of Approval of an Information Collection; Importation of Beef and Ovine Meat From Uruguay and Beef From Argentina and BrazilPDF
82 FR 15321 - Notice of Request for Revision to and Extension of Approval of an Information Collection; Swine Health ProtectionPDF
82 FR 15318 - Notice of Request for Revision to and Extension of Approval of an Information Collection; Importation of Jackfruit, Pineapple, and Starfruit From Malaysia Into the Continental United StatesPDF
82 FR 15317 - Notice of Request for Revision to and Extension of Approval of an Information Collection; Importation of Clementines, Mandarins, and Tangerines From ChilePDF
82 FR 15374 - Sunshine Act Meeting; National Science BoardPDF
82 FR 15377 - Sunshine Act Meeting NoticePDF
82 FR 15393 - Sunshine Act MeetingPDF
82 FR 15415 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Request for Comments for a New Information CollectionPDF
82 FR 15416 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Request for Comments for a New Information CollectionPDF
82 FR 15419 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Multiple IRS Information Collection RequestsPDF
82 FR 15418 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Usual and Customary Business Records Maintained by BrewersPDF
82 FR 15418 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Designation of Financial Market UtilitiesPDF
82 FR 15333 - Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 15336 - Applications for New Awards; Assistance for Arts Education Programs-Professional Development for Arts Educators GrantsPDF
82 FR 15374 - Notice of Intent To Grant an Exclusive LicensePDF
82 FR 15332 - Market Risk Advisory CommitteePDF
82 FR 15310 - Response to December 9, 2013, Clean Air Act Section 176A Petition From Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and VermontPDF
82 FR 15302 - Civil PenaltiesPDF
82 FR 15364 - Submission for OMB Review; 30-Day Comment Request; Early Career Reviewer Program Application and Vetting System (EAVS) (Center for Scientific Review)PDF
82 FR 15369 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Extension Without Change, of a Previously Approved Collection OJJDP National Training and Technical Assistance Center (NTTAC) Feedback Form packagePDF
82 FR 15311 - Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Provisions; Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Mid-Atlantic Unmanaged Forage Fish Omnibus AmendmentPDF
82 FR 15357 - EPA-Mid-Atlantic Region III; Maryland Marine Sanitation Device Standard-Receipt of PetitionPDF
82 FR 15334 - Defense Innovation Board; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee MeetingPDF
82 FR 15293 - Security Zone; VIP Visits, Palm Beach, FLPDF
82 FR 15358 - Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding CompaniesPDF
82 FR 15290 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Elizabeth River, Elizabeth, NJPDF
82 FR 15373 - Division of Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Proposed Extension of Existing Collection; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 15345 - Notice of Petition for Waiver of AHT Incorporated From the Department of Energy Commercial Refrigeration Equipment Test Procedures and Partial Grant of Interim WaiverPDF
82 FR 15371 - Fiscal Year (FY) 2016 Through FY 2017 Stand Down Grant RequestsPDF
82 FR 15420 - Notice of Open Public HearingPDF
82 FR 15415 - Notice of Final Federal Agency Actions on the Interstate 64 Peninsula Study in VirginiaPDF
82 FR 15345 - National Coal CouncilPDF
82 FR 15344 - Advanced Scientific Computing Advisory CommitteePDF
82 FR 15332 - Community Broadband WorkshopPDF
82 FR 15375 - Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Notice of MeetingPDF
82 FR 15320 - Notice of Request for Revision to and Extension of Approval of an Information Collection; Animal Disease TraceabilityPDF
82 FR 15295 - Safety Zones, Recurring Marine Events in Captain of the Port Long Island Sound ZonePDF
82 FR 15292 - Safety Zone; City of Eureka Fourth of July Fireworks Display, Humboldt Bay, Eureka, CAPDF
82 FR 15319 - Notice of Request for Extension of Approval of an Information Collection; Importation of Live Swine, Pork, and Pork Products From Certain Regions Free of Classical Swine Fever in Brazil, Chile, and MexicoPDF
82 FR 15368 - Certificate of Alternate Compliance for the Gladding-Hearn Hulls 418 and 419PDF
82 FR 15367 - Port Access Route Study (PARS): In Nantucket SoundPDF
82 FR 15291 - Safety Zone; San Francisco Giants Fireworks Display, San Francisco Bay, San Francisco, CAPDF
82 FR 15308 - Safety Zone; Roar on the River Fireworks, Detroit River, Trenton Channel, Trenton, MIPDF
82 FR 15408 - Spinnaker ETF Trust, et al.PDF
82 FR 15407 - AB Bond Fund, Inc., et al.PDF
82 FR 15404 - Consolidated Tape Association; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of the Twenty-Second Charges Amendment to the Second Restatement of the CTA Plan and the Thirteenth Charges Amendment to the Restated CQ PlanPDF
82 FR 15296 - Safety Zone; San Francisco Giants Fireworks Display, San Francisco Bay, San Francisco, CAPDF
82 FR 15335 - Government-Industry Advisory Panel; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee MeetingPDF
82 FR 15370 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Extension With or Without Change, of a Previously Approved Collection Drug Questionnaire (DEA-341)PDF
82 FR 15359 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Experimental Study on Warning Statements for Cigarette Graphic Health WarningsPDF
82 FR 15314 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 15372 - Proposed Extension of Information Collection; Safety Defects; Examination, Correction, and RecordsPDF
82 FR 15371 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Job Corps Enrollee Allotment DeterminationPDF
82 FR 15331 - Meeting of the Advisory Committee on Commercial Remote SensingPDF
82 FR 15326 - Notice of Public Meeting of the Ohio Advisory Committee for a Meeting To Discuss the Committee's Next Topic of Civil Rights Study: Equal Access to EducationPDF
82 FR 15329 - Notice of Public Meeting of the Indiana Advisory Committee To Discuss Civil Rights Concerns in the State and Determine the Next Topic of Committee StudyPDF
82 FR 15326 - Notice of Public Meeting of the Kansas Advisory Committee To Discuss the Committee's Next Topic of Civil Rights InquiryPDF
82 FR 15354 - Midship Pipeline Company, LLC; Supplemental Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the Planned Midcontinent Supply Header Interstate Pipeline Project and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues Related to New Pipeline Lateral and Booster StationPDF
82 FR 15357 - Republic Transmission, LLC; Notice of Petition for Declaratory OrderPDF
82 FR 15353 - Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP; Notice Extending Comment DatePDF
82 FR 15297 - Determination of Royalty Rates and Terms for Making and Distributing Phonorecords (Phonorecords III); Subpart A Configurations of the Mechanical LicensePDF
82 FR 15368 - National Register of Historic Places; Notification of Pending Nominations and Related ActionsPDF
82 FR 15370 - Meeting of the Global Justice Information Sharing Initiative Federal Advisory CommitteePDF
82 FR 15328 - Notice of Public Meeting of the Nevada State Advisory CommitteePDF
82 FR 15327 - Notice of Public Meeting of the Nevada State Advisory CommitteePDF
82 FR 15328 - Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Colorado Advisory CommitteePDF
82 FR 15420 - Cost of Living Adjustments for Service-Connected BenefitsPDF
82 FR 15325 - Notice of Public Meeting of the Oregon Advisory CommitteePDF
82 FR 15329 - Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; General Provisions for Domestic Fisheries; Application for Exempted Fishing PermitPDF
82 FR 15343 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment Request; The College Assistance Migrant Program (CAMP) Annual Performance Report (APR)PDF
82 FR 15393 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Related to Rule 6.15PDF
82 FR 15408 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on a Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Listing and Trading of Shares of the Bitcoin Investment Trust Under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.201PDF
82 FR 15400 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment Nos. 1, 3, and 4 Thereto, To List and Trade Shares of the ProShares UltraPro 3x Crude Oil ETF and ProShares UltraPro 3x Short Crude Oil ETF Under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.200PDF
82 FR 15417 - Proposed Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 15362 - National Library of Medicine; Notice of MeetingPDF
82 FR 15365 - Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; Notice of MeetingPDF
82 FR 15365 - Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
82 FR 15366 - National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
82 FR 15366 - National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism; Notice of MeetingPDF
82 FR 15362 - National Cancer Institute; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
82 FR 15362 - National Cancer Institute; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
82 FR 15367 - National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
82 FR 15363 - Prospective Grant of an Exclusive Patent License for Commercialization: Cerclage Annuloplasty Devices for Treating Mitral Valve RegurgitationPDF
82 FR 15356 - PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.; Notice of FilingPDF
82 FR 15410 - Kentucky Disaster #KY-00064PDF
82 FR 15361 - Announcement of Meeting of the Secretary's Advisory Committee on National Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Objectives for 2030PDF
82 FR 15411 - California Disaster #CA-00264PDF
82 FR 15410 - California Disaster #CA-00263PDF
82 FR 15411 - Oklahoma Disaster Number OK-00109PDF
82 FR 15392 - Submission for Review: Court Orders Affecting Retirement BenefitsPDF
82 FR 15392 - Civil Service Retirement System Board of Actuaries MeetingPDF
82 FR 15324 - Information Collection Activity; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 15412 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Request and Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 15325 - Information Collection Activity; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 15316 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 15322 - Tonto National Forest; Gila County, AZ; Pinto Valley Mine Environmental Impact StatementPDF
82 FR 15376 - Information Collection: NRC Form 4, “Cumulative Occupational Exposure History”PDF
82 FR 15299 - Approval of Missouri's Air Quality Implementation Plans; Open Burning RequirementsPDF
82 FR 15301 - State of Iowa; Approval and Promulgation of the Title V Operating Permits Program, the State Implementation Plan, and 112(l) PlanPDF
82 FR 15306 - Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Arcata, CA; Fortuna, CA; and Establishment of Class E Airspace; Arcata, CA, and Eureka, CAPDF
82 FR 15304 - Proposed Establishment of Class E Airspace, Willits, CAPDF
82 FR 15303 - Proposed Amendment of Class C and Class E Airspace; Evansville, INPDF
82 FR 15377 - Biweekly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving No Significant Hazards ConsiderationsPDF
82 FR 15287 - Airworthiness Directives; Textron Aviation Inc. (Type Certificate Previously Held by Cessna Aircraft Company) AirplanesPDF
82 FR 15284 - Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company AirplanesPDF
82 FR 15281 - Airworthiness Directives; Airbus AirplanesPDF
82 FR 15422 - Connect America Fund; Universal Service Reform-Mobility FundPDF

Issue

82 58 Tuesday, March 28, 2017 Contents Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

See

Forest Service

See

Rural Utilities Service

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 15314-15316 2017-06022 2017-06076 2017-06077
Animal Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Animal Disease Traceability, 15320-15321 2017-06094 Importation of Beef and Ovine Meat From Uruguay and Beef From Argentina and Brazil, 15316-15317 2017-06218 Importation of Clementines, Mandarins, and Tangerines from Chile, 15317-15318 2017-06215 Importation of Jackfruit, Pineapple, and Starfruit from Malaysia Into the Continental United States, 15318-15319 2017-06216 Importation of Live Swine, Pork, and Pork Products from Certain Regions Free of Classical Swine Fever in Brazil, Chile, and Mexico, 15319-15320 2017-06090 Swine Health Protection, 15321-15322 2017-06217 Civil Rights Civil Rights Commission NOTICES Meetings: Colorado Advisory Committee, 15328 2017-06060 Indiana Advisory Committee, 15329 2017-06070 Kansas Advisory Committee, 15326 2017-06069 Nevada State Advisory Committee, 15327-15329 2017-06061 2017-06062 Ohio Advisory Committee, 15326-15327 2017-06071 Oregon Advisory Committee, 15325-15326 2017-06058 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Drawbridge Operations: Elizabeth River, Elizabeth, NJ, 15290-15291 2017-06109 Safety Zones: City of Eureka Fourth of July Fireworks Display, Humboldt Bay, Eureka, CA, 15292-15293 2017-06091 Recurring Marine Events in Captain of the Port Long Island Sound Zone, 15295-15296 2017-06093 San Francisco Giants Fireworks Display, San Francisco Bay, San Francisco, CA, 15291-15292, 15296-15297 2017-06082 2017-06087 Security Zones: VIP Visits, Palm Beach, FL, 15293-15295 2017-06111 PROPOSED RULES Safety Zones: Roar on the River Fireworks, Detroit River, Trenton Channel, Trenton, MI, 15308-15310 2017-06086 NOTICES Certificates of Alternative Compliance: Gladding-Hearn Hulls 418 and 419, 15368 2017-06089 Port Access Route Study: Nantucket Sound, 15367 2017-06088 Commerce Commerce Department See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

See

National Telecommunications and Information Administration

Commodity Futures Commodity Futures Trading Commission NOTICES Meetings: Market Risk Advisory Committee, 15332-15333 2017-06121 Copyright Royalty Board Copyright Royalty Board RULES Determination of Royalty Rates and Terms for Making and Distributing Phonorecords (Phonorecords III); Subpart A Configurations of the Mechanical License, 15297-15299 2017-06065 Defense Department Defense Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 15333-15334 2017-06124 Meetings: Defense Innovation Board, 15334-15335 2017-06112 Government-Industry Advisory Panel, 15335-15336 2017-06081 Education Department Education Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: The College Assistance Migrant Program Annual Performance Report, 15343-15344 2017-06056 Applications for New Awards: Assistance for Arts Education Programs--Professional Development for Arts Educators Grants, 15336-15343 2017-06123 Election Election Assistance Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 15344 2017-06219 Energy Department Energy Department See

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Office

See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

NOTICES Meetings: Advanced Scientific Computing Advisory Committee, 15344-15345 2017-06099 National Coal Council, 15345 2017-06100
Energy Efficiency Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Office NOTICES Petition for Waivers: AHT Inc. from the Department of Energy Commercial Refrigeration Equipment Test Procedures and Partial Grant of Interim Waiver, 15345-15353 2017-06107 Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Iowa; Approval and Promulgation of the Title V Operating Permits Program, the State Implementation Plan, and 112(l) Plan, 15301-15302 2017-06008 Missouri; Approval of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Open Burning Requirements, 15299-15301 2017-06009 PROPOSED RULES Clean Air Act Petitions: Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Vermont, 15310-15311 2017-06120 NOTICES Receipt of Petition: Maryland Marine Sanitation Device Standard, 15357-15358 2017-06113 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration RULES Airworthiness Directives: Airbus Airplanes, 15281-15283 2017-05766 Textron Aviation Inc. (Type Certificate Previously Held by Cessna Aircraft Company) Airplanes, 15287-15290 2017-05771 The Boeing Company Airplanes, 15284-15287 2017-05768 PROPOSED RULES Class C and E Airspace; Amendments: Evansville, IN, 15303-15304 2017-05991 Class E Airspace; Establishment of Class E Airspace; Amendments: Arcata, CA; Fortuna, CA; Arcata, CA; Eureka, CA, 15306-15308 2017-05993 Class E Airspace; Establishments: Willits, CA, 15304-15306 2017-05992 Federal Communications Federal Communications Commission RULES Connect America Fund: Universal Service Reform—Mobility Fund, 15422-15456 2017-05665 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Applications: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP, 15353-15354 2017-06066 Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Midship Pipeline Co., Midcontinent Supply Header Interstate Pipeline Project, 15354-15356 2017-06068 Filings: PJM Interconnection, LLC, 15356-15357 2017-06035 Petitions for Declaratory Orders: Republic Transmission, LLC, 15357 2017-06067 Federal Highway Federal Highway Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 15415-15416 2017-06133 2017-06134 Federal Agency Actions: Interstate 64 Peninsula Study in Virginia, 15415-15416 2017-06104 Federal Railroad Federal Railroad Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 15417-15418 2017-06046 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System NOTICES Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies, 15358 2017-06110 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Experimental Study on Warning Statements for Cigarette Graphic Health Warnings, 15359-15361 2017-06078 Forest Forest Service NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Tonto National Forest; Gila County, AZ; Pinto Valley Mine, 15322-15324 2017-06020 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Food and Drug Administration

See

National Institutes of Health

NOTICES Meetings: Secretary's Advisory Committee on National Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Objectives for 2030; Webinar, 15361-15362 2017-06033
Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

Interior Interior Department See

National Park Service

Justice Department Justice Department See

Justice Programs Office

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Drug Questionnaire, 15370 2017-06079 Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention National Training and Technical Assistance Center Feedback Form Package, 15369-15370 2017-06115
Justice Programs Justice Programs Office NOTICES Meetings: Global Justice Information Sharing Initiative Federal Advisory Committee, 15370-15371 2017-06063 Labor Department Labor Department See

Mine Safety and Health Administration

See

Workers Compensation Programs Office

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Job Corps Enrollee Allotment Determination, 15371-15372 2017-06073 Fiscal Year 2016 Through FY 2017 Stand Down Grant Requests, 15371 2017-06106
Library Library of Congress See

Copyright Royalty Board

Mine Mine Safety and Health Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Safety Defects; Examination, Correction, and Records, 15372-15373 2017-06074 NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NOTICES Intent to Grant Exclusive Licenses, 15374 2017-06122 National Highway National Highway Traffic Safety Administration RULES Civil Penalties, 15302 2017-06119 National Institute National Institutes of Health NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Early Career Reviewer Program Application and Vetting System, 15364-15365 2017-06116 Exclusive Patent Licenses: Commercialization of Cerclage Annuloplasty Devices for Treating Mitral Valve Regurgitation, 15363-15364 2017-06036 Meetings: Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 15365-15366 2017-06043 2017-06044 National Cancer Institute, 15362-15363 2017-06039 2017-06040 National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health, 15367 2017-06038 National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 15366-15367 2017-06041 2017-06042 National Library of Medicine, 15362 2017-06045 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration PROPOSED RULES Fisheries of the Northeastern United States: Mid-Atlantic Unmanaged Forage Fish Omnibus Amendment, 15311-15313 2017-06114 NOTICES Exempted Fishing Permits; Applications: Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; General Provisions for Domestic Fisheries, 15329-15331 2017-06057 Meetings: Advisory Committee on Commercial Remote Sensing, 15331-15332 2017-06072 National Park National Park Service NOTICES National Register of Historic Places: Pending Nominations and Related Actions, 15368-15369 2017-06064 National Science National Science Foundation NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 15374-15375 2017-06191 2017-06193 National Telecommunications National Telecommunications and Information Administration NOTICES Meetings: Community Broadband Workshop, 15332 2017-06097 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Cumulative Occupational Exposure History, 15376-15377 2017-06018 Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses: Applications and Amendments Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Considerations, etc., 15377-15392 2017-05990 Meetings: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, 15375-15376 2017-06095 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 15377 2017-06161 Personnel Personnel Management Office NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Court Orders Affecting Retirement Benefits, 15392 2017-06029 Meetings: Civil Service Retirement System Board of Actuaries, 15392-15393 2017-06028 Rural Utilities Rural Utilities Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 15324-15325 2017-06024 2017-06026 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Applications: AB Bond Fund, Inc., et al., 15407-15408 2017-06084 Spinnaker ETF Trust, et al., 15408-15410 2017-06085 Filings: Consolidated Tape Association, 15404-15407 2017-06083 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 15393 2017-06152 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: C2 Options Exchange, Inc., 15393-15400 2017-06055 NYSE Arca, Inc., 15400-15404, 15408 2017-06053 2017-06054 Small Business Small Business Administration NOTICES Disaster Declarations: California, 15410 2017-06031 Kentucky, 15410-15411 2017-06034 Oklahoma; Amendment 1, 15411 2017-06030 Major Disaster Declarations: California, 15411 2017-06032 Social Social Security Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 15412-15414 2017-06025 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

Federal Highway Administration

See

Federal Railroad Administration

See

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Treasury Treasury Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Designation of Financial Market Utilities, 15418-15419 2017-06125 Multiple IRS Information Collection Requests, 15419 2017-06127 Usual and Customary Business Records Maintained by Brewers, 15418 2017-06126 U.S. China U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission NOTICES Hearings, 15420 2017-06105 Veteran Affairs Veterans Affairs Department NOTICES Cost of Living Adjustments for Service-Connected Benefits, 15420 2017-06059 Workers' Workers Compensation Programs Office NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Division of Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation, 15373-15374 2017-06108 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Federal Communications Commission, 15422-15456 2017-05665 Reader Aids

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

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

82 58 Tuesday, March 28, 2017 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2014-0922; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-156-AD; Amendment 39-18836; AD 2017-06-12] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes AGENCY:

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

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Airbus Model A319 and A320 series airplanes. This AD was prompted by a report that fatigue cracking could appear at certain fastener locations in the longeron area below the emergency exit cut-outs. This AD requires the modification of certain fastener locations in the longeron area below the emergency exit cut-outs. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES:

This AD is effective May 2, 2017.

The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of May 2, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

For service information identified in this final rule, contact Airbus, Airworthiness Office—EIAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-0922.

Examining the AD Docket

You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-0922; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone 800-647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-1405; fax 425-227-1149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

We issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Airbus Model A319 and A320 series airplanes. The SNPRM published in the Federal Register on January 20, 2016 (81 FR 3053) (“the SNPRM”). We preceded the SNPRM with a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that published in the Federal Register on December 15, 2014 (79 FR 74035) (“the NPRM”). The NPRM proposed to require the modification of eight fastener locations in the longeron area below the emergency exit cut-outs on the left-hand (LH) and right-hand (RH) sides. The NPRM was prompted by a report that fatigue cracking could appear at certain fastener locations in the longeron area below the emergency exit cut-outs. The NPRM was intended to complete certain mandated programs intended to support the airplane reaching its limit of validity (LOV) of the engineering data that support the established structural maintenance program. The SNPRM proposed to add post-Airbus Modification 32208 airplanes. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking at certain fastener locations in the longeron area below the emergency exit cut-outs, which could lead to failure of the fasteners and reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2015-0085, dated May 13, 2015 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition on certain Model A319 and Model A320 series airplanes. The MCAI states:

During the A320 fatigue test campaign for Extended Service Goal (ESG), it was determined that fatigue damage could appear at certain fastener locations on the longeron [area] below the emergency exit cut-outs, on the left-hand (LH) and right-hand (RH) sides of the fuselage.

This condition, if not detected and corrected, could affect the structural integrity of the aeroplane.

To address this potential unsafe condition, Airbus developed a modification, which has been published through Airbus Service Bulletin (SB) A320-53-1265 for in-service application to allow aeroplanes to operate up to the new ESG limit. Consequently, EASA issued AD 2014-0176 to require modification (cold working) of 8 fastener locations in the longeron area (Stringer 20A) below the emergency exit cut-outs on the LH and RH sides.

Since that [EASA] AD was issued, it was identified that post-mod 32208 aeroplanes, which were excluded from the Applicability of that [EASA] AD, are also affected.

For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD retains the requirements of EASA AD 2014-0176, which is superseded, but no longer excludes post-mod 32208 aeroplanes from the Applicability.

As described in FAA Advisory Circular 120-104, several programs have been developed to support initiatives that will ensure the continued airworthiness of aging airplane structure. The last element of those initiatives is the requirement to establish a LOV of the engineering data that support the structural maintenance program under 14 CFR 26.21. This AD is the result of an assessment of the previously established programs by the design approval holder (DAH) during the process of establishing the LOV for Airbus Model A319 and A320 series airplanes. The actions specified in this AD are necessary to complete certain programs to ensure the continued airworthiness of aging airplane structure and to support an airplane reaching its LOV.

You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-0922.

Comments

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

Requests To Reference Revised Service Information

Airbus, Delta Air Lines (Delta), and United Airlines (United) requested that we revise the SNPRM to reference Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1265, Revision 03, dated April 30, 2015.

We agree with the commenters' requests to include the most recent service information; however, since Revision 03 was issued, Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1265, Revision 04, dated July 6, 2016, has been issued. No additional work is specified by Revision 03 or Revision 04 of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1265. Therefore, we have revised paragraph (g) of this AD to reference Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1265, Revision 04, dated July 6, 2016, and we have revised paragraph (h) of this AD to provide credit for actions accomplished prior to the effective date of this AD using Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1265, Revision 02, dated July 10, 2014; or Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1265, Revision 03, dated April 30, 2015.

Request To Revise Proposed Costs of Compliance

Delta asked that we include the purchase price of the Airbus service information in the Costs of Compliance section of the SNPRM. Delta stated that operators must purchase the service information at a cost ranging, in their experience, from $15,000 to $280,000 per airplane. Delta added that the economic impact of the SNPRM should account for all costs associated with the regulatory action, including the purchase price of the service information.

We do not agree with the commenter's request. The cost analysis in AD rulemaking actions describes only the direct costs of the specific actions required by the AD. Based on the best data available, the manufacturer provided the number of work-hours necessary for compliance with this AD, and the cost of any parts necessary for accomplishing those actions. It is our practice to post the service information that is required by this AD, and incorporated by reference in this AD, in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, the service information is available to the affected parties by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section of this final rule.

However, we have updated the estimated costs in this final rule to reflect the costs for required actions, as specified in the latest revision of the service information—i.e., Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1265, Revision 04, dated July 6, 2016.

Request To Revise Proposed Applicability

Delta requested that we revise the proposed applicability to reflect the effectivity specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1265, Revision 02, dated July 10, 2014. Delta pointed out that, in our response to a comment from United in the SNPRM, we stated that we had revised the applicability to reflect the effectivity of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1265, Revision 02, dated July 10, 2014. Delta asserted that the proposed applicability was not updated as stated.

We do not agree to revise the applicability of this AD. However, we acknowledge that we did not revise the applicability specified in the proposed AD (in the SNPRM) to reflect the effectivity of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1265, Revision 02, dated July 10, 2014. That service information specifies certain manufacturer's serial numbers (MSNs) for certain operators; however, the applicability of this AD matches the applicability specified in the MCAI, which applies to all MSNs, except those airplanes on which Airbus Modification 152637 has been embodied in production. Airbus developed Modification 152637 to enable these airplanes to continue to safely operate up to the new ESG. Because all airplanes reaching their LOV are subject to the effects of aging airplane structure, regardless of who operates them, we find it necessary to apply the requirements of this AD to all airplanes that have not had Airbus Modification 152637 installed. We have not revised this AD in this regard.

Conclusion

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

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

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

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

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A320-53-1265, Revision 04, dated July 6, 2016. The service information describes procedures for modifying the fastener locations in the longeron area below the emergency exit cut-outs on both RH and LH sides of the fuselage. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this AD affects 294 airplanes of U.S. registry.

We estimate that it takes between 7 and 12 work-hours per product to comply with the basic requirements of this AD, depending on airplane configuration. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $0 per product. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD on U.S. operators to be between $174,930 and $299,880, or between $595 and $1,020 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

Regulatory Findings

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

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;

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

3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

§ 39.13 [Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): 2017-06-12 Airbus: Amendment 39-18836; Docket No. FAA-2014-0922; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-156-AD. (a) Effective Date

This AD is effective May 2, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

None.

(c) Applicability

This AD applies to the Airbus airplanes identified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD, certificated in any category, except those on which Airbus modification (mod) 152637 has been embodied in production.

(1) Airbus Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133 airplanes, all manufacturer serial numbers (MSN).

(2) Airbus Model A320-211, -212, -214, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes, all MSN.

(d) Subject

Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Reason

This AD was prompted by a report that fatigue cracking could appear at certain fastener locations in the longeron area below the emergency exit cut-outs. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking at certain fastener locations in the longeron area below the emergency exit cut-outs, which could lead to failure of the fasteners and reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Modification of Fastener Locations

Before the accumulation of 48,000 total flight cycles or 96,000 total flight hours, whichever occurs first since the airplane's first flight, modify the 8 fastener locations in the longeron area (stringer 20A) below the emergency exit cut-outs on both right-hand (RH) and left-hand (LH)- sides, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1265, Revision 04, dated July 6, 2016.

(h) Credit for Previous Actions

This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1265, dated January 2, 2013; Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1265, Revision 01, dated July 2, 2013; Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1265, Revision 02, dated July 10, 2014; or Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1265, Revision 03, dated April 30, 2015.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

The following provisions also apply to this AD:

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-1405; fax 425-227-1149. Information may be emailed to: [email protected] Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office. The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.

(2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

(3) Required for Compliance (RC): If any service information contains procedures or tests that are identified as RC, those procedures and tests must be done to comply with this AD; any procedures or tests that are not identified as RC are recommended. Those procedures and tests that are not identified as RC may be deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the procedures and tests identified as RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition. Any substitutions or changes to procedures or tests identified as RC require approval of an AMOC.

(j) Related Information

(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2015-0085, dated May 13, 2015, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-0922.

(2) Service information identified in this AD that is not incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in paragraphs (k)(3) and (k)(4) of this AD.

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.

(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.

(i) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1265, Revision 04, dated July 6, 2016.

(ii) Reserved.

(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus, Airworthiness Office—EIAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.airbus.com.

(4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

(5) You may view this service information that is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 16, 2017. Dionne Palermo, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-05766 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2016-9068; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-067-AD; Amendment 39-18838; AD 2017-06-14] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain The Boeing Company Model 737-300, -400, and -500 series airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports of cracks in the horizontal stabilizer lower skins. This AD requires inspections for cracking of the horizontal stabilizer lower skin, and corrective actions if necessary; and also provides actions that would terminate certain repetitive inspections. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES:

This AD is effective May 2, 2017.

The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of May 2, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

For service information identified in this final rule, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600; telephone 562-797-1717; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-9068.

Examining the AD Docket

You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-9068; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

George Garrido, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-5232; fax: 562-627-5210; email: [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain The Boeing Company Model 737-300, -400, and -500 series airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on September 8, 2016 (81 FR 62022) (“the NPRM”). The NPRM was prompted by reports of cracks in the horizontal stabilizer lower skins. The NPRM proposed to require inspections for cracking of the horizontal stabilizer lower skin, including repetitive inspections, as applicable, and corrective actions if necessary; and also proposed actions that would terminate certain repetitive inspections. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracks in horizontal stabilizer lower skins resulting in reduced local stiffness of the horizontal stabilizer, which can cause heavy vibration leading to loss of structural integrity of the horizontal stabilizer.

Comments

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

Support for the NPRM

Boeing expressed support for the NPRM.

Request To Revise Repair Instructions

All Nippon Airways (ANA) requested that we revise paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(3) of the proposed AD to state “repair common to the rear spar lower chord between station (STA) 83.50 and STA 249.10,” instead of “repair.” ANA stated that there might be a repair installed on the lower skin of the horizontal stabilizer that is not addressed in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-55-1059, Revision 1, dated April 6, 2016 (“SASB 737-55-1059 R1”). ANA explained that some structural repair manual repairs and external doublers are not applicable to the inspection area specified in SASB 737-55-1059 R1.

We agree with ANA's request. Specifying the location of the applicable repairs may reduce potential confusion. Therefore, we have revised paragraphs (h)(1), (h)(2), and (h)(3) of this AD to specify the location of the applicable repairs.

Request To Clarify Fastener Requirements

ANA requested that we clarify the fastener requirements. ANA stated that figure 3 in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-55-1059, dated September 10, 1998, specifies to use blind rivets and Hi-lok fasteners; however, compliance table 2, note (b), in SASB 737-55-1059 R1, states that doublers installed with solid rivets do not need to be inspected for any loose or missing fasteners. ANA explained that Boeing told ANA that Hi-lok fasteners do not require inspection for any loose or missing fasteners.

We agree to clarify the fastener requirements. We infer that ANA is requesting that we update paragraph (h) of this AD to specify that Hi-lok fasteners do not require inspection. We have determined that Hi-lok fasteners do not require inspection. Therefore, we have added paragraph (i)(3) to this AD to specify that where SASB 737-55-1059 R1 specifies that doublers installed with solid rivets do not need to be inspected for loose or missing fasteners, this AD does not require doublers installed with solid rivets or Hi-lok fasteners to be inspected for loose or missing fasteners. We have also revised paragraph (h)(1) of this AD to reference this exception.

Request To Revise Configuration Description

ANA requested that we revise paragraph (h) of the proposed AD to refer to the horizontal stabilizer configuration with the applicable repair installed side only. ANA asserted that the wording of paragraph (h) of the proposed AD could be interpreted to require inspection of both the repaired and unrepaired sides of the horizontal stabilizer.

We agree with ANA's request. The wording in the proposed AD is not clear regarding what is required if an airplane has left and right stabilizers that are different configurations. For example, the left-side stabilizer may have a repair installed common to the rear spar lower chord (configuration 2), whereas the right side may not have a repair (configuration 1). We have revised the affected airplanes in paragraph (g) of this AD from “Group 1, Configuration 1, airplanes” to “any Configuration 1 horizontal stabilizer on Group 1 airplanes”. We have revised the affected products in paragraph (h) of this AD from “Group 1, Configuration 2, airplanes” to “any Configuration 2 horizontal stabilizer on Group 1 airplanes.”

Effect of Winglets on Accomplishment of the Proposed Actions

Aviation Partners Boeing stated that accomplishing the Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) ST01219SE does not affect the actions specified in the NPRM.

We concur with the commenter. We have redesignated paragraph (c) of the proposed AD as paragraph (c)(1) of this AD and added paragraph (c)(2) to this AD to state that installation of STC ST01219SE does not affect the ability to accomplish the actions required by this final rule. Therefore, for airplanes on which STC ST01219SE is installed, a “change in product” AMOC approval request is not necessary to comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 39.17.

Conclusion

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

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

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

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

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

We reviewed SASB 737-55-1059 R1. The service information describes procedures for doing inspections of the horizontal stabilizer lower skin, and repairs. The service information also describes procedures for doing actions that would terminate certain repetitive inspections. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this AD affects 270 airplanes of U.S. registry.

We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

Estimated Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Cost on U.S. operators Inspection 4 work-hours × $85 per hour = $340 per inspection cycle $0 $340 per inspection cycle $91,800 per inspection cycle. Estimated Costs for Optional Actions Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Modification Up to 51 work-hours per stabilizer × $85 per hour = $4,335 $721 Up to $5,056 per stabilizer.

We estimate the following costs to do any necessary repairs that will be required based on the results of the inspection. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these repairs:

On-Condition Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Skin splice repair Up to 438 work-hours × $85 per hour = $37,230 $0 Up to $37,230. External doubler repair 26 work-hours × $85 per hour = $2,210 0 $2,210. Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

Regulatory Findings

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

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

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

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

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

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

§ 39.13 [Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): 2017-06-14 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-18838; Docket No. FAA-2016-9068; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-067-AD. (a) Effective Date

This AD is effective May 2, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

None.

(c) Applicability

(1) This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 737-300, -400, and -500 series airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-55-1059, Revision 1, dated April 6, 2016 (“SASB 737-55-1059 R1”).

(2) Installation of Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) ST01219SE (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgstc.nsf/0/ebd1cec7b301293e86257cb30045557a/$FILE/ST01219SE.pdf) does not affect the ability to accomplish the actions required by this AD. Therefore, for airplanes on which STC ST01219SE is installed, a “change in product” alternative method of compliance (AMOC) approval request is not necessary to comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 39.17.

(d) Subject

Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 55; Horizontal stabilizer.

(e) Unsafe Condition

This AD was prompted by reports of cracks in horizontal stabilizer lower skins. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracks in horizontal stabilizer lower skins, resulting in reduced local stiffness of the stabilizer, which can cause heavy vibration leading to loss of structural integrity of the horizontal stabilizer.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Inspections, Related Investigative Actions, and Corrective Actions for Configuration 1 Horizontal Stabilizers on Group 1 Airplanes

For any Configuration 1 horizontal stabilizer on Group 1 airplanes, as identified in SASB 737-55-1059 R1: Except as specified in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD, at the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of SASB 737-55-1059 R1, do a detailed inspection for cracking of the horizontal stabilizer lower skin; and do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions; in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of SASB 737-55-1059 R1, except as specified in paragraph (i)(2) of this AD. Do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions before further flight. Repeat the inspection of the horizontal stabilizer lower skin, if applicable, thereafter at the applicable intervals specified in paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of SASB 737-55-1059 R1. Options specified in SASB 737-55-1059 R1 for accomplishing the inspections are acceptable for the corresponding requirements of this paragraph provided that the inspections are done at the applicable times in paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of the SASB 737-55-1059 R1.

(h) Inspections, Related Investigative Actions, and Corrective Actions for Configuration 2 Horizontal Stabilizers on Group 1 Airplanes

For any Configuration 2 horizontal stabilizer on Group 1 airplanes, as identified in SASB 737-55-1059 R1: Except as specified in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD, at the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of SASB 737-55-1059 R1, do the actions specified in paragraphs (h)(1), (h)(2), and (h)(3) of this AD; and do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions; in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of SASB 737-55-1059 R1, except as specified in paragraph (i)(2) of this AD. Do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions before further flight. Repeat the inspections specified in paragraphs (h)(1), (h)(2), and (h)(3) of this AD, if applicable, thereafter at the applicable intervals specified in paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of SASB 737-55-1059 R1. Options specified in SASB 737-55-1059 R1, for accomplishing the inspections are acceptable for the corresponding requirements of this paragraph provided that the inspections are done at the applicable times in paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of SASB 737-55-1059 R1.

(1) Do a high frequency eddy current inspection for cracking of the skin around any repair common to the rear spar lower chord between station (STA) 83.50 and STA 249.10 which was done as specified in the structural repair manual or any external doubler repair, and a detailed inspection for any loose or any missing fastener of repaired doublers, except as specified in paragraph (i)(3) of this AD.

(2) Do a detailed inspection for cracking of the inspar lower skin between STA 83.50 and STA 249.10, except in areas repaired common to the rear spar lower chord.

(3) Do a low frequency eddy current inspection for cracking of the forward fastener row of any external doubler repair common to the rear spar lower chord between STA 83.50 and STA 249.10.

(i) Service Information Exceptions

(1) Where SASB 737-55-1059 R1 specifies a compliance time “after the Revision 1 date of this service bulletin,” this AD requires compliance within the specified compliance time after the effective date of this AD.

(2) If any cracking, corrosion, hole elongation, or loose or missing fastener is found during any inspection required by this AD, and SASB 737-55-1059 R1 specifies to contact Boeing for repair instructions: Before further flight, repair the cracking, corrosion, hole elongation, loose or missing fasteners using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (j) of this AD.

(3) Where SASB 737-55-1059 R1 specifies that doublers installed with solid rivets do not need to be inspected for loose or missing fasteners, this AD does not require doublers installed with solid rivets or Hi-lok fasteners to be inspected for loose or missing fasteners.

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

(1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (k) of this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected]

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

(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO, to make those findings. To be approved, the repair method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.

(k) Related Information

For more information about this AD, contact George Garrido, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles ACO, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-5232; fax: 562-627-5210; email: [email protected]

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.

(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.

(i) Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-55-1059, Revision 1, dated April 6, 2016.

(ii) Reserved.

(3) For Boeing service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600; telephone 562-797-1717; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.

(4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

(5) You may view this service information that is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 16, 2017. Dionne Palermo, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-05768 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2016-3705; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-168-AD; Amendment 39-18837; AD 2017-06-13] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Textron Aviation Inc. (Type Certificate Previously Held by Cessna Aircraft Company) Airplanes AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Textron Aviation Inc. (Textron) Model 680 airplanes. This AD was prompted by Textron's report of a manufacturing defect that affects the durability of the aft canted bulkhead metallic structure. This AD requires repetitive inspections of the aft canted bulkhead; repair if necessary; and a modification, which would terminate the repetitive inspections. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES:

This AD is effective May 2, 2017.

The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of May 2, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

For service information identified in this final rule, contact Textron Aviation Inc., P.O. Box 7706, Wichita, KS 67277; telephone 316-517-6215; fax 316-517-5802; email [email protected]; Internet https://support.cessna.com/custsupt/csupport/newlogin.jsp. You may review this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-3705.

Examining the AD Docket

You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-3705; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Phuoc Le, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ACE-118W, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, 1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Dwight D. Eisenhower Airport, Wichita, KS 67209; phone: 316-946-4195; fax: 316-946-4107; email: [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Textron Aviation Inc. Model 680 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on February 26, 2016 (81 FR 9790) (“the NPRM”). The NPRM was prompted by Textron's report of a manufacturing defect that affects the durability of the aft canted bulkhead metallic structure. The manufacturing defect directly affects the bond integrity of the vertical and horizontal stiffeners on the aft canted bulkhead metallic structure. The NPRM proposed to require repetitive inspections of the aft canted bulkhead and repair if necessary. The NPRM also proposed to require a modification which would terminate the repetitive inspections. We are issuing this AD to prevent disbonding of the horizontal and vertical stiffeners on the aft canted bulkhead. Loss of bond integrity could result in a structural failure that could lead to separation of the cruciform tail and loss of control of the airplane.

Comments

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

Request To Limit Findings to “Disbonding”

NetJets Aviation, Inc. (NetJets) requested that we revise paragraph (h) of the proposed AD to remove “cracked paint” as a possible finding from the inspection. NetJets acknowledged that cracked paint, while not a safety concern on its own, should be investigated to ensure that it is not evidence of disbonding. NetJets indicated that the requirement for a disbond to be repaired per an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) is sufficient to ensure that the safety concern is addressed appropriately.

We agree with the commenter that cracked paint may not be a safety concern on its own; however it is evidence that a disbond of the structure may have occurred and should be investigated further to ensure there is no evidence of disbonding. Thus, if cracked paint is found, operators must contact the FAA for procedures to determine whether the cracked paint was an indication of disbonding. We have revised paragraph (h) of this AD to clarify that operators must obtain instructions from the FAA and comply with those instructions.

Request To Have Cessna Engineering Drawing Be Made Available

NetJets indicated that paragraph (n)(2) of the proposed AD states that the required service information is available from Textron. However, Netjets stated that Textron does not provide owners/operators with access to Cessna Engineering Drawing 6991115 (“Drawing 6991115”), which is required for compliance with paragraph (i) of the proposed AD. NetJets added that the required service information is not available at the Federal Register and is not available to owners/operators through the source identified in the proposed AD. NetJets indicated that Cessna Service Bulletin SB680-53-08, dated September 28, 2015, states that only Textron-owned service centers can complete the modification and have access to Drawing 6991115. NetJets stated that access to Drawing 6991115 should be made available to owners/operators, and the proposed AD should state that compliance at a Textron-owned service center is not required by the AD.

We acknowledge that Drawing 6991115 is not available to owners/operators. However, drawing 6991115 is only used for an airplane that is modified at a Textron-owned service center. Cessna Service Bulletin SB680-53-08, Revision 2, dated November 2, 2016 (“SB680-53-08, Revision 2”) (issued after the NPRM was published), includes a reference to Cessna Engineering Drawing 6991119 (“Drawing 6991119”), which should be available to owners/operators and contains approved data for owners/operators who choose to modify their airplanes at a non-Textron-owned service center. We have revised paragraph (i) of this AD to refer to SB680-53-08, Revision 2.

Request To Include the Revision Level for Cessna Engineering Drawing

NetJets requested that the revision level for Drawing 6991115 be added to paragraph (i) of the proposed AD, and that paragraph (i) of the proposed AD allow later revisions to Drawing 6991115. Paragraph (i) of the proposed AD would require compliance with Cessna Service Bulletin SB680-53-08, dated September 28, 2015, which contains a reference to the modification instructions contained in Drawing 6991115. Because neither Cessna Service Bulletin SB680-53-08, dated September 28, 2015, nor paragraph (i) of the proposed AD specifies the revision level of Drawing 6991115 that would be required for compliance with the proposed AD, NetJets asserted that it is not possible for an owner/operator to comply with its responsibility to ensure that FAA approval was obtained.

We partially agree that there is a need to specify acceptable revision levels of Drawing 6991115. However, with the release of SB680-53-08, Revision 2, Drawing 6991115 is no longer applicable for the owners/operators who elect to accomplish SB680-53-08, Revision 2, at a non-Textron facility. Instead, the revision levels of Drawing 6991119 are now applicable for the owners/operators who will accomplish SB680-53-08, Revision 2, at a non-Textron facility. Although SB680-53-08, Revision 2, specifies using the latest revision of Drawing 6991119, this AD allows use of any revision level of that drawing. We have added paragraph (k) to this AD to specify this provision; subsequent paragraphs have been redesignated accordingly. We have reviewed all existing revisions of Drawing 6991119, and have found all to be acceptable. In addition, paragraph (i) of this AD has been revised to specify compliance with SB680-53-08, Revision 2.

Conclusion

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

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

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

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

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

We reviewed the following Cessna service information.

• Cessna Service Letter SL680-53-05, Revision 2, dated September 30, 2015. The service information describes procedures for a general visual inspection for disbonding and paint cracking around the edges of the stiffeners on the aft canted bulkhead.

• Cessna Service Bulletin SB680-53-08, Revision 2, dated November 2, 2016. The service information describes procedures for modifying the airplane by installing additional stiffeners to the aft canted bulkhead.

This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this AD affects 123 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

Estimated Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Cost on U.S. operators Inspection 1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 per inspection cycle $0 $85 per inspection cycle $10,455 per inspection cycle. Modification 180 work-hours × $85 per hour = $15,300 3,190 18,490 2,274,270.

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

According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost estimate.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

Regulatory Findings

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

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

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

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

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

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

§ 39.13 [Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): 2017-06-13 Textron Aviation Inc. (Type Certificate Previously Held by Cessna Aircraft Company): Amendment 39-18837; Docket No. FAA-2016-3705; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-168-AD. (a) Effective Date

This AD is effective May 2, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

None.

(c) Applicability

This AD applies to Textron Aviation Inc. (Type Certificate previously held by Cessna Aircraft Company) Model 680 airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD.

(1) Model 680 Sovereign airplanes (commonly known as Citation Sovereign airplanes), having serial numbers: 680-0001, -0002, -0006, -0025, -0030, -0031, -0032, -0046, -0051, -0057, -0064, -0066, -0067, -0082, -0104, -0108, -0112, -0118, -0120, -0125, -0132, -0139, -0140, -0141, -0144, -0147, -0148, -0149, -0153, -0157, -0160, -0162, -0163, -0164, -0166, -0167, -0169, -0170, -0171, -0173, -0174, -0175, -0176, -0177, -0178, -0179, -0180, -0182, -0183, -0185, -0186, -0192, -0193, -0196, -0200, -0202, -0204, -0205, -0206, -0208, -0211, -0216, -0220, -0221, -0222, -0227, -0229, -0230, -0231, -0234, -0235, -0236, -0238, -0241, -0242, -0243, -0245, -0246, -0249, -0252, -0253, -0255, -0256, -0257, -0258, -0260, -0262, -0268, -0270, -0271, -0280, -0282, -0283, -0284, -0285, -0289, -0291, -0292, -0296, -0297, -0300, -0301, -0302, -0303, -0304, -0306, -0307, -0313, -0315, -0317, -0318, -0322, -0323, -0324, -0327, -0328, -0329, -0333, -0334, -0336, -0337, -0339, -0340, -0342, -0344, -0346, -0347, -0348, and -0349.

(2) Model 680 Sovereign airplanes (commonly known as Citation Sovereign+ airplanes) having serial numbers: 680-0501, -0504, -0505, -0509, -0510, -0511, -0512, -0513, -0514, -0515, -0516, -0517, -0519, -0520, -0522, -0524, -0525, -0526, -0527, and -0531.

(d) Subject

Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Unsafe Condition

This AD was prompted by Textron's report of a manufacturing defect which affects the durability of the aft canted bulkhead metallic structure. The manufacturing defect directly affects the bond integrity of the vertical and horizontal stiffeners on the aft canted bulkhead metallic structure. We are issuing this AD to prevent disbonding of the horizontal and vertical stiffeners on the aft canted bulkhead. Loss of bond integrity could result in a structural failure that may lead to separation of the cruciform tail and loss of control of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Repetitive Inspections

Before the accumulation of 7,000 total flight hours, or within 100 flight hours after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, perform a general visual inspection for disbonding and paint cracking around the edges of the stiffeners on the aft canted bulkhead, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Cessna Service Letter SL680-53-05, Revision 2, dated September 30, 2015. Repeat the general visual inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 100 flight hours, until the modification required by paragraph (i) of this AD is accomplished.

(h) Repair

If, during any inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD, any disbonding or cracked paint is found, before further flight, obtain instructions approved by the Manager, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), ACE-118W, FAA, and, within the compliance time specified in those instructions, accomplish the instructions accordingly.

(i) Modification

At the applicable compliance time specified in paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD, modify the airplane by installing additional stiffeners on the aft canted bulkhead, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Cessna Service Bulletin SB680-53-08, Revision 2, dated November 2, 2016, except as provided by paragraphs (k) and (l) of this AD. Doing this modification terminates the repetitive inspections required by paragraph (g) of this AD.

(1) For airplanes that have accumulated 7,000 or more total flight hours as of the effective date of this AD: Within 1,800 flight hours or 24 months, whichever occurs first, after the effective date of this AD.

(2) For airplanes that have accumulated less than 7,000 total flight hours as of the effective date of this AD: Within 3,600 flight hours or 48 months, whichever occurs first, after the effective date of this AD.

(j) Credit for Previous Actions

(1) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Cessna Service Letter SL680-53-05, dated December 22, 2014; or Cessna Service Letter SL680-53-05, Revision 1, dated March 12, 2015.

(2) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraph (i) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Cessna Service Bulletin SB680-53-08, dated September 28, 2015.

(k) Exceptions to Service Information Specifications

Although Cessna Service Bulletin SB680-53-08, Revision 2, dated November 2, 2016, specifies using the latest revision of Drawing 6991119, this AD allows using any revision level of that drawing.

(l) Provisions Regarding Reporting

Although Cessna Service Bulletin SB680-53-08, Revision 2, dated November 2, 2016; and Cessna Service Letter SL680-53-05, Revision 2, dated September 30, 2015; specify to submit certain information to the manufacturer, this AD does not include that requirement.

(m) Special Flight Permit

Special flight permits, as described in Section 21.197 and Section 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199), are not allowed.

(n) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

(1) The Manager, Wichita ACO, ACE-118W, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (o)(1) of this AD.

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

(o) Related Information

(1) For more information about this AD, contact Phuoc Le, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ACE-118W, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, 1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Dwight D. Eisenhower Airport, Wichita, KS 67209; phone: 316-946-4195; fax: 316-946-4107; email: [email protected]

(2) Service information identified in this AD that is not incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in paragraphs (p)(3) and (p)(4) of this AD.

(p) Material Incorporated by Reference

(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.

(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.

(i) Cessna Service Letter SL680-53-05, Revision 2, dated September 30, 2015.

(ii) Cessna Service Bulletin SB680-53-08, Revision 2, dated November 2, 2016.

(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Textron Aviation Inc., P.O. Box 7706, Wichita, KS 67277; telephone 316-517-6215; fax 316-517-5802; email [email protected]; Internet https://support.cessna.com/custsupt/csupport/newlogin.jsp.

(4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

(5) You may view this service information that is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 16, 2017. Dionne Palermo, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-05771 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG-2017-0070] RIN 1625-AA09 Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Elizabeth River, Elizabeth, NJ AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard is removing the existing drawbridge operation regulations for five bridges across the Elizabeth River. These bridges were either removed in their entirety or replaced with a fixed bridge, making the operating regulations no longer necessary.

DATES:

This rule is effective March 28, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2017-0070 in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

If you have questions on this rule, call or email Mr. Jeffrey Stieb, Project Officer, First Coast Guard District Bridge Program, telephone 617-223-8364, email [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Table of Abbreviations CFR Code of Federal Regulations FR Federal Register NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking § Section U.S.C. United States Code II. Background Information and Regulatory History

The Coast Guard is issuing this final rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing an NPRM with respect to this rule because the New Jersey Transit Rail Operations railroad bridge, mile 0.7, the Baltic Street bridge, mile 0.9, the Summer Street bridge, mile 1.3, the South Street bridge, mile 1.8, and the Bridge Street bridge, mile 2.1 at the Elizabeth River that once required draw operations in 33 CFR 117.718(b), have been removed in their entirety or converted to a fixed bridge. Therefore, the regulation is no longer necessary or applicable and shall be removed from publication. It is unnecessary to publish an NPRM because this regulatory action does not purport to place any restrictions on mariners but rather removes restrictions that have no further use or value.

Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective in less than 30 days after publication in the FR. This rule merely requires an administrative change to the CFR in order to omit a regulatory requirement that is no longer applicable or necessary. The modifications have already taken place and the removal of the regulation will not affect mariners currently operating on this waterway. Therefore, a delayed effective date is unnecessary.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

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

The New Jersey Transit Rail Operations railroad bridge, mile 0.7, the Baltic Street bridge, mile 0.9, the Summer Street bridge, mile 1.3, the South Street bridge, mile 1.8, and the Bridge Street bridge, mile 2.1, at the Elizabeth River that once required draw operations in 33 CFR 117.718(b) were removed in their entirety or converted to fixed bridges over thirty years ago. It has come to the attention of the Coast Guard that the governing regulation for these drawbridges was never removed subsequent to the removal of the drawbridge or conversion to a fixed bridge. The elimination of these drawbridges necessitates the removal of the drawbridge operation regulation in 33 CFR 117.718(b) that pertains to these former drawbridges.

The purpose of this rule is to remove 33 CFR 117.718(b), which refers to these bridges, from the CFR since the bridges are no longer able to be opened.

IV. Discussion of Final Rule

The Coast Guard is changing the regulation in 33 CFR 117.718 by removing restrictions related to the draw operations for bridges that are no longer drawbridges. The change removes paragraph (b) of the regulation governing these bridges. This change does not affect nor does it alter the operating schedule that is currently designated paragraph (a), which governs the remaining drawbridge on the Elizabeth River.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.

This regulatory action determination is based on the fact that these bridges either no longer exist or no longer operate as a drawbridge. The removal of the operating schedule from 33 CFR part 117, subpart B, will have no effect on the movement of waterway or land traffic.

B. Impact on Small Entities

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

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

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

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

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Government

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

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

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

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

Under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction, an environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion determination are not required for this rule.

G. Protest Activities

The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the “For Further Information Contact” section to coordinate protest activities so that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or security of people, places or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

Bridges.

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

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

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

§ 117.718 [Amended]
2. In § 117.718, remove paragraph (b) and redesignate paragraph (a) as an undesignated paragraph. Dated: March 10, 2017. S.D. Poulin, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2017-06109 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG-2009-0559] Safety Zone; San Francisco Giants Fireworks Display, San Francisco Bay, San Francisco, CA AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Notice of enforcement of regulation.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard will enforce the safety zone for the annual San Francisco Giants Fireworks Display in the Captain of the Port, San Francisco area of responsibility during the dates and times noted below. This action is necessary to protect life and property of the maritime public from the hazards associated with the fireworks display. During the enforcement period, unauthorized persons or vessels are prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or anchoring in the safety zone, unless authorized by the Patrol Commander (PATCOM).

DATES:

The regulations in 33 CFR 165.1191, Table 1, Item number 1, will be enforced from 11 a.m. on April 14, 2017 to 1 a.m. on April 15, 2017, or as announced via Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Coast Guard will enforce a 100 foot safety zone around the fireworks barge during the loading, transit, and arrival of the fireworks barge from the loading location to the display location and until the start of the fireworks display. From 11 a.m. on April 14, 2017 until 5 p.m. on April 14, 2017, the fireworks barge will be loading pyrotechnics from Pier 50 in San Francisco, CA. The fireworks barge will remain at the loading location until its transit to the display location. From 8:30 p.m. to 9 p.m. on April 14, 2017, the loaded fireworks barge will transit from Pier 50 to the launch site near Pier 48 in approximate position 37°46′36″ N., 122°22′56″ W. (NAD 83) where it will remain until the conclusion of the fireworks display. Upon the commencement of the 15 minute fireworks display, scheduled to begin at the conclusion of the baseball game, at approximately 10 p.m. on April 14, 2017, the safety zone will increase in size and encompass the navigable waters around and under the fireworks barge within a radius 700 feet near Pier 48 in approximate position 37°46′36″ N., 122°22′56″ W. (NAD 83) for the San Francisco Giants Fireworks in 33 CFR 165.1191, Table 1, Item number 1. This safety zone will be in effect from 11 a.m. on April 14, 2017 until 1 a.m. on April 15, 2017, or as announced via Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

Under the provisions of 33 CFR 165.1191, unauthorized persons or vessels are prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or anchoring in the safety zone during all applicable effective dates and times, unless authorized to do so by the PATCOM. Additionally, each person who receives notice of a lawful order or direction issued by an official patrol vessel shall obey the order or direction. The PATCOM is empowered to forbid entry into and control the regulated area. The PATCOM shall be designated by the Commander, Coast Guard Sector San Francisco. The PATCOM may, upon request, allow the transit of commercial vessels through regulated areas when it is safe to do so.

This notice is issued under authority of 33 CFR 165.1191 and 5 U.S.C. 552(a). In addition to this notice in the Federal Register, the Coast Guard will provide the maritime community with extensive advance notification of the safety zone and its enforcement period via the Local Notice to Mariners.

If the Captain of the Port determines that the regulated area need not be enforced for the full duration stated in this notice, a Broadcast Notice to Mariners may be used to grant general permission to enter the regulated area.

Dated: March 9, 2017. Anthony J. Ceraolo, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port of San Francisco.
[FR Doc. 2017-06087 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG-2009-0559] Safety Zone; City of Eureka Fourth of July Fireworks Display, Humboldt Bay, Eureka, CA AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Notice of enforcement of regulation.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard will enforce the safety zone for the annual City of Eureka Fourth of July Fireworks Display in the Captain of the Port, San Francisco area of responsibility during the dates and times noted below. This action is necessary to protect life and property of the maritime public from the hazards associated with the fireworks display. During the enforcement period, unauthorized persons or vessels are prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or anchoring in the safety zone, unless authorized by the Patrol Commander (PATCOM).

DATES:

The regulations in 33 CFR 165.1191, Table 1, Item number 3, will be enforced from 10 a.m. on July 4, 2017 to 11 p.m. on July 4, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

If you have questions on this notice, call or email Lieutenant Junior Grade Christina Ramirez, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Francisco; telephone (415) 399-3585 or email at [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Coast Guard will enforce a 100 foot safety zone around the fireworks barge during the loading, transit, and arrival of the fireworks barge from the loading location to the display location and until the start of the fireworks display. From 10 a.m. on July 4, 2017 until 11 a.m. on July 4, 2017, the fireworks barge will be loading pyrotechnics from Schneider Dock in Eureka, CA. The fireworks barge will remain at the loading location until its transit to the display location. From 3 p.m. to 4 p.m. on July 4, 2017, the loaded fireworks barge will transit from Schneider Dock to the launch site near Woodley Island in approximate position 40°48′29″ N., 124°10′06″ W. (NAD 83) where it will remain until the conclusion of the fireworks display. Upon the commencement of the 45 minute fireworks display, scheduled to begin at 10 p.m. on July 4, 2017, the safety zone will increase in size and encompass the navigable waters around and under the fireworks barge within a radius 1,000 feet near Woodley Island in approximate position 40°48′29″ N., 124°10′06″ W. (NAD 83) for the Fourth of July Fireworks, City of Eureka in 33 CFR 165.1191, Table 1, Item number 3. This safety zone will be in effect from 10 a.m. on July 4, 2017 until 11 p.m. on July 4, 2017.

Under the provisions of 33 CFR 165.1191, unauthorized persons or vessels are prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or anchoring in the safety zone during all applicable effective dates and times, unless authorized to do so by the PATCOM. Additionally, each person who receives notice of a lawful order or direction issued by an official patrol vessel shall obey the order or direction. The PATCOM is empowered to forbid entry into and control the regulated area. The PATCOM shall be designated by the Commander, Coast Guard Sector San Francisco. The PATCOM may, upon request, allow the transit of commercial vessels through regulated areas when it is safe to do so.

This notice is issued under authority of 33 CFR 165.1191 and 5 U.S.C. 552(a). In addition to this notice in the Federal Register, the Coast Guard will provide the maritime community with extensive advance notification of the safety zone and its enforcement period via the Local Notice to Mariners.

If the Captain of the Port determines that the regulated area need not be enforced for the full duration stated in this notice, a Broadcast Notice to Mariners may be used to grant general permission to enter the regulated area.

Dated: March 14, 2017. Anthony J. Ceraolo, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port of San Francisco.
[FR Doc. 2017-06091 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2017-0220] RIN 1625-AA87 Security Zone; VIP Visits, Palm Beach, FL AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Temporary final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary security zone in the vicinity of the Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida during the visit of a high-level government official. The security zone is necessary to protect the official party, the public, and the surrounding waterway from terrorist acts, sabotage or other subversive acts, accidents, or other causes of a similar nature. Entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within this security zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Miami or a designated representative.

DATES:

This rule is effective without actual notice from March 28, 2017 through May 29, 2017. For purposes of enforcement, actual notice will be used from March 17, 2017 through March 28, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2017-0220 in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

If you have questions on this rule, call or email Petty Officer Mara Brown, Sector Miami Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 305-535-4317, email [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule because specific information regarding the need for the regulation was not received in time to publish a NPRM before the regulation's effective date. Delay in promulgating this rule would be impracticable and contrary to public interest because a security zone is required with short notice to protect the elected government official and the official's party in the vicinity of this waterway. The official's presence creates unique safety and security concerns.

Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register for the same reasons discussed above.

We note that the Coast Guard is in the process of publishing an NPRM proposing to establish a permanent security zone for these events. While that rulemaking action will not affect the events occurring through May 29, 2017, it would establish a security zone for future similar events.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231. The Captain of the Port Miami (COTP) has determined that the official's visit presents a potential target for terrorist acts, sabotage, or other subversive acts, accidents, or other causes of a similar nature. Given the close proximity of the waterways to the official's visit site, this security zone is necessary to protect the official party, the public, and the surrounding waterways adjacent to the Mar-a-Lago Resort in Palm Beach, Florida.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

This rule establishes a security zone from March 17, 2017 through May 29, 2017. The rule will be enforced every Friday through Monday on a recurring weekly basis from March 17, 2017 through May 29, 2017 during the visit of a high-level government official. This rule will be enforced with actual notice while the high-level government official is visiting. This rule establishes a temporary security zone, which encompasses certain waters of the Intracoastal Waterway and the Atlantic Ocean in the vicinity of the Southern Boulevard Bridge in Palm Beach, Florida. The security zone will be broken into three zones. The first zone will consist of waters of the Lake Worth Lagoon from the southern tip of the Everglades Island to approximately 1000 yards south of the Southern Boulevard Bridge, and the eastern shore line out to Fisherman Island. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain in the first zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative.

The second zone will consist of waters of the Lake Worth Lagoon including the Intracoastal Waterway from the southern tip of the Everglades Island to approximately 1000 yards south of the Southern Boulevard Bridge, and from the western shore line to the western edge of the Fisherman Island. All vessels transiting the second zone shall maintain a steady speed and shall not slow or stop in the zone.

The third zone will consist of waters of the Atlantic Ocean from the Banyan Road south to Ocean View Road, and from shore to approximately 1000 yards east of the shoreline. All vessels transiting the third zone shall maintain a steady speed and shall not slow or stop in the zone.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.

This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, duration, and time-of-year of the security zone. Vessel traffic will be able to safely transit around this security zone, which will impact a small designated area of the Intracoastal Waterway and the Atlantic Ocean in Palm Beach, FL for no more than five days at a time from March 17, 2017 to May 29, 2017 and in an area where traffic is low. Moreover, the Coast Guard will issue Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

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

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

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

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

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

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

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

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a security zone lasting only a few days at a time that will prohibit entry within certain waters of the Intracoastal Waterway and Atlantic Ocean in Palm Beach, Florida. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.

G. Protest Activities

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

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

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

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

2. Add a temporary § 165.T07-0220 to read as follows:
§ 165.T07-0220 Security Zone; VIP Visits, Palm Beach, Florida.

(a) Location. The following areas are security zones:

(1) Zone 1. The navigable waters within the following points are a regulated area: Beginning at Point 1 in position 26°41′21″ N., 80°2′39″ W.; thence east to Point 2 in position 26°41′21″ N., 80°2′13″ W.; thence south following the shoreline to Point 3 in position 26°39′58″ N., 80°2′20″ W.; thence west to Point 4 in position 26°39′58″ N., 80°2′38″ W., thence back to origin at Point 1.

(2) Zone 2. The navigable waters within the following points are a regulated area: Beginning at Point 1 in position 26°41′21″ N., 80°2′39″ W.; thence west to Point 2 in position 26°41′21″ N., 80°3′00″ W.; thence south following the shoreline to Point 3 in position 26°39′58″ N., 80°2′55″ W.; thence east to Point 4 in position 26°39′58″ N., 80°2′38″ W., thence back to origin at Point 1.

(3) Zone 3. The navigable waters within the following points are a regulated area: Beginning at Point 1 in position 26°41′21″ N., 80°2′01″ W.; thence south following the shoreline to Point 2 in position 26°39′57″ N., 80°2′01″ W.; thence east to Point 3 in position 26°39′58″ N., 80°1′02″ W.; thence north to Point 4 in position 26°41′20″ N., 80°1′02″ W., thence back to origin at Point 1.

(b) Regulations.

(1) Requirements for Zone 1. All persons and vessels are prohibited from entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the security zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Miami or a designated representative.

(2) Requirements for Zone 2. All persons and vessels are required to transit through the security zone at a steady speed and may not slow down or stop except in the case unforeseen mechanical or other emergency. Any persons or vessels forced to slow or stop in the zone shall immediately notify the Captain of the Port via VHF channel 16.

(3) Requirements for Zone 3. All persons and vessels are required to transit through the security zone at a steady speed and may not slow down or stop except in the case unforeseen mechanical or other emergency. Any persons or vessels forced to slow or stop in the zone shall immediately notify the Captain of the Port via VHF channel 16.

(4) Persons and vessels desiring to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the security zones described in paragraph (a) of this section may contact the Captain of the Port Miami by telephone at 305-535-4472, or a designated representative via VHF radio on channel 16 to request authorization. If authorization to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the security zones is granted by the Captain of the Port Miami or a designated representative, all persons and vessels receiving such authorization must comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port Miami or the designated representative.

(5) The Coast Guard will provide notice of the security zones by Broadcast Notice to Mariners and on-scene designated representatives.

(c) Definition. The term “designated representative” means Coast Guard Patrol Commanders, including Coast Guard coxswains, petty officers, and other officers operating Coast Guard vessels, and Federal, state, and local officers designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port Miami in the enforcement of the regulated area.

(d) Effective and enforcement dates. This rule is effective from March 17, 2017 through May 29, 2017. This rule will be enforced with actual notice on a recurring weekly basis from March 17, 2017 through May 29, 2017, while the high-level government official is visiting.

Dated: March 17, 2017. M.M. Dean, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Miami.
[FR Doc. 2017-06111 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG-2012-1036] Safety Zones, Recurring Marine Events in Captain of the Port Long Island Sound Zone AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Notice of enforcement of regulation.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard will enforce ten safety zones for fireworks displays in the Sector Long Island Sound area of responsibility on the date and time listed in the table below. This action is necessary to provide for the safety of life on navigable waterways during the events. During the enforcement periods, no person or vessel may enter the safety zones without permission of the Captain of the Port (COTP) Sector Long Island Sound or designated representative.

DATES:

The regulation in 33 CFR 165.151 Table 1 will be enforced during the dates and times listed in the table in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

If you have questions on this notice, call or email Petty Officer Katherine Linnick, Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Long Island Sound; telephone 203-468-4565, email [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Coast Guard will enforce the safety zones listed in 33 CFR 165.151 Table 1 on the specified dates and times indicated below.

Under the provisions of 33 CFR 165.151, the fireworks displays listed below are established as safety zones. During the enforcement period, persons and vessels are prohibited from entering into, transiting through, mooring, or anchoring within these safety zones unless they receive permission from the COTP or designated representative.

6.1 Barnum Festival Fireworks • Date: June 24, 2017.
  • • Rain Date: June 25, 2017.
  • • Time: 8:30 p.m. to 10:30 p.m.
  • • Location: Waters of Bridgeport Harbor, Bridgeport, CT in approximate position 41°9′04″ N., 073°12′49″ W. (NAD 83).
  • 6.3 Vietnam Veterans/Town of East Haven Fireworks • Date: June 24, 2017.
  • • Rain Date: June 26, 2017.
  • • Time: 9:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m.
  • • Location: Waters off Cosey Beach, East Haven, CT in approximate position 41°14′19″ N., 072°52′9.8″ W. (NAD 83).
  • 7.4 Norwalk Fireworks • Date: July 3, 2017.
  • • Rain Date: July 5, 2017.
  • • Time: 8:30 p.m. to 10:30 p.m.
  • • Location: Waters off Calf Pasture Beach, Norwalk, CT in approximate position 41°04′50″ N., 073°23′22″ W. (NAD 83).
  • 7.5 Lawrence Beach Club Fireworks • Date: July 1, 2017.
  • • Rain Date: July 2, 2017.
  • • Time: 9:00 p.m. to 10:30 p.m.
  • • Waters of the Atlantic Ocean off Lawrence Beach Club, Atlantic Beach, NY in approximate position 40°34′42.65″ N., 073°42′56.02″ W. (NAD 83).
  • 7.7 South Hampton Fresh Air Home Fireworks • Date: June 30, 2017.
  • • Rain Date: July 2, 2017.
  • • Time: 8:30 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. • Waters of Shinnecock Bay, South Hampton, NY in approximate position 40°51′48″ N., 072°26′30″ W. (NAD 83). 7.7 Westport Police Athletic League Fireworks • Date: July 3, 2017.
  • • Rain Date: July 5, 2017.
  • • Time: 8:45 p.m. to 10:15 p.m.
  • • Waters off Campo Beach, Westport, CT in approximate position 41°06′15″ N., 073°20′57″ W. (NAD 83).
  • 7.27 City of Long Beach Fireworks • Date: July 7, 2017.
  • • Rain Date: July 8, 2017.
  • • Time: 8:30 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.
  • • Location: Waters off Riverside Blvd., City of Long Beach, NY in approximate position 40°34′38.77″ N., 073°39′41.32″ W. (NAD 83).
  • 7.30 Shelter Islands Fireworks • Date: July 8, 2017.
  • • Rain Date: July 9, 2017.
  • • Time: 9:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m.
  • • Location: Waters of Gardiner Bay, Shelter Island, NY in approximate position 41°04′39.11″ N., 072°22′01.07″ W. (NAD 83).
  • 7.34 Devon Yacht Club Fireworks • Date: July 1, 2017.
  • • Rain Date: July 2, 2017.
  • • Time: 8:45 p.m. to 10:45 p.m.
  • • Location: Waters of Napeague Bay, in Block Island Sound off Amagansett, NY in approximate position 40°59′41.40″ N., 072°06′08.70″ W. (NAD 83).
  • 9.4 The Creek Fireworks • Date: September 02, 2016.
  • • Rain Date: September 03, 2016.
  • • Time: 7:45 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
  • • Location: Waters of Long Island Sound off the Creek Golf Course, Lattingtown, NY in approximate position 40°54′13″ N., 073°35′58″ W. (NAD 83).
  • This rule is issued under authority of 33 CFR 165 and 5 U.S.C. 552(a). In addition to this document in the Federal Register, the Coast Guard will provide the maritime community with advance notification of this enforcement period via the Local Notice to Mariners or marine information broadcasts. If the COTP determines that these safety zones need not be enforced for the full duration stated in this notice, a Broadcast Notice to Mariners may be used to grant general permission to enter the regulated area.

    Dated: March 13, 2017. A.E. Tucci, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector Long Island Sound.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06093 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG-2009-0559] Safety Zone; San Francisco Giants Fireworks Display, San Francisco Bay, San Francisco, CA AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of enforcement of regulation.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard will enforce the safety zone for the annual San Francisco Giants Fireworks Display in the Captain of the Port, San Francisco area of responsibility during the dates and times noted below. This action is necessary to protect life and property of the maritime public from the hazards associated with the fireworks display. During the enforcement period, unauthorized persons or vessels are prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or anchoring in the safety zone, unless authorized by the Patrol Commander (PATCOM).

    DATES:

    The regulations in 33 CFR 165.1191, Table 1, Item number 1, will be enforced from 11 a.m. on May 26, 2017 to 1 a.m. on May 27, 2017, or as announced via Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this notice, call or email Lieutenant Junior Grade Christina Ramirez, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Francisco; telephone (415) 399-3585 or email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Coast Guard will enforce a 100 foot safety zone around the fireworks barge during the loading, transit, and arrival of the fireworks barge from the loading location to the display location and until the start of the fireworks display. From 11 a.m. on May 26, 2017 until 5 p.m. on May 26, 2017, the fireworks barge will be loading pyrotechnics from Pier 50 in San Francisco, CA. The fireworks barge will remain at the loading location until its transit to the display location. From 8:30 p.m. to 9 p.m. on May 26, 2017, the loaded fireworks barge will transit from Pier 50 to the launch site near Pier 48 in approximate position 37°46′36″ N., 122°22′56″ W. (NAD 83) where it will remain until the conclusion of the fireworks display. Upon the commencement of the 15 minute fireworks display, scheduled to begin at the conclusion of the baseball game, at approximately 10 p.m. on May 26, 2017, the safety zone will increase in size and encompass the navigable waters around and under the fireworks barge within a radius 700 feet near Pier 48 in approximate position 37°46′36″ N., 122°22′56″ W. (NAD 83) for the San Francisco Giants Fireworks in 33 CFR 165.1191, Table 1, Item number 1. This safety zone will be in effect from 11 a.m. on May 26, 2017 until 1 a.m. on May 27, 2017, or as announced via Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

    Under the provisions of 33 CFR 165.1191, unauthorized persons or vessels are prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or anchoring in the safety zone during all applicable effective dates and times, unless authorized to do so by the PATCOM. Additionally, each person who receives notice of a lawful order or direction issued by an official patrol vessel shall obey the order or direction. The PATCOM is empowered to forbid entry into and control the regulated area. The PATCOM shall be designated by the Commander, Coast Guard Sector San Francisco. The PATCOM may, upon request, allow the transit of commercial vessels through regulated areas when it is safe to do so.

    This notice is issued under authority of 33 CFR 165.1191 and 5 U.S.C. 552 (a). In addition to this notice in the Federal Register, the Coast Guard will provide the maritime community with extensive advance notification of the safety zone and its enforcement period via the Local Notice to Mariners. If the Captain of the Port determines that the regulated area need not be enforced for the full duration stated in this notice, a Broadcast Notice to Mariners may be used to grant general permission to enter the regulated area.

    Dated: March 9, 2017. Anthony J. Ceraolo, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port of San Francisco.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06082 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    LIBRARY OF CONGRESS Copyright Royalty Board 37 CFR Part 385 [Docket No. 16-CRB-0003-PR] Determination of Royalty Rates and Terms for Making and Distributing Phonorecords (Phonorecords III); Subpart A Configurations of the Mechanical License AGENCY:

    Copyright Royalty Board, Library of Congress.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Copyright Royalty Judges publish final regulations that set continued, unaltered rates and terms for subpart A configurations subject to the statutory license to use nondramatic musical works to make and distribute phonorecords of those works (the Mechanical License). In addition, the Judges correct an outdated cross-reference in the regulations.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: March 28, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Anita Blaine, Program Specialist, by telephone at (202) 707-7658 or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    The Copyright Royalty Judges (Judges) received a Motion to Adopt Settlement (Motion) from UMG Recordings, Inc. (UMG) 1 and Warner Music, Inc. (WMG),2 in their respective capacities as licensees of nondramatic musical works. The Motion sought approval of a partial settlement of the license rate proceeding before the Judges titled Determination of Royalty Rates and Terms for Making and Distributing Phonorecords (Phonorecords III), Docket No. 16-CRB-0003-PR. UMG and WMG reported that they reached the settlement with “a significant portion of the sound recording and music publishing industries” to continue unaltered the currently existing rates and terms in subpart A of 37 CFR part 385 for the “Mechanical License”, i.e., the statutory license for the use of nondramatic musical works in the making and distributing of phonorecords. See 17 U.S.C. 115.

    1 UMG Recordings, Inc. includes its successors and affiliates that engage in the production and distribution of recorded music, including Capitol Christian Music group, Inc., and Capitol Records, LLC.

    2 Warner Music, Inc. includes its successors and affiliates that engage in the production and distribution of recorded music.

    Section 801(b)(7)(A) of the Copyright Act authorizes the Judges to adopt rates and terms negotiated by “some or all of the participants in a proceeding at any time during the proceeding” provided the settling parties submit the negotiated rates and terms to the Judges for approval. That provision directs the Judges to provide those who would be bound by the negotiated rates and terms an opportunity to comment on the agreement.

    The Judges published the proposed settlement in the Federal Register and requested comments from the public.3 81 FR 48371 (July 25, 2016). The Judges received comments from three entities: American Association of Independent Music (A2IM), Sony Music Entertainment (SME), and George D. Johnson dba GEO Music (Mr. Johnson). A2IM urged adoption of the agreed settlement. SME did not oppose continuing the existing royalty rates, but opposed adoption of one portion of the proposed regulation, viz., the late fee provision. Mr. Johnson opposed adoption of the settlement.

    3 The notice of settlement included a proposed rule that purported to limit the license rates at issue to the time period 2018 to 2022. See 81 FR 48371 (Jul. 25, 2016). In fact, the license rates adopted in this Final Rule will remain in effect until superseded by a subsequent rulemaking. See 17 U.S.C. 115(c)(3)(C).

    The National Music Publishers' Association (NMPA) and the Nashville Songwriters Association International (NSAI) (together, Copyright Owners) filed a motion seeking leave to respond to the SME comment and partial objection to the settlement. The Judges granted the Copyright Owners' motion and extended the initial comment period to permit interested parties to submit responsive comments. See 81 FR 71657 (Oct. 18, 2016). The Judges thus considered Copyright Owners' responsive comments, which they had attached to their motion for leave to respond. During the extended comment period, the Judges received a comment in support of the proposed settlement from “Anonymous.” 4

    4 Without more information, the Judges cannot determine whether “Anonymous” is a participant in this proceeding. As “Anonymous” made no objection, however, participant status is irrelevant.

    On or about October 28, 2016, the Judges received a Motion to Adopt Settlement Industry-Wide (Second Motion). In the Second Motion, the Copyright Owners reported an agreement between Copyright Owners and SME, resolving all issues SME raised in its partial objection to the proposed settlement. According to the Second Motion, the parties agreed that: (1) SME would withdraw its objection to the proposed rule, (2) Copyright Owners would withdraw their response to SME's objection, (3) the parties to the settlement would request that the Judges adopt the settlement industry-wide, and (4) SME would withdraw from the proceeding, except to support adoption of the settlement or, if the settlement were not adopted, to litigate matters relating to the subpart A regulations.

    By its terms, the partial settlement applied originally only to UMG, WMG, and the unnamed “significant portion of the . . . music publishing industries” with whom the licensees had agreed. The Second Motion expanded the settlement to include SME as a licensee subject to the settlement rates and terms.

    The Judges “may decline to adopt the agreement as a basis for statutory terms and rates for participants that are not parties to the agreement,” only “if any participant [in the proceeding] objects to the agreement and the [Judges] conclude, based on the record before them if one exists, that the agreement does not provide a reasonable basis for setting statutory terms or rates.” 17 U.S.C. 801(b)(7)(A)(ii).

    Mr. Johnson's Objections to the Settlement

    George Johnson, dba GEO Music, appears in this proceeding as a pro se participant. Mr. Johnson's comment opposing the proposed settlement rates and terms filed August 24, 2016, incorporated by reference “two Opposition Motions” filed concurrently with his Comments in the rulemaking. The exact identity of the two “Opposition Motions” Mr. Johnson cites is unclear.

    Mr. Johnson submitted: (1) Opposition to Parties Motion to Adopt Settlement, dated June 27, 2016 (Opposition); (2) Second Opposition Motion to NMPA, NSAI, WMG, and UMG's Reply to Adopt Settlement as Statutory Rates and Terms, dated July 7, 2016 (Second Opposition); (3) Objection to Comments and Objections of Sony Music Entertainment Concerning Proposed Settlement, dated August 29, 2016 (Objection); and (4) Objection and Response to NMPA and NSAI's Response to SME's Comments and Objections Concerning Proposed § 385.3 Settlement, dated August 31, 2016 (Second Objection).5

    5 These papers were filed with the Judges on July 7, 2016, July 11, 2016, September 28, 2016, and September 28, 2016, respectively.

    Mr. Johnson filed an opposition to the Second Motion on November 3, but amended his filing twice. He submitted his final version November 8, 2016.6 The objections Mr. Johnson made in response to the Second Motion were a reprise of his earlier objections. Nothing in the parties' agreement addresses Mr. Johnson's grievances.

    6 CRB procedural rules require responses to motions to be filed within five business days after the motion is filed. See 37 CFR 350.4(f). Five business days after October 28, 2016, was November 4, 2016. As Mr. Johnson's later filings consisted of amendments to the original, timely filing and as Mr. Johnson is appearing in this proceeding pro se, the Judges accepted his November 8, amended filing.

    In each of his filings, Mr. Johnson objects to adoption of the settlement rates and terms, whether for the settling parties alone, or as a basis for statutory licenses industry-wide. The bases for his objections are that the proposed settlement:

    (1) “violates copyright owners' exclusive rights”;7

    7 Opposition at 2; Second Opposition at 6; see Second Objection at 3.

    (2) creates a “substantive competitive disadvantage for every American independent songwriter and music publisher, as well as, every co-writer and co-publisher within the Universal Music Publishing (UMP) . . . and Warner-Chappell Publishing (WCP) catalogs;” 8

    8 Opposition at 2-3; Second Opposition at 6.

    (3) involves foreign companies, as UMP/UMG and WCP/WMG are headquartered in France and Russia; 9

    9 Opposition at 3; Second Opposition at 7.

    (4) permits licensees to look out for their own self-interests; 10

    10Id.

    (5) is a product of anticompetitive “price-fixing other people's property at the below-market 9.1 cents. . . .” 11

    11Id.; Objection at 2; see Second Objection at 3-4.

    (6) “does not provide a reasonable basis for setting statutory terms or rates;” 12 and

    12 Opposition at 6.

    (7) disregards the effects of inflation on the songwriter and publisher rights at issue.13

    13 Opposition at 7; Second Opposition at 6-7; Objection at 3-4; Second Objection at 2.

    Mr. Johnson makes legal, economic, and subjective arguments against adoption of the agreed license rates and terms from his perspective as an independent songwriter and publisher.

    Mr. Johnson's legal argument, viz., that the proposed settlement violates copyright owners' exclusive rights, fails.14 The copyrights of creators of nondramatic musical works are not unlimited. They are subject to express exceptions and limitations, including section 115 of the Act. Section 115, like its predecessor, section 1(e) of the 1909 Copyright Act, creates a compulsory, statutory license available to users of musical works for “mechanical” manufacture and distribution of those works. Over time, the scope of the “mechanical” license has grown to include digital uses. These uses are expressly allowed by the Act and, so long as the user complies with the terms of the statutory license, the user is not infringing on any copyright that a songwriter or publisher might claim.15

    14 It is unclear whether, in his Objection, Mr. Johnson intended to challenge the constitutionality of the mechanical compulsory license. The Judges find that Mr. Johnson's conclusory statement that “[t]his is . . . unconstitutional and violates the Art I exclusive rights in copyright” does not articulate a constitutional challenge that the Judges can consider.

    15 In some of his argument, Mr. Johnson refers to the difficulties presented not only by the section 115 license, but also by the Performing Rights Organizations' uses that are governed by separate Consent Decrees that were first entered in 1941 and have been amended periodically since. Consent Decree rates are determined in a New York federal district court, commonly known as the Rate Court. The Judges agree with Mr. Johnson that music licensing is fragmented, both by reason of the Consent Decree and the fragmentation of the statutory licensing schemes in the Act. These issues are beyond the scope of authority of the Judges; they can only be addressed by Congress.

    Similarly, Mr. Johnson's economic arguments must fail. Negotiations by and between major recording companies and major publishers might be concluded without input from independent songwriters or publishers. The negotiating representatives, however, represent individual songwriters and publishers.16 Presumably the representatives are acting in the interest of their constituents. If they were not doing so, the constituents could seek representation elsewhere. But, Mr. Johnson has not even hinted at evidence to support his argument that the representative negotiators are engaged in anti-competitive price-fixing at below-market rates. The very definition of a market value is one that is reached by negotiations between a willing buyer and a willing seller, with neither party being under any compulsion to bargain. Although Mr. Johnson states it as a negative, the parties' negotiations are only fair and reasonable if each party acts to protect its own self-interest. In that regard, the Judges view the settling parties' consensual decision to establish a fixed nominal rate, i.e., unadjusted for inflation, as also representative of their mutual self-interest.17

    16 Of note, Mr. Johnson himself is a member of NSAI. See George Johnson's (GEO) Objection to NMPA, NSAI and SME's Motion to Adopt Settlement Industry Wide at 10 (Nov. 8, 2016).

    17 Mr. Johnson repeats allegations that the recording companies involved in this licensing negotiation are foreign-owned. He fails, however, to state why foreign corporate ownership might be relevant to the issues at hand.

    Judges' Conclusion

    Section 801(b)(7)(A) of the Act is clear that the Judges have the authority to adopt settlements between some or all of the participants to a proceeding at any time during a proceeding, so long as those that would be bound by those rates and terms are given an opportunity to comment. Id. at (b)(7)(A)(i). If a participant raises an objection to adoption of the settlement, the Judges must determine whether, despite the objection(s), the proposed settlement provides a reasonable basis for setting the rates and terms at issue. Id. If the Judges find that no participant has shown that the agreement “does not provide a reasonable basis for setting statutory terms or rates” then they may adopt the proposed terms and rates as statutory rates and terms for participants that are not parties to the agreement. Id. at (b)(7)(A)(ii).

    The Judges provided an opportunity for comment and, following the Second Motion, were left with only Mr. Johnson's objections. As discussed above, Mr. Johnson's objections did not change and he provides no persuasive legal or economic arguments that would convince the Judges to reject a proposed settlement reached voluntarily between the Settling parties.

    From the perspective of an independent songwriter, the proposed rates might seem inadequate. The fact remains, however, that the proposed rates and terms were negotiated on behalf of the vast majority of parties that historically have participated in Section 115 proceedings before the Judges. Those parties clearly concluded that the rates and terms were acceptable to both sides. The evidence 18 and arguments Mr. Johnson presented are insufficient for the Judges to determine that the agreed rates and terms are unreasonable.

    18 The Judges are not ruling that any of Mr. Johnson's submissions would be admissible at an evidentiary hearing. Even taking those submissions as admissible evidence in support of its positions, however, the Judges find that they would be immaterial to the Judges' rate-setting mandate.

    The only objections to the agreement by a participant were those of Mr. Johnson. Based on those objections, the Judges cannot conclude that the agreement reached voluntarily between the Settling Parties does not provide a reasonable basis for setting statutory terms and rates for licensing nondramatic musical works to manufacture and distribute phonorecords, including permanent digital downloads and ringtones (Subpart A Configurations). Therefore, the Judges must adopt the proposed regulations that codify the partial settlement.

    Further, because the only participant, other than Mr. Johnson, offering objection to the settlement joined in the Second Motion to apply the rates and terms industry-side, the Judges adopt the proposed rates and terms industry-wide for subpart A Configurations. In doing so, the Judges make clear that the adoption of the partial settlement should in no way suggest that they are more or less inclined to adopt the reasoning or proposals of any of the parties remaining in the proceeding in relation to subpart B or C configurations.

    In reviewing the regulations, the Judges discovered an outdated cross-reference and are correcting it.

    The regulations of 37 CFR part 385, subpart A, are adopted as detailed in this Final Rule.

    List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 385

    Copyright, Phonorecords, Recordings.

    Final Regulation

    For the reasons set forth herein, the Copyright Royalty Judges amend 37 CFR part 385 as follows:

    PART 385—RATES AND TERMS FOR USE OF MUSICAL WORKS UNDER COMPULSORY LICENSE FOR MAKING AND DISTRIBUTING OF PHYSICAL AND DIGITAL PHONORECORDS 1. The authority citation for part 385 continues to read: Authority:

    17 U.S.C. 115, 801(b)(1), 804(b)(4).

    § 385.4 [Amended]
    2. Section 385.4 is amended by removing “§ 201.19(e)(7)(i)” and adding “§ 210.16(g)(1)” in its place. Dated: February 22, 2017. Suzanne M. Barnett, Chief Copyright Royalty Judge. Approved by: Carla D. Hayden, Librarian of Congress.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06065 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1410-72-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R07-OAR-2016-0470; FRL-9958-72-Region 7] Approval of Missouri's Air Quality Implementation Plans; Open Burning Requirements AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final action to approve a revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the State of Missouri related to open burning. On November 24, 2009, the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) requested to amend the SIP to replace four area specific open burning rules into one rule that is area specific and applicable state-wide. EPA solicited comment in an earlier proposed rulemaking that published in the Federal Register on September 8, 2016, and received one comment in support of the proposed SIP revision. These revisions to Missouri's SIP do not have an adverse effect on air quality as demonstrated in the technical support document (TSD) which is a part of the proposed rulemaking docket. EPA's final approval of these SIP revisions is being done in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

    DATES:

    This final rule is effective on April 27, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2016-0470. All documents in the docket are listed on the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through www.regulations.gov or please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional information.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Steven Brown, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at 913-551-7718, or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Throughout this document “we,” “us,” and “our” refer to EPA. This section provides additional information by addressing the following:

    I. What is being addressed in this document? II. Have the requirements for final approval of a SIP revision been met? III. What action is EPA taking? IV. Incorporation by Reference V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. What is being addressed in this document?

    EPA is taking final action to approve the SIP revision submitted by the state of Missouri that replaces four area specific open burning rules with a rule that is applicable state-wide. On November 24, 2009, the MDNR requested to amend the SIP to rescind Missouri Open Burning Restrictions 10 CSR 10-2.100, 10 CSR 10-3.030, 10 CSR 10-4.090, and 10 CSR 10-5.070, and consolidated these four rules into a new rule 10 CSR 10-6.045. The new rule adds language that allows burning of “trade wastes” by permit in areas for situations where open burning is in the best interest of the general public or when it can be shown that open burning is the safest and most feasible method of disposal. The rule reserves the right for the staff director to deny, revoke or suspend an open burn permit. It changes the general provisions section by not limiting liability to an individual who is directly responsible for a violation and extends the regulatory liability to any person, such as a property owner who hires an individual to start the fire. The rule also adds the definition of “untreated wood” for clarification to aid in compliance purposes. On September 8, 2016, EPA proposed approval of the SIP revision in the Federal Register (81 FR 62066), the comment period closed on October 11, 2016. During this period, on October 11, 2016, EPA received one comment which is included in the docket from an unknown commenter that supports this final rule.

    II. Have the requirements for final approval of a SIP revision been met?

    The state submission has met the public notice requirements for SIP submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The submission also satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. In addition, as explained above and in more detail in the technical support document (TSD) which is part of the proposed rulemaking docket that published in the Federal Register on September 8, 2016, the revision meets the substantive SIP requirements of the CAA, including section 110 and implementing regulations.

    III. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is finalizing approval of revisions to the Missouri SIP regarding an open burn regulation that replaces four area specific open burning rules. EPA has conducted a full evaluation of the regulation, which is discussed in detail in the proposed rule and the TSD, which is included in this rulemaking docket.

    We are processing this as a final approval action after soliciting comments on a proposed action. The public comment period on EPA's proposed rule opened on September 8, 2016, the date of its publication in the Federal Register (81 FR 62066), and closed on October 11, 2016.

    IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 as set forth below. Therefore, these materials have been approved by EPA for inclusion in the State implementation plan, have been incorporated by reference by EPA into that plan, are fully Federally enforceable under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the final rulemaking of EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by reference by the Director of the Federal Register in the next update to the SIP compilation.1 EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents generally available electronically through www.regulations.gov and/or in hard copy at the appropriate EPA office (see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble for more information).

    1 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).

    V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

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

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by May 30, 2017. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2)).

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: March 20, 2017. Edward H. Chu, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR part 52 as set forth below:

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

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et. seq.

    Subpart AA—Missouri 2. In § 52.1320, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by: a. Removing entries “10-2.100”, “10-3.030”, “10-4.090”, and “10-5.070”. b. Adding the entry “10-6.045” in numerical order.

    The addition reads as follows:

    § 52.1320 Identification of plan.

    (c) * * *

    EPA-Approved Missouri Regulations Missouri citation Title State effective date EPA approval date Explanation Missouri Department of Natural Resources *         *         *         *         *         *         * Chapter 6—Air Quality Standards, Definitions, Sampling and Reference Methods, and Air Pollution Control Regulations for the State of Missouri *         *         *         *         *         *         * 10-6.045 Open Burning Requirements 9/30/09 3/28/17 [insert Federal Register citation] *         *         *         *         *         *         *
    [FR Doc. 2017-06009 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 52 and 70 [EPA-R07-OAR-2016-0453; FRL 9957-84-Region 7] State of Iowa; Approval and Promulgation of the Title V Operating Permits Program, the State Implementation Plan, and 112(l) Plan AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule; technical amendments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published in the Federal Register on September 9, 2016, approving revisions to the Iowa Title V Operation Permits Program, the State Implementation Plan (SIP), and the 112(l) plan. This amendment makes minor administrative revisions and amends the state effective date.

    DATES:

    This final rule is effective March 28, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Heather Hamilton, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at 913-551-7039, or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In the September 9, 2016 (81 FR 62387), Federal Register direct final action approving revisions to part 52, chapter 22 of Iowa's SIP, EPA inadvertently omitted a minor administrative phrase from rules 567-22.4, 567-22.5, and 567.22.10. This technical part 52 revision to 567-22.5 is also being applied to Iowa's 112(l) plan.

    This technical revision is also making corrections to the Region 7 Technical Support Document (TSD) that supports the September 9, 2016 (81 FR 62387), direct final action. EPA inadvertently omitted minor administrative phrases and a reference from chapter 22 rule 567-22.103. Two revisions to chapter 22 rule 567-22.105(2) are required for clarification. Please see the revised TSD included in the docket.

    Finally, we are revising the incorrect state effective dates codified on page 62398 of the September 9, 2016 (81 FR 62387), Federal Register for parts 52 and 70. The correct state effective date is December 16, 2015.

    Additional information for this technical amendment can be found in the revised Technical Support Document located in this docket.

    List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    40 CFR Part 70

    Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Operating permits, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: March 20, 2017. Edward H. Chu, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7.

    Accordingly, 40 CFR parts 52 and 70 is corrected by making the following technical amendments:

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

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Subpart Q—Iowa
    § 52.820 [Amended]
    2. In § 52.820, the table in paragraph(c) is amended by removing from under the column titled “State effective date” the text “3/15/16” and adding the text “12/16/15” in its place for entries “567-20.1”, “567-22.1”, “567-22.4”, “567-22.5”, “567-22.8”, “567-22.10” “567-31.1” and “567-33.1”, respectively. PART 70—STATE OPERATING PERMIT PROGRAMS 3. The authority citation for part 70 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    4. Appendix A to part 70 is amended by revising paragraph (q) under the heading “Iowa” to read as follows: Appendix A to Part 70—Approval Status of State and Local Operating Permits Program Iowa

    (q) The Iowa Department of Natural Resources submitted for program approval a revision to rules 567-22.100, 567-22.101, 567-22.103, 567-22.105, 567-22.106, 567-22.108, and added 567.30.4(2) on December 16, 2015. This revision to the Iowa program is approved effective on November 8, 2016.

    [FR Doc. 2017-06008 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 49 CFR Part 578 [Docket No. NHTSA-2016-0136] RIN 2127-AL82 Civil Penalties AGENCY:

    National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT).

    ACTION:

    Final rule; delay of effective date.

    SUMMARY:

    Pursuant to a notice published on January 30, 2017, the effective date of the rule entitled “Civil Penalties,” published in the Federal Register on December 28, 2016 was temporarily delayed for 60 days. This action temporarily delays the effective date of that rule for 90 additional days.

    DATES:

    As of March 27, 2017, the effective date of the rule amending 49 CFR part 578 published at 81 FR 95489, December 28, 2016, delayed at 82 FR 8694, January 30, 2017, is further delayed until June 26, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For legal issues, contact Michael Kuppersmith, Office of Chief Counsel, at (202) 366-5263. For non-legal issues, contact John Finneran, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, at (202) 366-5289.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Pursuant to a document published on January 30, 2017 (82 FR 8694), the effective date of the rule entitled “Civil Penalties,” published in the Federal Register on December 28, 2016, at 81 FR 95489, was temporarily delayed for 60 days in accordance with the memorandum of January 20, 2017, from the Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff, entitled “Regulatory Freeze Pending Review.” 1 The present action temporarily delays the effective date of that rule for 90 additional days. That rule responded to a petition for reconsideration from the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers and the Association of Global Automakers by delaying, until model year 2019, the implementation of inflationary adjustments to the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) civil penalty rate. These inflationary adjustments are required by Congress as part of the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015. The additional 90-day delay in effective date is necessary to temporarily preserve the status quo while Department officials continue to review and consider the final rule and related laws. To the extent that 5 U.S.C. 553 is applicable, this action is exempt from notice and comment because it constitutes a rule of procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(A).

    1 Available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/20/memorandum-heads-executive-departments-and-agencies (last accessed Mar. 13, 2017).

    Authority:

    Pub. L. 101-410, Pub. L. 104-134, Pub. L. 109-59, Pub. L. 114-74, Pub L. 114-94, 49 U.S.C. 32902 and 32912; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.81, 1.95.

    Issued on: March 23, 2017. Jack Danielson, Acting Deputy Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06119 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
    82 58 Tuesday, March 28, 2017 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2016-9540; Airspace Docket No. 16-AGL-27] Proposed Amendment of Class C and Class E Airspace; Evansville, IN AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    This action proposes to modify Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Evansville Regional Airport, Evansville, Indiana. This action is necessary due to the decommissioning of the Evansville non-directional radio beacon (NDB) and cancellation of the NDB approach. This action would also update the geographic coordinates of the airport, as well as Skylane Airport, listed with Evansville Regional Airport in Class C airspace.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before May 12, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590; telephone (202) 366-9826, or 1-800-647-5527. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2016-9540; Airspace Docket No. 16-AGL-27, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

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

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ron Laster, Federal Aviation Administration, Contract Support, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone (817) 222-5879.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part, A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it would amend Class C airspace and Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Evansville Regional Airport, Evansville, IN.

    Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal. Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to Docket No. FAA-2016-9540/Airspace Docket No. 16-AGL-27.” The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.

    All communications received before the specified closing date for comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule. The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the docket.

    Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.

    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office (see the ADDRESSES section for the address and phone number) between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at the Federal Aviation Administration, Air Traffic Organization, Central Service Center, Operations Support Group, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177.

    Availability and Summary of Documents Proposed for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15, 2016. FAA Order 7400.11A is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11A lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

    The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by modifying Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface to within a 7.1-mile radius of the airport (from a 6.8-mile radius) at Evansville Regional Airport, Evansville, IN.

    The 4.4-mile wide segment (2.2. miles from each side of the 001 degree bearing from the airport) extending from the 6.8-mile radius of the airport would be modified to a 4-mile wide segment extending from the proposed 7.1-mile radius of the airport to 11.6 miles north (from 11.2 miles).

    The 4.4-mile wide segment (2.2 miles from each side of the 181 degree bearing from the airport) extending from the 6.8-mile radius of the airport to 11.3 miles south of the airport would be removed due to the decommissioning of the Evansville NDB.

    The Pocket City VORTAC navigation aid segment would be amended to within a 7.1-mile radius (from a 6.8-mile radius) of the airport to the VORTAC.

    This proposal also would update the geographic coordinates of the airport to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database, as well as updating the coordinates of Skylane Airport listed under Evansville Regional Airport in Class C airspace.

    Airspace reconfiguration is necessary due to the cancellation and decommissioning of the non-directional radio beacon (NDB) and NDB approaches which would enhance the safety and management of the standard instrument approach procedures for IFR operations at the airport.

    Class C and E airspace designations are published in paragraph 4000 and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.11A, dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15, 2016, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

    Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

    Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, “Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures” prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

    The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

    PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as follows: Authority:

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

    § 71.1 [Amended]
    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15, 2016, is amended as follows: Paragraph 4000 Class C Airspace. AGL IN C Evansville Regional Airport, IN Evansville Regional Airport, IN (Lat. 38°02′27″ N., long. 87°31′43″ W.) Skylane Airport (Lat. 38°00′42″ N., long. 87°35′41″ W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 4,500 feet MSL within a 5-mile radius of the Evansville Regional Airport excluding that airspace beginning where the Pocket City 057° radial crosses the 5-mile ring, thence northeast via the 057° radial to intercept a 11/4-mile radius of the Skylane Airport, thence counterclockwise via the 11/4-mile radius to the 360° bearing from the Skylane Airport, thence due west to the 5-mile ring extending upward from the surface to 1,600 feet MSL; and that airspace within a 10-mile radius of the airport extending upward from 1,600 feet MSL to and including 4,500 feet MSL. This Class C airspace area is effective during the specific days and hours of operation of the Evansville Tower and Approach Control Facility as established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective dates and times will thereafter be continuously published in the Airport/Facility Directory.

    Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. AGL IN E5 Evansville, IN Evansville Regional Airport, IN (Lat. 38°02′27″ N., long. 87°31′43″ W.) Pocket City VORTAC (Lat. 37°55′42″ N., long. 87°45′45″ W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 7.1-mile radius of Evansville Regional Airport, and within 2 miles each side of the 001° bearing from the airport extending from the 7.1-mile radius to 11.6 miles north of the airport, and within 4 miles each side of the Pocket City VOTYAC 060° radial extending from the 7.1-mile radius to the VORTAC.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas on March 13, 2017. Walter Tweedy Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
    [FR Doc. 2017-05991 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2017-0046; Airspace Docket No. 17-AWP-3] Proposed Establishment of Class E Airspace, Willits, CA AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    This action proposes to establish Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Frank R. Howard Memorial Hospital Heliport, Willits, CA, to support the development of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations under standard instrument approach and departure procedures at the heliport, for the safety and management of aircraft within the National Airspace System.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before May 12, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; telephone: 1-800-647-5527, or (202) 366-9826. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2017-0046; Airspace Docket No. 17-AWP-3, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

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

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Tom Clark, Federal Aviation Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone (425) 203-4511.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it would establish Class E airspace at Frank R. Howard Memorial Hospital Heliport, Willits, CA.

    Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal. Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in triplicate to the address listed above. Persons wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to Docket No. FAA-2017-0046/Airspace Docket No. 17-AWP-3”. The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.

    All communications received before the specified closing date for comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule. The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the docket.

    Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.

    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office (see the ADDRESSES section for the address and phone number) between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at the Northwest Mountain Regional Office of the Federal Aviation Administration, Air Traffic Organization, Western Service Center, Operations Support Group, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057.

    Availability and Summary of Documents Proposed for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15, 2016. FAA Order 7400.11A is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11A lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

    The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by establishing Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Frank R. Howard Memorial Hospital Heliport, Willits, CA. Class E airspace would be established within a 2.5-mile radius of the heliport, and within a 5-mile wide segment (2.5 miles each side of the 166 degree bearing) from the heliport to 6.7 miles southeast of the heliport, and within a 3-mile wide segment (1.5 miles each side of the 360 degree bearing) extending from the heliport to 10.5 miles north of the heliport. This airspace is necessary to support IFR operations in standard instrument approach and departure procedures at the heliport.

    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Order 7400.11A, dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15, 2016, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

    Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

    Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, “Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures” prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

    The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

    PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as follows: Authority:

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

    § 71.1 [Amended]
    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15, 2016, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. AWP CA E5 Willits, CA [New] Frank R. Howard Memorial Hospital Heliport, CA (Lat. 39°23′21″ N., long. 123°20′21″ W.)

    That airspace upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 2.5-mile radius of Frank R. Howard Memorial Hospital Heliport, and within 2.5 miles each side of a 166° bearing from the heliport to 6.7 miles southeast of the heliport, and within 1.5 miles each side of a 360° bearing from the heliport to 10.5 miles north of the heliport.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on March 13, 2017. Mindy Wright, Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
    [FR Doc. 2017-05992 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2015-6751; Airspace Docket No. 15-AWP-18] Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Arcata, CA; Fortuna, CA; and Establishment of Class E Airspace; Arcata, CA, and Eureka, CA AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    This action proposes to modify Class E surface area airspace, modify Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet, and establish Class E airspace designated as an extension at Arcata Airport, Arcata, CA. The action also proposes to modify Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet at Rohnerville Airport, Fortuna, CA, and establish stand-alone Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet at Murray Field Airport, Eureka, CA, to accommodate airspace redesign for the safety and management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations within the National Airspace System. Additionally, this proposal would update the geographic coordinates of these airports.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before May 12, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; telephone: 1-800-647-5527, or (202) 366-9826. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2015-6751; Airspace Docket No. 15-AWP-18, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

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

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Tom Clark, Federal Aviation Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone (425) 203-4511.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it would amend Class E airspace at Arcata Airport, Arcata, CA, and Rohnerville Airport, Fortuna, CA, and would establish Class E airspace at Murray Field, Eureka, CA.

    Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal. Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in triplicate to the address listed above. Persons wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to Docket No. FAA-2015-6751/Airspace Docket No. 15-AWP-18”. The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.

    All communications received before the specified closing date for comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule. The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the docket.

    Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.

    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office (see the ADDRESSES section for the address and phone number) between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at the Northwest Mountain Regional Office of the Federal Aviation Administration, Air Traffic Organization, Western Service Center, Operations Support Group, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057.

    Availability and Summary of Documents Proposed for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15, 2016. FAA Order 7400.11A is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11A lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

    The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) Part 71 by modifying Class E surface area airspace at Arcata Airport, Arcata, CA, and Rohnerville Airport, Fortuna, CA, and establishing Class E airspace designated as an extension at Arcata Airport. Also, stand-alone Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface would be established at Murray Field Airport, Eureka, CA. This proposed airspace redesign is necessary for the safety and management of IFR operations at these airports, and for efficiency within the National Airspace System.

    At Arcata Airport, Arcata, CA, Class E surface area airspace would be expanded by 0.1 miles to within 4.1 miles of the airport, and the Abeta NDB would be removed from the description as it was decommissioned and no longer needed; Class E airspace designated as an extension to a Class D or Class E surface area would be established within 2.9 miles each side of the 153 degree bearing from the Arcata Airport extending from the 4.1-mile radius to 10.5 miles southeast of the airport. Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface would be reduced to within a 7-mile radius of the airport, with a segment 4.2 miles wide (2.1 miles each side of the 153 degree bearing) extending from the 7-mile radius of the airport to 14.1 miles southeast of the airport. Class E airspace upward from 1,200 feet above the surface would be removed, since this airspace is wholly contained within the Rogue Valley Class E en route airspace area.

    At Eureka, CA, this proposal would establish a designated stand-alone Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.3-mile radius of Murray Field Airport with a segment 6.3 miles wide extending to 23 miles southwest of the airport. This airspace area would specifically support IFR operations at Eureka, CA, and would be unaffected by any proposed changes that would occur at any other airport.

    At Fortuna, CA, this proposal would reduce Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface to within a 2.7-mile radius (from a 6.5-mile radius) of Rohnerville Airport, with segments extending 7 miles northwest, 5.2 miles west, and 6.1 miles southeast of the airport. Class E airspace upward from 1,200 feet above the surface would be removed since this airspace is wholly contained within the Rogue Valley Class E en route airspace area.

    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6002, 6004, and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.11A, dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15, 2016, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

    Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

    Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, “Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures” prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

    The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

    PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as follows: Authority:

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

    § 71.1 [Amended]
    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15, 2016, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Designated as Surface Areas. AWP CA E2 Arcata, CA [Modified] Arcata Airport, CA (Lat. 40°58′40″ N., long. 124°06′31″ W.)

    That airspace within a 4.1-mile radius of Arcata Airport.

    Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Designated as an Extension to a Class D or Class E Surface Area. AWP CA E4 Arcata, CA [New] Arcata Airport, CA (Lat. 40°58′40″ N., long. 124°06′31″ W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within 2.9 miles each side of the 153° bearing from the Arcata Airport extending from the 4.1-mile radius to 10.5 miles southeast of the airport.

    Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. AWP CA E5 Arcata, CA [Modified] Arcata Airport, CA (Lat. 40°58′40″ N., long. 124°06′31″ W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 7-mile radius of the Arcata Airport, and within 2.1 miles each side of the 153° bearing from the airport extending from the 7-mile radius to 14.1 miles southeast of the airport.

    AWP CA E5 Eureka, CA [New] Murray Field Airport, CA (Lat. 40°48′12″ N., long. 124°06′46″ W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.3-mile radius of Murray Field Airport, and within 6.3 miles east of the Murray Field Airport 217° bearing extending from the 6.3-mile radius to 23 miles southwest of the airport.

    AWP CA E5 Fortuna, CA [Modified] Rohnerville Airport, CA (Lat. 40°33′14″ N., long. 124°07′58″ W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 2.7 mile radius of Rohnerville Airport, and within 1.8 miles each side of the 326° bearing from the airport extending from the 2.7 mile radius to 7 miles northwest of the airport, and within 1.1-miles each side of the 307° bearing from the airport extending from the 2.7 mile radius to 5.2 miles west of the airport, and within 1.1-miles each side of the 113° bearing from the airport extending from the 2.7 mile radius to 6.1 miles southeast of the airport.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on March 13, 2017. Mindy Wright, Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
    [FR Doc. 2017-05993 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2017-0216] RIN 1625-AA08 Safety Zone; Roar on the River Fireworks, Detroit River, Trenton Channel, Trenton, MI AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary safety zone for certain waters of the Detroit River. This action is necessary to provide for the safety of life on these navigable waters near Elizabeth Park, Trenton, MI, during a fireworks display on July 14, 2017. If inclement weather, this event will take place on July 15, 2017. This proposed rulemaking would prohibit persons and vessels from being in the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Detroit or a designated representative. We invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking.

    DATES:

    Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before April 27, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2017-0216 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the “Public Participation and Request for Comments” portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further instructions on submitting comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions about this proposed rulemaking, call or email call or email Tracy Girard, Prevention Department, Sector Detroit, Coast Guard; telephone 313-568-9564, or email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Table of Abbreviations CFR Code of Federal Regulations DHS Department of Homeland Security FR Federal Register NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking § Section U.S.C. United States Code COTP Captain of the Port II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    On February 16, 2017, Great Lakes Firewoks, LLC., notified the Coast Guard that it will be conducting a fireworks display from 10 to 10:30 p.m. on July 14, 2017. In the event of inclement weather the fireworks display will be on July 15, 2017. The fireworks are to be launched from a barge off Elizabeth Park, Trenton, MI. Hazards from firework displays include accidental discharge of fireworks, dangerous projectiles, and falling hot embers or other debris. The Captain of the Port Detroit (COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with the fireworks to be used in this display would be a safety concern for anyone within a 350 foot radius of the fireworks barge.

    The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure the safety of vessels and the navigable waters within a 350-foot radius of the fireworks barge, during, and after the scheduled event. The Coast Guard proposes this rulemaking under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231.

    III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The COTP proposes to establish a safety zone from 10 to 10:30 p.m. on July 14, 2017. In the event of inclement weather, the fireworks display will be on July 15, 2017. The safety zone would cover all navigable waters within 350 feet of the fireworks launch site on the Detroit River, Trenton Channel, Trenton, MI. The duration of the zone is intended to ensure the safety of vessels and these navigable waters before, during, and after the scheduled 10 to 10:30 p.m. fireworks display. No vessel or person would be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative. The regulatory text we are proposing appears at the end of this document.

    IV. Regulatory Analyses

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

    A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. Executive Order 13771 (“Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs”), directs agencies to reduce regulation and control regulatory costs and provides that “for every one new regulation issued, at least two prior regulations be identified for elimination, and that the cost of planned regulations be prudently managed and controlled through a budgeting process.”

    This NPRM has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. As this rule is not a significant regulatory action, this rule is exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 13771. See OMB's Memorandum titled “Interim Guidance Implementing Section 2 of the Executive Order of January 30, 2017 titled `Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs' ” (February 2, 2017).

    This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, duration, and time-of-day of the safety zone. Vessel traffic would be able to safely transit around this safety zone which would impact a small designated area of the Detroit River less than 1 hour during the evening when vessel traffic is normally low. Moreover, the Coast Guard would issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zone, and the rule would allow vessels to seek permission to enter the zone.

    B. Impact on Small Entities

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

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

    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically affect it.

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

    C. Collection of Information

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

    D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

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

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

    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

    F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves a safety zone lasting less than 1 hour that would prohibit entry within 350 feet of the fireworks barge. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of Commandant Instruction M16475.lD. A preliminary environmental analysis checklist and Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed rule.

    G. Protest Activities

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

    Public Participation and Request for Comments

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

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

    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal Register (70 FR 15086).

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

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR parts 165 as follows:

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

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

    2. Add § 165.T09-0216 to read as follows:
    § 165.T09-0216 Safety Zone; Roar on the River Fireworks, Detroit River, Trenton, MI.

    (a) Location. A safety zone is established to include all U.S. navigable waters of Detroit River, Trenton Channel, Trenton, MI, within a 350-ft radius of fireworks barge in position 42°07.812′ N., 083°10.446 W. (NAD 83).

    (b) Enforcement period. The regulated area described in paragraph (a) will be enforced from 10 through 10:30 p.m. on July 14, 2017. In the event of inclement weather the regulated area will be enforced from 10 through 10:30 p.m. on July 15, 2017.

    (c) Regulations.

    (1) No vessel or person may enter, transit through, or anchor within the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Detroit, or his on-scene representative.

    (2) The safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may be permitted by the Captain of the Port Detroit or his on-scene representative.

    (3) The “on-scene representative” of the Captain of the Port Detroit is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer or Federal, State, or local law enforcement officer designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port Detroit to act on his behalf.

    (4) Vessel operators shall contact the Captain of the Port Detroit or his on-scene representative to obtain permission to enter or operate within the safety zone. The Captain of the Port Detroit or his on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16 or at 313-568-9564. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the regulated area must comply with all directions given to them by the Captain of the Port Detroit or his on-scene representative.

    Dated: March 22, 2017. Scott B. Lemasters, Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Detroit.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06086 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 50 and 51 [EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0596; FRL-9960-38-OAR] RIN 2060-AT22 Response to December 9, 2013, Clean Air Act Section 176A Petition From Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Vermont AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of public hearing and extension of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    Due to inclement weather in the Washington, DC, area, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is announcing it has rescheduled the hearing date and extended the public comment period for the proposed action titled, “Response to December 9, 2013, Clean Air Act Section 176A Petition from Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Vermont,” published in the Federal Register on January 19, 2017. In response to requests for a public hearing, the EPA published a notice of public hearing and extension of public comment period on February 15, 2017, announcing that a public hearing would be held on March 14, 2017, in Washington, DC, and the public comment period extended to April 13, 2017. Due to inclement weather, the EPA has rescheduled the hearing to April 13, 2017. In addition, in order to allow sufficient time after the public hearing for submission of comments, the EPA is announcing the extension of the comment period for the proposed action to May 15, 2017.

    DATES:

    Comments. Comments must be received on or before May 15, 2017. Public Hearing. The public hearing will be held on April 13, 2017, in Washington, DC. Please refer to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for additional information on the public hearing.

    ADDRESSES:

    Public Hearing. The April 13, 2017, public hearing will be held at the EPA, William Jefferson Clinton East Building, Room 1153, 1201 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004. Identification is required. If your driver's license is issued by Kentucky, Maine, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina or the state of Washington, you must present an additional form of identification to enter (see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for additional information on this location). Comments. Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0596, at: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the Web, Cloud or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.

    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at EPA Docket Center Reading Room, William Jefferson Clinton West Building, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The phone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you would like to speak at the public hearing, please contact Ms. Pamela Long, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS), Air Quality Planning Division (C504-01), Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone (919) 541-0641, fax number (919) 541-5509, email address [email protected], no later than April 11, 2017. If you have any questions relating to the public hearing, please contact Ms. Long at the above number.

    If you have questions concerning the January 19, 2017, proposed action, please contact Ms. Gobeail McKinley, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS), Air Quality Planning Division (C539-01), Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone (919) 541-5246, email address [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The proposal for which the EPA is holding the public hearing was published in the Federal Register on January 19, 2017 (82 FR 6509), and is available at: http://www.epa.gov/ozone-pollution/2008-ozone-national-ambient-air-quality-standards-naaqs-section-176a-petitions and also in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0596. The public hearing will provide interested parties the opportunity to present data, views, or arguments concerning the proposal. The EPA may ask clarifying questions during the oral presentations, but will not respond to presentations at that time. Written statements and supporting information that are submitted during the comment period will be considered with the same weight as any oral comments and supporting information presented at the public hearing. Written comments must be postmarked by the last day of the comment period.

    The public hearing will convene at 9:00 a.m. and end at 6:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) or at least 2 hours after the last registered speaker has spoken. The EPA will make every effort to accommodate all individuals interested in providing oral testimony. A lunch break is scheduled from 12:00 p.m. until 1:00 p.m. Please note that this hearing will be held at a U.S. government facility. Individuals planning to attend the hearing should be prepared to show valid picture identification to the security staff in order to gain access to the meeting room. The REAL ID Act, passed by Congress in 2005, established new requirements for entering federal facilities. These requirements took effect on July 21, 2014. If your driver's license is issued by Kentucky, Maine, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina or the state of Washington, you must present an additional form of identification to enter the federal building where the public hearing will be held. Acceptable alternative forms of identification include: Federal employee badges, passports, enhanced driver's licenses and military identification cards. For additional information for the status of your state regarding REAL ID, go to http://www.dhs.gov/real-id-enforcement-brief. In addition, you will need to obtain a property pass for any personal belongings you bring with you. Upon leaving the building, you will be required to return this property pass to the security desk. No large signs will be allowed in the building, cameras may only be used outside of the building, and demonstrations will not be allowed on federal property for security reasons.

    If you would like to present oral testimony at the hearing, please notify Ms. Pamela Long, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS), Air Quality Planning Division (C504-01), Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone (919) 541-0641, fax number (919) 541-5509, email address [email protected], no later than 4:00 p.m. ET on April 11, 2017. Ms. Long will arrange a general time slot for you to speak. The EPA will make every effort to follow the schedule as closely as possible on the day of the hearing.

    Oral testimony will be limited to 5 minutes for each commenter. The EPA encourages commenters to provide the EPA with a copy of their oral testimony electronically (via email) or in hard copy form. The EPA will not provide audiovisual equipment for presentations unless we receive special requests in advance. Commenters should notify Ms. Long if they will need specific equipment. Commenters should also notify Ms. Long if they need specific translation services for non-English speaking commenters.

    Prior to the hearing, the hearing schedule, including the list of speakers, will be posted on the EPA's Web site at: http://www.epa.gov/ozone-pollution/2008-ozone-national-ambient-air-quality-standards-naaqs-section-176a-petitions. Verbatim transcripts of the hearing and written statements will be included in the docket for the action.

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

    The EPA has established a docket for the proposed action “Response to December 9, 2013, Clean Air Act Section 176A Petition from Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Vermont” under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0596 (available at: http://www.regulations.gov). The EPA has made available information related to the proposed action on the EPA's Web site at: http://www.epa.gov/ozone-pollution/2008-ozone-national-ambient-air-quality-standards-naaqs-section-176a-petitions.

    Dated: March 16, 2017. Stephen Page, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06120 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 648 RIN 0648-BG42 Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Provisions; Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Mid-Atlantic Unmanaged Forage Fish Omnibus Amendment AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability of a fishery management plan amendment; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS announces that the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council has submitted its Unmanaged Forage Omnibus Amendment to the Secretary of Commerce for review and approval. We are requesting comments from the public on this amendment. This amendment would implement an annual landing limit, possession limits, and permitting and reporting requirements for certain previously unmanaged forage species and species groups within Mid-Atlantic Federal waters. The purpose of this action is to prevent the development of new, and the expansion of existing, commercial fisheries on certain forage species until the Council has adequate opportunity and information to evaluate the potential impacts of forage fish harvest on existing fisheries, fishing communities, and the marine ecosystem.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before May 30, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments on this document, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2017-0013, by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2017-0013, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.

    Mail: John K. Bullard, Regional Administrator, NMFS, Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office, 55 Great Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930. Mark the outside of the envelope, “Comments on Mid-Atlantic Forage NOA.”

    Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period, may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address, etc.), confidential business information, or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily by the sender will be publicly accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter “N/A” in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous).

    The Council prepared an environmental assessment (EA) for the Unmanaged Forage Omnibus Amendment that describes the proposed action and other alternatives considered and provides a thorough analysis of the impacts of the proposed measures and alternatives considered. Copies of the Unmanaged Forage Omnibus Amendment, including the EA, the Regulatory Impact Review, and the Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis, are available from: Christopher Moore, Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, Suite 201, 800 State Street, Dover, DE 19901. The EA and associated analysis is accessible via the Internet at http://www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov/ or http://www.mafmc.org.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Douglas Christel, Fishery Policy Analyst, 978-281-9141; fax 978-281-9135.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    Mid-Atlantic Council stakeholders identified managing forage species as a key concern for future action during a 2011 strategic planning and visioning process. Forage species are generally considered small, mostly pelagic schooling species that serve as prey for larger species. In 2014, the Council's Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) developed a white paper on forage species. The paper indicated that forage species facilitate the transfer of energy from the lowest levels of the food chain to higher levels, highlighting the importance of forage species in maintaining the productivity of marine ecosystems. The Council recognized that although it already manages several forage species that are the target of directed commercial fisheries (Atlantic mackerel, longfin and Illex squid, and butterfish), there are other unmanaged species that serve as prey for species important to commercial and recreational fisheries managed within the Mid-Atlantic. However, the Council was concerned that insufficient information existed to assess the amount of unmanaged forage species currently being harvested and associated impacts to other marine resources. Due to the importance of forage species to the marine ecosystem and the health of important commercial and recreational fisheries, the Council sought to prevent the further expansion of commercial fishing effort on forage species. Therefore, the Council wanted to maintain existing commercial fisheries at recent levels until it could collect more detailed information to evaluate the potential impacts of forage fish harvest on existing fisheries, fishing communities, and the marine ecosystem. On December 8, 2014, the Council initiated an action to begin protecting previously unmanaged forage species in each fishery management plan (FMP) under its jurisdiction. The purpose of this action is to prevent the development of new, and the expansion of existing, commercial fisheries on certain forage species. Scoping meetings were held from Rhode Island through North Carolina in September and October 2015. These meetings sought public input on the type of action to undertake, which forage species to address, the geographic scope of the action, data needs, possible measures to prevent the expansion of commercial fisheries on forage species, and processes to evaluate the development of commercial fisheries in the future. After further developing proposed measures, the Council conducted public hearings in May and June 2016 to solicit additional input on the range of alternatives under consideration by the Council, with public comments accepted through June 17, 2016. At its August 2016 meeting, the Council adopted final measures under the Unmanaged Forage Omnibus Amendment. On November 23, 2016, the Council submitted the amendment and draft EA to NMFS for preliminary review. The Council submitted the final forage amendment on March 20, 2017. The Council reviewed the proposed regulations to implement these measures, as drafted by NMFS, and deemed them to be necessary and appropriate, as specified in section 303(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act on March 10, 2017.

    This amendment would prevent the development of new, and the expansion of existing, commercial fisheries on certain Mid-Atlantic forage species until the Council can collect the information necessary to more fully evaluate the potential impacts of forage species harvests on existing fisheries, fishing communities, and the marine ecosystem. To do this, the Council would limit catch of certain forage species to recent levels and implement administrative measures necessary to more accurately record the catch of these species within Mid-Atlantic Federal waters. Specifically, this action proposes the following measures:

    • Designate 15 species and species groups as ecosystem component species of FMPs under the Council's jurisdiction;

    • Specify a 1,700-lb (771-kg) combined possession limit for ecosystem component species within Mid-Atlantic Federal waters;

    • Set an annual catch limit of 2.86 million lb (1,297 mt) for Atlantic chub mackerel (Scomber colias);

    • Specify a 40,000-lb (18,144-kg) chub mackerel possession limit within Mid-Atlantic Federal waters (i.e., from New York through Cape Hatteras, NC, an area referred to as the “Mid-Atlantic Forage Species Management Unit”) once the chub mackerel annual landing limit is reached;

    • Require that all vessels possessing ecosystem component species and chub mackerel in Mid-Atlantic Forage Species Management Unit be issued a Federal commercial fishing vessel permit from the Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office and comply with existing reporting requirements;

    • Allow vessels that catch ecosystem component species and chub mackerel outside of the Mid-Atlantic Forage Species Management Unit to transit through the area to land these species at other ports;

    • Develop appropriate codes to record the catch of these species in vessel trip reports and dealer reports;

    • Establish a Council policy requiring an exempted fishery permit and sufficient Council review before further development of any fishery for ecosystem component species; and

    • Expand framework provisions in the all of the Council's FMPs to allow future changes to annual landing limits and possession limits for Mid-Atlantic forage species.

    As proposed, the proposed chub mackerel measures are temporary, and would expire in 3 years. This would allow the Council to develop long-term measures and the scientific information necessary to formally integrate this chub mackerel as a stock in the fishery under the Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish FMP. The Council initiated a separate action to develop these long-term measures at its February 2017 meeting for implementation by 2020, if approved.

    Public comments are being solicited on the Unmanaged Forage Omnibus Amendment and its incorporated documents through the end of the comment period specified in the DATES section of this notice of availability (NOA). Following NMFS's review of the amendment under the Magnuson-Stevens Act procedures, a rule proposing to implement measures outlined in this amendment may be published in the Federal Register for public comment. All comments received by the end of the comment period on the NOA, whether specifically directed to the NOA or the proposed rule, will be considered in the approval/disapproval decision. Comments received after the end of the comment period for the NOA will not be considered in the approval/disapproval decision of this action.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: March 23, 2017. Karen H. Abrams, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06114 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    82 58 Tuesday, March 28, 2017 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request March 23, 2017.

    The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments are requested regarding (1) whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Comments regarding this information collection received by April 27, 2017 will be considered. Written comments should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), New Executive Office Building, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20502. Commenters are encouraged to submit their comments to OMB via email to: [email protected] or fax (202) 395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling (202) 720-8958.

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

    Title: Plum Pox Compensation.

    OMB Control Number: 0579-0159.

    Summary of Collection: Under the Plant Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 7701et seq.), the Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to prohibit or restrict the importation, entry, or movement of plants and plant pests to prevent the introduction of plant pests into the United States or their dissemination within the United States. The regulations in 7 CFR 301.74-5 permit owners of commercial stone fruit orchards and owners of fruit tree nurseries to receive compensation under certain circumstances. Owners of commercial stone fruit orchards may receive compensation for losses associated with trees destroyed to control plum pox pursuant to an emergency action notification (EAN) issued by the Animal & Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). Owners of fruit tree nurseries may receive compensation for net revenue losses associated with movement or sale of nursery stock prohibited under an EAN issued by APHIS with respect to regulated articles within the nursery in order to control plum pox. Plum Pox is an extremely serious viral disease of plants that can affect many stone fruit species, including plum, peach, apricot, almond, and nectarine. APHIS will collect information using form PPQ 651 Application for Plum Pox Compensation, PPQ 523 Emergency Action Notification, Orchard Owner Records, Destruction Verification Document, and State Compensation.

    Need and Use of the Information: APHIS will collect the owner's name and address, a description of the owner's property, and a certification statement that the trees removed from the owner's property were stone fruit trees from commercial fruit orchards or fruit tree nurseries. For claims made by owners of stone fruit orchards, the completed application must be accompanied by a copy of the EAN ordering the destruction of their trees, the notification's accompanying inventory describing the acreage and ages of trees removed and documentation verifying that the destruction of the trees have been completed and the date of that completion. For claims made by owners of fruit tree nurseries, the completed application must be accompanied by a copy of the EAN prohibiting the same or movement of the nursery stock, the notification's accompanying inventory describing the total number of trees covered by the EAN, their age and variety, and documentation indicating the final disposition of the nursery stock. Without the information APHIS would be unable to compensate eligible grove and nursery owners for their losses.

    Description of Respondents: Farms; Business or other for-profit.

    Number of Respondents: 2.

    Frequency of Responses: Reporting: On occasion.

    Total Burden Hours: 5.

    Ruth Brown, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06077 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request March 23, 2017.

    The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments are requested regarding (1) whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Comments regarding this information collection received by April 27, 2017 will be considered. Written comments should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), New Executive Office Building, 725—17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20502. Commenters are encouraged to submit their comments to OMB via email to: [email protected] or fax (202) 395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling (202) 720-8958.

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    Animal Plant and Health Inspection Service

    Title: Commercial Transportation of Equines to Slaughter.

    OMB Control Number: 0579-0160.

    Summary of Collection: Sections 901-905 of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 1901), authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to issue guidelines for regulating the commercial transportation of horses to slaughter by person regularly engaged in that activity within the United States. To fulfill this responsibility, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) established regulations in title 9, part 88 of the Code of Federal Regulations. The minimum standards cover among other things the food, water, and rest provided to these horses while they are in transit; and to review other related issues that may be appropriate to ensuring that these animals are treated humanely. Implementing these regulations entails the use of information collection activities such as providing business information, completing an owner/shipper certificate and continuation sheet, and maintaining records of the owner/shipper certificate and continuation sheet.

    Need and Use of the Information: APHIS will collect the following information: (1) Shippers name and address and the owner's name and address; (2) description of the transporting vehicle, including the license plate number; (3) a description of the horse's physical characteristics, including its sex, coloring, distinguishing marks, permanent brands, electronic means of identification, or other characteristics that can be use to accurately identify the horse; (4) the number of the USDA backtags that has been applied to the horse; (5) a statement of the animal's fitness to travel, which must indicate that the horse is able to bear weight on all four limbs, is able to walk unassisted, is not blind in both eyes, is older than 6 months of age, and is not likely to give birth during the trip; (6) a description of anything unusual with regard to the physical condition of the horse, such as a wound or blindness in one eye, and any special handling needs; (7) the date, time, and place the horse was loaded on the conveyance; and (8) a statement that the horse was provided access to food, water, and rest prior to transport. This information is helpful in those instances in which APHIS must conduct a trace back investigation of any possibly salleged violation of the regulations.

    Description of Respondents: Business or other for-profit and Federal Government.

    Number of Respondents: 302.

    Frequency of Responses: Recordkeeping; Reporting: On occasion.

    Total Burden Hours: 3308.

    Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

    Title: Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza, All Subtypes, and Newcastle Disease; Additional Restrictions.

    OMB Control Number: 0579-0245.

    Summary of Collection: The Animal Health Protection Act (AHPA), 7 U.S.C. 8301, is the primary Federal law governing the protection of animal health. The law gives the Secretary of Agriculture broad authority to detect, control, or eradicate pests or diseases of livestock or poultry. The agency charged with carrying out this disease prevention mission is the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), through its Veterinary Services (VS) Program. Highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) and Newcastle Disease are extremely infectious and often fatal disease affecting all types of birds and poultry.

    Need and Use of the Information: To protect the United States against an incursion of HPAI and Newcastle Disease, APHIS requires the use of several information collection activities, including an USDA-APHIS-VS Application For Permit To Import or Transport Controlled Materials or Organisms or Vectors (VS Form 16-3); a United States Veterinary Permit for Importation and Transportation of Controlled Materials and Organisms and Vectors (VS Form 16-6A); an Application for Approval or Report of Inspection Establishment Handling Restricted Animal Byproducts or Controlled Materials (VS Form 16-25); USDA-APHIS-VS Agreement for Handling Restricted Imports of Animal By-Products and Controlled Materials (VS Form 16-26); USDA-APHIS-VS Report of Entry, Shipment of Restricted Imported Animal Products and Animal By-Products, and Other Material (VS Form 16-78); USDA-APHIS-VS Application for Import or in Transit Permit (Animals, Animal Semen, Animal Embryos, Birds, Poultry, and Hatching Eggs) (VS Form 17-129); USDA-APHIS Agreement of Pet Bird Owner (VS Form 17-8); application of seals and agreements; notarized declaration or affirmation; notification of signs of disease in a recently imported bird; cooperative service agreements, and recordkeeping by processing establishments. APHIS will collect information to ensure that U.S. birds and poultry undergo appropriate examinations before entering the United States. Without the information, it would be impossible for APHIS to establish an effective line of defense against an introduction of HPAI and Newcastle Disease.

    Description of Respondents: Individuals or households; Business or other for-profit; Not-for-profit institutions; Federal Government.

    Number of Respondents: 970.

    Frequency of Responses: Reporting and Recordkeeping: On occasion.

    Total Burden Hours: 2,046.

    Animal Plant and Health Inspection Service

    Title: Importation of Emerald Ash Borer Host Material from Canada.

    OMB Control Number: 0579-0319.

    Summary of Collection: The United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), is responsible for preventing plant diseases or insect pests from entering the United States, preventing the spread of pests and noxious weeds not widely distributed in the United States, and eradicating those imported pests when eradication is feasible. Under the Plant Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 7701—et. seq), the Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to prohibit or restrict the importation, entry, or movement of plants and plant pests to prevent the introduction of plant pests into the United States or their dissemination within the United States. The regulations in 7 CFR part 319, “Foreign Quarantine Notices,” prohibit or restrict the importation of certain plants and plant products to prevent the introduction or dissemination of plant pests and noxious weeds into the United States. The Foreign Quarantine Notices regulations prohibit or restrict the importation of certain articles from Canada that present the risk of being infested with Emerald Ash Borer (EAB). EAB is a destructive wood-boring insect that attacks ash trees (Fraxinus spp., including green ash, white ash, and several horticultural varieties of ash).

    Need and Use of the Information: APHIS will collect information using phytosanitary certificate, permit application, and certificates of inspection. If APHIS did not collect this information, EAB could damage ash trees and cause economic losses to nursery stock and the nursery industry.

    Description of Respondents: Business or other-for-profit; Federal Government.

    Number of Respondents: 5.

    Frequency of Responses: Reporting: On occasion.

    Total Burden Hours: 42.

    Ruth Brown, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06076 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request March 22, 2017.

    The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments are requested regarding (1) whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Comments regarding this information collection received by April 27, 2017 will be considered. Written comments should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), [email protected] or fax (202) 395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling (202) 720-8958.

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    Food and Nutrition Service

    Title: Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: State Issuance and Participation Estimates—Forms FNS-388 and FNS-388A only Recordkeeping Burden Estimates.

    OMB Control Number: 0584-0081.

    Summary of Collection: Section 18(b) of Food and Nutrition Act, (the Act) 7 U.S.C. 2027(b), limits the value of allotments paid to SNAP households to an amount not in excess of the appropriation for the fiscal year. Timely State monthly issuance estimates are necessary for the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) to ensure that it remains within the appropriation and will have a direct effect upon the manner in which allotments would be reduced if necessary.

    Need and Use of the Information: FNS uses the FNS-388 to obtain monthly estimated or actual issuance and participation data for the current and previous months. In addition, State agencies are required to collect and maintain reports submitted in a project area breakdown on the FNS-388, of issuance and participation data twice a year. The project area breakdown attached to the FNS-388, twice a year is known as the FNS-388A. The data is collected and maintained because it is useful in identifying project areas that operate fraud detection units in accordance with the Act.

    Description of Respondents: State, Local, or Tribal Government.

    Number of Respondents: 53.

    Frequency of Responses: Recordkeeping only; Monthly; Semi-annually.

    Total Burden Hours: 17.

    Ruth Brown, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06022 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-30-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2017-0010] Notice of Request for Revision to and Extension of Approval of an Information Collection; Importation of Beef and Ovine Meat From Uruguay and Beef From Argentina and Brazil AGENCY:

    Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Revision to and extension of approval of an information collection; comment request.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service's intention to request a revision to and extension of approval of an information collection associated with regulations for the importation of beef and ovine meat from Uruguay and beef from Argentina and Brazil.

    DATES:

    We will consider all comments that we receive on or before May 30, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by either of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2017-0010.

    Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Send your comment to Docket No. APHIS-2017-0010, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road, Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238.

    Supporting documents and any comments we receive on this docket may be viewed at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2017-0010 or in our reading room, which is located in room 1141 of the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call (202) 799-7039 before coming.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For information on the regulations for the importation of beef and ovine meat from Uruguay and beef from Argentina and Brazil, contact Dr. Lynette Williams, Senior Staff Veterinarian, Animal Products, NIES, VS, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 40, Riverdale, MD 20737-1236; (301) 851-3300. For copies of more detailed information on the information collection, contact Ms. Kimberly Hardy, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 851-2483.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Importation of Beef and Ovine Meat From Uruguay and Beef From Argentina and Brazil.

    OMB Control Number: 0579-0372.

    Type of Request: Revision to and extension of approval of an information collection.

    Abstract: The Animal Health Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 8301 et seq.), authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to, among other things, prohibit or restrict the importation and interstate movement of animals and animal products into the United States to prevent the introduction of animal diseases and pests. The regulations for the importation of animals and animal products are contained in 9 CFR parts 92 through 98.

    The regulations in part 94 provide the requirements for the importation of specified animals and animal products to prevent the introduction into the United States of various animal diseases, including rinderpest and foot-and-mouth disease (FMD). Among other things, the regulations in § 94.1 place certain restrictions on beef and ovine meat exported to the United States in accordance with § 94.29, when the beef or ovine meat enters a port or otherwise transits a region where rinderpest or FMD exists during shipment to the United States. An authorized official of the exporting region must provide the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) with certification that specific conditions for importation listed in § 94.1 have been met.

    Section 94.29 places certain restrictions on the importation of beef and ovine meat from Uruguay and fresh (chilled or frozen) beef from certain regions in Argentina and Brazil into the United States to prevent the introduction of FMD. These conditions involve information collection activities, such as the requirement that APHIS collect, for each shipment, certification from an authorized veterinary official of the country of export that the conditions in § 94.29 have been met. For some of these conditions to be met, the facility in which the bovines and sheep are slaughtered must allow periodic on-site evaluation and subsequent inspection of its facilities.

    The information collection requirements above are currently approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under OMB control numbers 0579-0372 (Importation of Ovine Meat From Uruguay), 0579-0414 (Importation of Beef From a Region in Brazil), and 0579-0428 (Importation of Beef From a Region in Argentina). After OMB approves this combined information collection package (0579-0372), APHIS will retire OMB control numbers 0579-0414 and 0579-0428. Lastly, as a result of the merging of these information collection activities, APHIS has revised the name of this information collection from “Importation of Ovine Meat From Uruguay” to “Importation of Beef and Ovine Meat From Uruguay and Beef From Argentina and Brazil.”

    We are asking the OMB to approve our use of these information collection activities, as described, for an additional 3 years.

    The purpose of this notice is to solicit comments from the public (as well as affected agencies) concerning our information collection. These comments will help us:

    (1) Evaluate whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

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

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

    Estimate of burden: The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 0.99 hours per response.

    Respondents: Authorized veterinary officials employed by the Governments of Argentina, Brazil, and Uruguay and managers of foreign facilities that process meat and meat products.

    Estimated annual number of respondents: 8.

    Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 1,861.

    Estimated annual number of responses: 14,888.

    Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 14,755 hours. (Due to averaging, the total annual burden hours may not equal the product of the annual number of responses multiplied by the reporting burden per response.)

    All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record.

    Done in Washington, DC, this 23rd day of March 2017. Jere L. Dick, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06218 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2017-0019] Notice of Request for Revision to and Extension of Approval of an Information Collection; Importation of Clementines, Mandarins, and Tangerines From Chile AGENCY:

    Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Revision to and extension of approval of an information collection; comment request.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service's intention to request a revision to and extension of approval of an information collection associated with the regulations for the importation of clementines, mandarins, and tangerines from Chile into the United States.

    DATES:

    We will consider all comments that we receive on or before May 30, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by either of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2017-0019.

    Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Send your comment to Docket No. APHIS-2017-0019, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road, Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238.

    Supporting documents and any comments we receive on this docket may be viewed at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2017-0019 or in our reading room, which is located in room 1141 of the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call (202) 799-7039 before coming.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For information on regulations for the importation of clementines, mandarins, and tangerines from Chile, contact Dr. Robert Baca, Assistant Director, Permitting and Compliance Coordination, Compliance and Environmental Coordination Branch, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 150, Riverdale, MD 20737; (301) 851-2292. For copies of more detailed information on the information collection, contact Ms. Kimberly Hardy, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 851-2483.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Importation of Clementines, Mandarins, and Tangerines From Chile.

    OMB Control Number: 0579-0242.

    Type of Request: Revision to and extension of approval of an information collection.

    Abstract: The Plant Protection Act (PPA, 7 U.S.C. 7701 et seq.) authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to restrict the importation, entry, or interstate movement of plants, plant products, and other articles to prevent the introduction of plant pests into the United States or their dissemination within the United States. As authorized by the PPA, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service regulates the importation of certain fruits and vegetables in accordance with the regulations in “Subpart—Fruits and Vegetables” (7 CFR 319.56-1 through 319.56-76).

    Under these regulations, clementines, mandarins, and tangerines from Chile may be imported into the United States under certain conditions, as listed in § 319.56-38, to prevent the introduction of plant pests into the United States. The regulations include requirements that involve information collection activities, such as phytosanitary certificates, trust fund agreements, permits, production site registration, phytosanitary inspection, shipping documentation, and treatment (cold treatment or fumigation) or low prevalence production site certification.

    We are asking the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to approve our use of these information collection activities, as described, for an additional 3 years.

    The purpose of this notice is to solicit comments from the public (as well as affected agencies) concerning our information collection. These comments will help us:

    (1) Evaluate whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

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

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

    Estimate of burden: The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 0.3721 hours per response.

    Respondents: Growers, shippers, and the national plant production organization of Chile.

    Estimated annual number of respondents: 40.

    Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 14.

    Estimated annual number of responses: 559.

    Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 208 hours. (Due to averaging, the total annual burden hours may not equal the product of the annual number of responses multiplied by the reporting burden per response.)

    All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record.

    Done in Washington, DC, this 23rd day of March 2017. Jere L. Dick, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06215 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2017-0017] Notice of Request for Revision to and Extension of Approval of an Information Collection; Importation of Jackfruit, Pineapple, and Starfruit From Malaysia Into the Continental United States AGENCY:

    Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Revision to and extension of approval of an information collection; comment request.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service's intention to request a revision to and extension of approval of an information collection associated with the regulations for the importation of jackfruit, pineapple, and starfruit from Malaysia into the continental United States.

    DATES:

    We will consider all comments that we receive on or before May 30, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by either of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2017-0017.

    Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Send your comment to Docket No. APHIS-2017-0017, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road, Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238.

    Supporting documents and any comments we receive on this docket may be viewed at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2017-0017 or in our reading room, which is located in room 1141 of the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call (202) 799-7039 before coming.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For information on the regulations for the importation of jackfruit, pineapple, and starfruit from Malaysia into the continental United States, contact Dr. Robert Baca, Assistant Director, Permitting and Compliance Coordination, Compliance and Environmental Coordination Branch, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 150, Riverdale, MD 20737; (301) 851-2292. For copies of more detailed information on the information collection, contact Ms. Kimberly Hardy, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 851-2483.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Importation of Jackfruit, Pineapple, and Starfruit From Malaysia Into the Continental United States.

    OMB Control Number: 0579-0408.

    Type of Request: Revision to and extension of approval of an information collection.

    Abstract: The Plant Protection Act (PPA, 7 U.S.C. 7701 et seq.) authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to restrict the importation, entry, or interstate movement of plants, plant products, and other articles to prevent the introduction of plant pests into the United States or their dissemination within the United States. As authorized by the PPA, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service regulates the importation of fruits and vegetables into the United States from certain parts of the world as provided in “Subpart—Fruits and Vegetables” (7 CFR 319.56-1 through 319.56-76).

    In accordance with § 319.56-65, jackfruit, pineapple, and starfruit from Malaysia may be imported into the continental United States under certain conditions to prevent the introduction of plant pests into the United States. Those conditions include irradiation treatment, inspection, and importation in commercial consignments. An additional condition of entry is that the fruit must be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate issued by the national plant protection organization (NPPO) of Malaysia, and the phytosanitary certificate must include an additional declaration as indicated in the regulations.

    We are asking OMB to approve our use of these information collection activities, as described, for an additional 3 years.

    The purpose of this notice is to solicit comments from the public (as well as affected agencies) concerning our information collection. These comments will help us:

    (1) Evaluate whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

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

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

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

    Respondents: Importers of jackfruit, pineapple, and starfruit from Malaysia and the NPPO of Malaysia.

    Estimated annual number of respondents: 86.

    Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 2.

    Estimated annual number of responses: 170.

    Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 170 hours. (Due to averaging, the total annual burden hours may not equal the product of the annual number of responses multiplied by the reporting burden per response.)

    All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record.

    Done in Washington, DC, this 23rd day of March 2017. Jere L. Dick, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06216 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2017-0012] Notice of Request for Extension of Approval of an Information Collection; Importation of Live Swine, Pork, and Pork Products From Certain Regions Free of Classical Swine Fever in Brazil, Chile, and Mexico AGENCY:

    Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Extension of approval of an information collection; comment request.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service's intention to request an extension of approval of an information collection associated with the regulations for the importation of live swine, pork, and pork products from certain regions free of classical swine fever in Brazil, Chile, and Mexico.

    DATES:

    We will consider all comments that we receive on or BEFORE May 30, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by either of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2017-0012.

    Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Send your comment to Docket No. APHIS-2017-0012, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road, Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238.

    Supporting documents and any comments we receive on this docket may be viewed at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2017-0012 or in our reading room, which is located in room 1141 of the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call (202) 799-7039 before coming.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For information on the regulations for the importation of live swine, pork, and pork products from certain regions free of classical swine fever in Brazil, Chile, and Mexico, contact Dr. Magde Elshafie, Senior Staff Veterinary Medical Officer, TTS, National Import Export Services, VS, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 40, Riverdale, MD 20737; (301) 851-3300. For copies of more detailed information on the information collection, contact Ms. Kimberly Hardy, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 851-2483.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Importation of Live Swine, Pork, and Pork Products From Certain Regions Free of Classical Swine Fever in Brazil, Chile, and Mexico.

    OMB Control Number: 0579-0230.

    Type of Request: Extension of approval of an information collection.

    Abstract: Under the Animal Health Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 8301 et seq.), the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of the United States Department of Agriculture is authorized, among other things, to prohibit or restrict the importation and interstate movement of animals and animal products to prevent the introduction into and dissemination within the United States of livestock diseases and pests. To carry out this mission, APHIS regulates the importation of animals and animal products into the United States. The regulations for the importation of animals and animal products are contained in 9 CFR parts 92 through 98.

    Part 94 allows the importation, under certain conditions, of live swine, pork, and pork products from certain regions that are free of classical swine fever (CSF) in Brazil, Chile, and Mexico to prevent the introduction of CSF into the United States. In accordance with § 94.32, APHIS recognizes certain regions in Brazil, Chile, and Mexico as free of CSF but places restrictions on the importation of live swine, pork, and pork products from these regions. These restrictions are placed because these regions either supplement their pork supplies by importing fresh (chilled or frozen) pork from CSF-affected regions, supplement their pork supplies with pork from CSF-affected regions that is not processed in accordance with the requirements in part 94, share a common land border with CSF-affected regions, or import live swine from such regions under conditions less restrictive than would be acceptable for importation into the United States. To ensure that the importation of live swine, pork, and pork products from Brazil, Chile, and Mexico do not introduce CSF into the United States, the regulations include information collection activities, such as certificates, compliance agreements, and cooperative service agreements.

    Certificates, which are issued by salaried veterinary officers of the Governments of Brazil, Chile, and Mexico, must accompany swine, pork, and pork products from their respective regions, and must certify that the live swine, pork, and pork products have met the specified requirements in part 94.

    A compliance agreement is required from the operators of the processing establishment and states that: All meat processed for importation to the United States will be processed in accordance with the requirements in part 94; a full-time, salaried meat inspection official of the national government of the region in which the processing facility is located will supervise the processing and examination of the product and certify that it has been processed in accordance with the section; and APHIS personnel or other persons authorized by the Administrator may enter the establishment, unannounced, to inspect the establishment and its records.

    A cooperative service agreement, which is required by APHIS from the processing establishment, or a party on its behalf, is an agreement with APHIS to pay all expenses incurred by APHIS for the initial evaluation of the processing establishment and periodically thereafter.

    We are asking the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to approve our use of these information collection activities for an additional 3 years.

    The purpose of this notice is to solicit comments from the public (as well as affected agencies) concerning our information collection. These comments will help us:

    (1) Evaluate whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

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

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

    Estimate of burden: The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1.0 hour per response.

    Respondents: Federal animal health officials of the Governments of Brazil, Chile, and Mexico.

    Estimated annual number of respondents: 11.

    Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 273.55.

    Estimated annual number of responses: 3,009.

    Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 3,009 hours. (Due to averaging, the total annual burden hours may not equal the product of the annual number of responses multiplied by the reporting burden per response.)

    All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record.

    Done in Washington, DC, this 23rd day of March 2017. Jere L. Dick, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06090 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2017-0009] Notice of Request for Revision to and Extension of Approval of an Information Collection; Animal Disease Traceability AGENCY:

    Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Revision to and extension of approval of an information collection; comment request.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service's intention to request a revision to and extension of approval of an information collection associated with animal disease traceability.

    DATES:

    We will consider all comments that we receive on or before May 30, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by either of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2017-0009.

    Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Send your comment to Docket No. APHIS-2017-0009, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road, Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238.

    Supporting documents and any comments we receive on this docket may be viewed at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2017-0009 or in our reading room, which is located in room 1141 of the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call (202) 799-7039 before coming.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For information on animal disease traceability, contact Mr. Neil Hammerschmidt, Program Manager, Animal Disease Traceability, VS, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 46, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231; (240) 463-0098. For copies of more detailed information on the information collection, contact Ms. Kimberly Hardy, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 851-2483.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Animal Disease Traceability.

    OMB Control Number: 0579-0327.

    Type of Request: Revision to and extension of approval of an information collection.

    Abstract: Under the Animal Health Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 8301 et seq.), the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is authorized, among other things, to prevent the introduction into and the dissemination within the United States of any pest or disease of livestock or poultry.

    Within APHIS, Veterinary Services (VS) safeguards U.S. animal health through a variety of activities, including disease control. One important part of disease control is animal disease traceability. Animal disease traceability provides the ability to document the movement history of an animal throughout its life. Knowing where diseased and at-risk animals have been and are located, as well as when they have been there, is indispensable during an emergency response and important for ongoing disease programs. Epidemiologists use this information to determine the potential spread of a disease. In fact, having the ability to plot locations within a radius of an infected premises helps to determine the potential magnitude of a contagious disease and the resources needed to contain it. Furthermore, as diseases are controlled or eradicated, it is important to document areas, States, or regions of the country that are free from disease. Traceability helps APHIS determine those disease-free zones, thus enhancing the marketability of U.S. livestock.

    The regulations for animal disease traceability are located in 9 CFR part 86. Under the regulations, unless specifically exempted, livestock moved interstate must be officially identified and accompanied by an interstate certificate of veterinary inspection or other documentation. The regulations specify approved forms of official identification for each species but allow livestock to be moved between any two States or Tribes with another form of identification as agreed upon by animal health officials in the two jurisdictions. This identification requirement improves APHIS' ability to trace livestock if a disease is detected.

    Development and implementation of the animal disease traceability framework continues to be a partnership involving APHIS, States, Tribes, and industry. States and Tribes enter into cooperative agreements with APHIS to implement their traceability activities. Also, within the animal disease traceability framework, the National Uniform Eartagging System (NUES) gives a nationally unique identification number for animals that need official identification. To distribute and use official identification eartags using the NUES, APHIS requires several information collection activities that we are including in this information collection.

    We are asking the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to approve these information collection activities, as described, for an additional 3 years.

    The purpose of this notice is to solicit comments from the public (as well as affected agencies) concerning our information collection. These comments will help us:

    (1) Evaluate whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

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

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

    Estimate of burden: The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 0.09 hours per response.

    Respondents: State, Tribal, and territorial animal health officials; accredited veterinarians; breed and registry associations; producers; livestock market operators; and harvest facility employees.

    Estimated annual number of respondents: 197,302.

    Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 53.

    Estimated annual number of responses: 10,513,557.

    Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 939,085 hours. (Due to averaging, the total annual burden hours may not equal the product of the annual number of responses multiplied by the reporting burden per response.)

    All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record.

    Done in Washington, DC, this 22nd day of March 2017. Michael C. Gregoire, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06094 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2017-0013] Notice of Request for Revision to and Extension of Approval of an Information Collection; Swine Health Protection AGENCY:

    Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Revision to and extension of approval of an information collection; comment request.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service's intention to request a revision to and extension of approval of an information collection associated with the swine health protection program.

    DATES:

    We will consider all comments that we receive on or before May 30, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by either of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2017-0013.

    Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Send your comment to Docket No. APHIS-2017-0013, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road, Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238.

    Supporting documents and any comments we receive on this docket may be viewed at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2017-0013 or in our reading room, which is located in room 1141 of the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call (202) 799-7039 before coming.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For information on the swine health protection program, contact Dr. John Korslund, Staff Epidemiologist, Surveillance, Preparedness, and Response, Veterinary Services, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 46, Riverdale, MD 20737; (301) 851-3468. For copies of more detailed information on the information collection, contact Ms. Kimberly Hardy, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 851-2483.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Swine Health Protection.

    OMB Control Number: 0579-0065.

    Type of Request: Revision to and extension of approval of an information collection.

    Abstract: Under the Animal Health Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 8301 et seq.), the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is authorized, among other things, to prohibit or restrict the interstate movement of animals and animal products to prevent the dissemination within the United States of animal diseases and pests of livestock and to conduct programs to detect, control, and eradicate pests and diseases of livestock.

    The Swine Health Protection Act (the Act) prohibits the feeding of garbage to swine intended for interstate movement or foreign commerce or that substantially affect such commerce unless the garbage has been treated to kill disease organisms. Untreated garbage is one of the primary media through which numerous infectious and communicable diseases can be transmitted to swine. APHIS' regulations promulgated under the Act, which are located at 9 CFR part 166, require that garbage intended to be fed to swine must be treated at a facility that holds a valid permit to treat the garbage and must be treated in accordance with the regulations.

    As part of its swine health protection program, APHIS conducts a pseudorabies (PRV) eradication program in cooperation with State governments, swine producers, swine shippers, herd owners, and accredited veterinarians. The program identifies PRV-affected swine, provides herd management techniques, and has eliminated PRV in commercial production herds. However, APHIS periodically finds infected swine when swine are exposed to feral swine or other swine that have had exposure to feral swine.

    The regulations in 9 CFR parts 71 and 85 facilitate the PRV eradication program and general swine health by providing requirements for moving swine interstate within a swine production system. (A production system consists of separate farms that each specialize in a different phase of swine production such as sow herds, nursery herds, and finishing herds. These separate farms, all members of the same production system, may be located in more than one State.)

    The regulations for the feeding of garbage to swine and for the PRV eradication program require the use of a number of information collection activities, including the creation of food waste reports; the completion of applications to operate garbage treatment facilities and acknowledgement of the Act and regulations; garbage treatment facility inspection; cancellation of license by State animal health officials; request for a hearing; cancellation of license by licensee; notification by licensee of sick or dead animals; notification by licensee of changes to name, address, or management; swine health protection program inspection summary; permit to move restricted animals; owner-shipper statement; certificate of veterinary inspection; accredited veterinarian's statement; embryo and semen shipments; identification for swine moving interstate; swine production system health plan; interstate movement report and notification; cancellation or withdrawal of a swine production system health plan; appeal of cancellation of a swine production system health plan; shipment to slaughter seal; appraisal and indemnity claim form; report of net salvage proceeds; herd management plans; and recordkeeping.

    The information collection requirements above are currently approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under OMB control numbers 0579-0137 (Swine Health Protection) and 0579-0065 (Swine Health Protection). After OMB approves this combined information collection package (0579-0065), APHIS will retire OMB control number 0579-0137.

    We are asking OMB to approve our use of these information collection activities, as described, for an additional 3 years.

    The purpose of this notice is to solicit comments from the public (as well as affected agencies) concerning our information collection. These comments will help us:

    (1) Evaluate whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

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

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

    Estimate of burden: The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1.89 hours per response.

    Respondents: Owners/operators (licensees) of garbage treatment facilities, herd owners, food establishments, accredited veterinarians, and State animal health authorities.

    Estimated annual number of respondents: 27,050.

    Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 31.55.

    Estimated annual number of responses: 853,318.

    Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 1,614,460 hours. (Due to averaging, the total annual burden hours may not equal the product of the annual number of responses multiplied by the reporting burden per response.)

    All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record.

    Done in Washington, DC, this 23rd day of March 2017. Jere L. Dick, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06217 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Tonto National Forest; Gila County, AZ; Pinto Valley Mine Environmental Impact Statement AGENCY:

    Forest Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement for approval of a mining plan of operations for the Pinto Valley Mine, notice of public scoping, and request for scoping comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Tonto National Forest (TNF) is preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to evaluate and disclose the potential environmental effects from approval of the Mining Plan of Operations (MPO) submitted by Pinto Valley Mining Corp. (PVMC), for operations on National Forest System (NFS) land associated with expansion of an existing open pit copper and molybdenum mine, the Pinto Valley Mine. An amendment to the Tonto National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan, 1985, as amended) may be required.

    DATES:

    Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received no later than April 27, 2017. Public scoping meetings will be held on April 18 at Superior Junior/Senior High School, 100 Mary Drive, Superior, Arizona and April 20 at Miami Junior/Senior High School, 4739 S. Ragus Rd., Miami, Arizona from 5:00 to 8:00 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send written comments to Pinto Valley Mine EIS Comments, 2324 E McDowell Rd., Phoenix, AZ 85006. Comments may also be sent via email to [email protected], or via facsimile to (602) 225-5302, ATTN: Pinto Valley Mine EIS Comments. Written and oral comments may also be submitted during scoping meetings that will be held by the U.S. Forest Service (Forest Service) on April 18 and 20. Additional details may be found at the Pinto Valley Mine EIS Web site at http://www.pintovalleymineeis.us.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Judd Sampson, Interim Project Manager, at 602-225-5272 or [email protected] during normal business hours. Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    PVMC submitted the proposed MPO for approval by the Forest Service in May 2016. The proposed MPO was submitted in accordance with Forest Service regulations for locatable minerals set forth at Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), part 228 (36 CFR part 228), subpart A, Locatable Minerals.

    The proposed action would consolidate prior permitted activities reasonably incident to extraction, transportation, and processing of copper and molybdenum on NFS lands and expand existing mining operations from private lands on to NFS lands primarily for tailings disposal and pit expansion.

    Purpose and Need for Action

    The purpose of this project is to analyze the proposed action as required by the regulations at 36 CFR 228.5(a). Approval of the proposed MPO would be a major federal action subject to National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). Accordingly, the Forest Service must prepare an EIS to identify the scope of issues associated with the MPO, identify and assess reasonable alternatives to the MPO in order to avoid or minimize adverse effects of MPO actions and evaluate and disclose the potential environmental effects. An amendment to the Tonto National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan, 1985, as amended) may be required.

    The need for this project is to comply with the regulations of the Forest Service, Department of Agriculture, that govern the use of surface resources in conjunction with mining operations on NFS lands as set forth under 36 CFR part 228. These regulations require that the Forest Service respond to parties who submit proposed mining plans for approval to conduct mining operations on or otherwise use NFS lands in conjunction with mining for part or all of their planned actions. In accordance with regulations at 36 CFR 228.5, the submittal of the proposed MPO by PVMC requires the Forest Service to consider whether to approve the proposed MPO or to require changes or additions deemed necessary to meet the purpose of the regulations for locatable mineral operations at 36 CFR part 228, subpart A. Forest Service cannot categorically prohibit mining operations that are reasonably incident to mining of locatable minerals on NFS lands in the area of the proposed action.

    Proposed Action

    The proposed action is to approve the MPO as submitted by PVMC. Pinto Valley Mine expansion would affect federal lands administered by TNF and private lands owned by PVMC. The proposed action by the Forest Service would only approve mining operations on NFS lands, since the Forest Service does not have jurisdiction to regulate mining operations that occur on private land. However, the EIS will consider and disclose environmental effects associated with the MPO. Connected actions related to the MPO and potential amendment of the forest plan, if required, would be analyzed in the EIS. Impacts from past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions will be considered in combination with impacts of the proposed project to estimate potential cumulative impacts.

    Existing and Proposed Mining Operations

    Pinto Valley Mine is an existing open pit copper and molybdenum mine with adjacent milling and processing operations, tailings disposal areas, and waste rock disposal, all operated by PVMC. The majority of Pinto Valley Mine is located on PVMC property. However, certain facilities and operations are located on TNF, and were authorized by the Forest Service or the U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) through Rights-of-Way, Plans of Operations, Special Use Permits, and a Letter Agreement. The authorizations date from as early as the 1940s, and have been amended, updated, and re-authorized over the years.

    Existing surface disturbance associated with the Pinto Valley Mine currently encompasses an estimated 3,845 acres, of which 3,389 acres are on private and 456 acres are on NFS lands. The proposed disturbance acreage would be an additional 1,011 acres of surface disturbance (766 acres on private land, 245 acres on NFS lands) for a total estimated surface disturbance of 4,856 acres (4,155 on private land, 701 acres on NFS lands).

    Each of the past, present, and proposed future uses of NFS lands is addressed in the MPO. Existing or proposed mining use of NFS lands includes portions of the Open Pit, 19 Dump, portions of three tailings storage facilities, transportation on Forest Roads and temporary access roads, use of existing powerlines and water pipelines, existing water supply, stormwater management facilities, and a sign.

    In summary, at the end of the current planned life of the mine, PVMC would use approximately 701 acres of NFS lands and 42.45 miles of Forest Roads and temporary access roads to access mine facilities and/or as alignments for linear utility infrastructure.

    Possible Alternatives

    The Pinto Valley Mine EIS will analyze the No Action Alternative, which would not approve of the proposed MPO. For the No Action Alternative, mining operations, reclamation, and closure would continue under current authorizations. The responsible official does not have discretion to select the No Action alternative, because it would not be consistent with requirements of 36 CFR 228.5.

    The EIS may evaluate additional alternatives that could include application of design features and other measures that address issues identified during scoping, that would meet the purpose and need for the project, and are reasonable and practicable. These alternatives may require changes to the proposed MPO, which are necessary to meet Forest Service regulations for locatable minerals set forth at 36 CFR part 228, subpart A.

    Lead and Cooperating Agencies

    The Forest Service will be the lead agency preparing the EIS. Cooperating agencies have not yet been confirmed, but may include agencies within the Department of the Interior, as well as other state and Federal agencies with regulatory and/or enforcement jurisdiction over the project.

    Responsible Official

    The Forest Supervisor of the TNF will be the responsible official who prepares the Record of Decision (ROD) and approves the MPO.

    Nature of Decision To Be Made

    TNF Forest Supervisor will consider beneficial and adverse impacts of each alternative analyzed in the EIS. TNF Forest Supervisor has discretion to determine whether changes in the proposed MPO will be required prior to approval.

    Plan of Operations

    Using the analysis in the EIS and supporting documentation, the TNF Forest Supervisor will make the following decisions regarding the proposed MPO:

    1. Decide whether to approve the proposed MPO submitted by PVMC, or require changes in, or additions to, the proposed MPO to meet the purpose of the regulations, including those for environmental protection and reclamation set forth at 36 CFR part 228, subpart A before approving a final MPO. The alternative that is selected for approval in the final MPO must minimize adverse impacts on NFS surface resources where feasible.

    2. If Forest Service determines that any amendment(s) is (are) required to the Forest Plan, then decide whether to approve amendments to the Forest Plan, which would be necessary to approve the final MPO.

    Final EIS and Record of Decision

    The Forest Supervisor plans to release a draft ROD in conjunction with the final EIS. The draft ROD would address the decision on approval of the MPO. The decision would be subject to 36 CFR part 218, Project-Level Pre-decisional Administrative Review Process. If forest plan amendments are required, then the draft decision may also be subject to 36 CFR part 219, subpart B, Pre-decisional Administrative Review Process.

    Following resolution of objections to the draft ROD, a final ROD would be issued. PVMC would have an opportunity to appeal the decision as set forth at 36 CFR part 214, Postdecisional Administrative Review Process for Occupancy or Use of National Forest System Lands and Resources.

    Prior to approval of the MPO, PVMC may be required to modify the proposed MPO to align it with the description of the selected alternative in the final ROD. In addition, the TNF Forest Supervisor would require PVMC to submit a reclamation bond or other acceptable financial assurance to ensure that NFS lands and resources involved with the mining operation are reclaimed in accordance with the approved MPO and Forest Service requirements for environmental protection (36 CFR 228.8 and 228.13). After the Forest Service has determined that the MPO conforms to the ROD and that the reclamation bond is acceptable, the TNF Forest Supervisor would approve the MPO. Implementation of mining operations that affect NFS lands and resources may not commence until the MPO is approved and the reclamation bond or other financial assurance is in place.

    Preliminary Issues

    Issues to be analyzed in the EIS will be developed during the scoping process. Preliminary issues expected to be analyzed include potential impacts to: Groundwater and surface water quantity and quality; riparian and aquatic areas and springs; biological resources, including threatened and endangered species and Forest Service sensitive species; historical and cultural resources; air quality; socioeconomics; transportation and traffic; noise; visual resources; and recreation. This list is subject to change based on comments received from the public and resource agencies.

    Permits or Licenses Required

    The following is a list of permits for Pinto Valley Mine: Permits associated with groundwater withdrawal and dam safety permits (Arizona Department of Water Resources); air quality Class II synthetic minor permit (Arizona Department of Environmental Quality), Arizona Pollutant Discharge Elimination System process and stormwater permits, Aquifer Protection Permit, and public water supply permit (Arizona Department of Environmental Quality); Mined Land Reclamation Plan (Arizona State Mine Inspector); letter agreement for a commercial vehicle staging area (Arizona Department of Transportation); and other required permits. Because the Pinto Valley Mine is an operating mine, PVMC already holds required permits. PVMC would update and amend permits for additional activities proposed in the MPO, as required.

    Scoping Process

    This notice of intent initiates the scoping process, which guides the development of the Pinto Valley Mine EIS. Public comments may be submitted to TNF in a variety of ways, including: By email, via the project Web site, by mail, and by facsimile. In addition, TNF will conduct two open houses during the scoping process through which members of the public can learn about the proposed action and the NEPA review process, and submit comments. Comments sought by TNF include specific comments related to the proposed action, appropriate information that could be pertinent to the description of baseline resource conditions and analysis of environmental effects, identification of significant issues, identification of reasonably foreseeable actions that should be considered in the cumulative analysis, and identification of potential design features and alternatives.

    Written comments may be sent to: Pinto Valley Mine EIS Comments, 2324 E McDowell Rd., Phoenix, AZ 85006. Comments may also be sent by email to: [email protected], or sent by facsimile to (602) 225-5302.

    It is important that reviewers provide comments at such times and in such manner that they are useful to the agency's preparation of the environmental impact statement. Therefore, comments should be provided prior to the close of the comment period and should clearly articulate the reviewer's concerns and contentions and specific recommendations wherever possible. When submitting comments, please keep them specific to this proposal only. Comments which are not specific to the project and project area will be deemed outside the scope of the analysis and will not be considered. If you are including references, citations, or additional information to be considered for this project, please provide a copy and specify exactly how the material relates to the project. Also indicate exactly what part of the material you would like us to consider (such as page or figure number). Comments received in response to this solicitation, including names and addresses of those who comment, will be part of the public record for this proposed action. Comments submitted anonymously will be accepted and considered; however, anonymous comments will not provide the agency with the ability to provide the respondent with subsequent environmental documents.

    Dated: March 21, 2017. Jeanne M. Higgins, Associate Deputy Chief, National Forest System.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06020 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3411-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Rural Utilities Service Information Collection Activity; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Rural Utilities Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the United States Department of Agriculture's Rural Utilities Service (RUS) invites comments on this information collection for which approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) will be requested.

    DATES:

    Comments on this notice must be received by May 30, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Thomas P. Dickson, Acting Director, Program Development and Regulatory Analysis, Rural Utilities Service, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., STOP 1522, Room 5164 South Building, Washington, DC 20250-1522. Telephone: (202) 690-4492. Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) regulation (5 CFR part 1320) implementing provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13) requires that interested members of the public and affected agencies have an opportunity to comment on information collection and recordkeeping activities (see 5 CFR 1320.8(d)). This notice identifies an information collection that RUS is submitting to OMB for approval. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) Ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments may be sent to: Thomas P. Dickson, Acting Director, Program Development and Regulatory Analysis, Rural Utilities Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, STOP 1522, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250-1522. Email: [email protected]

    Title: Technical Assistance Programs.

    OMB Control Number: 0572-0112.

    Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    Abstract: The Rural Utilities Service is authorized by section 306 of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1926) to make loans to public agencies, American Indian tribes, and nonprofit corporations to fund the development of drinking water, wastewater, and solid waste disposal facilities in rural areas with populations of up to 10,000 residents. Under the CONACT, 7 U.S.C. 1925(a), as amended, section 306(a)(14)(A) authorizes Technical Assistance and Training grants, and 7 U.S.C. 1932(b), section 310B authorizes Solid Waste Management grants. Grants are made for 100 percent of the cost of assistance. The Technical Assistance and Training Grants and Solid Waste Management Grants programs are administered through 7 CFR part 1775.

    Estimate of Burden: Public reporting for this collection of information is estimated to average 3 hours per response.

    Respondents: Not-for-profit institutions.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 142.

    Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 17.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 6,250.

    Copies of this information collection can be obtained from Thomas P. Dickson, Program Development and Regulatory Analysis, at (202) 690-4492. All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record.

    Dated: March 16, 2017. Christopher McLean, Acting Administrator, Rural Utilities Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06026 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Rural Utilities Service Information Collection Activity; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Rural Utilities Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Rural Utilities Service, invites comments on this information collection for which the Agency intends to request approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

    DATES:

    Comments on this notice must be received by May 30, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Thomas P. Dickson, Deputy Director, Program Development & Regulatory Analysis, Rural Utilities Service, USDA, 1400 Independence Ave. SW., STOP 1522, Room 5164 South Building, Washington, DC 20250-1522. Telephone: (202) 690-4492. (202) FAX: (202) 720-8435. [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: 7 CFR 1753, Telecommunications System Construction Policies and Procedures.

    OMB Control Number: 0572-0059.

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

    Abstract: In order to facilitate the programmatic interest of the RE Act, and, in order to assure that loans made or guaranteed by the Agency are adequately secured, the Agency, as a secured lender, has established certain forms for materials, equipment and construction of electric and telecommunications systems. The use of standard forms, construction contracts, and procurement procedures helps assure the Agency that appropriate standards and specifications are maintained, the Agency's loan security is not adversely affected; and the loan response. In an effort to improve customer service provided to RUS rural borrowers, the Agency continues to revise, consolidate, and/or streamline its current contracts and contracting procedures.

    Respondents: Business or other for-profit and non-profit institutions.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 513.

    Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 9.

    Estimate Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 8,434 hours.

    Copies of this information collection can be requested from MaryPat Daskal, Program Development and Regulatory Analysis, Rural Utilities Service by telephone at (202) 720-7853 or email: [email protected]

    Comments are invited on (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumption used; (c) Ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques on other forms of information technology.

    All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record.

    Dated: March 22, 2017. Christopher A. McLean, Acting Administrator, Rural Utilities Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06024 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meeting of the Oregon Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) that a meeting of the Oregon Advisory Committee (Committee) to the Commission will be held at 1:00 p.m. (Pacific Time) Tuesday, April 4, 2017. The purpose of the meeting is for the Committee to consider and discuss potential topics for their FY17 civil rights project.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Tuesday, April 4, 2017, at 1:00 p.m. PST.

    Public Call Information: Dial: 888-352-6793, Conference ID: 5731343.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This meeting is available to the public through the following toll-free call-in number: 888-352-6793, conference ID number: 5731343. Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-977-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.

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

    Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing prior to and after the meeting at http://facadatabase.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=270. Please click on the “Meeting Details” and “Documents” links. Records generated from this meeting may also be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's Web site, http://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Regional Programs Unit at the above email or street address.

    Agenda I. Introductions II. Discussion Regarding Potential FY17 Topics III. Public Comment IV. Next Steps V. Adjournment Dated: March 22, 2017. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06058 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meeting of the Kansas Advisory Committee To Discuss the Committee's Next Topic of Civil Rights Inquiry AGENCY:

    U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act that the Kansas Advisory Committee (Committee) will hold a meeting on Friday, April 14, 2017, at 1:00 p.m. CST. The meeting will include a discussion of current civil rights concerns in Kansas for future study.

    DATES:

    The meeting will take place on Friday, April 14, 2017, at 1:00 p.m. CST.

    ADDRESSES:

    Public call information: Dial: 888-556-4997, Conference ID: 5140898.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Members of the public can listen to the discussion. This meeting is available to the public through the following toll-free call-in number: 888-556-4997, conference ID: 5140898. Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. An open comment period will be provided to allow members of the public to make a statement as time allows. The conference call operator will ask callers to identify themselves, the organization they are affiliated with (if any), and an email address prior to placing callers into the conference room. Callers can expect to incur regular charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, according to their wireless plan. The Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-977-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.

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

    Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Records of the meeting will be available via www.facadatabase.gov under the Commission on Civil Rights, Kansas Advisory Committee link (http://www.facadatabase.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=249). Click on “meeting details” and then “documents” to download. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's Web site, http://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Regional Programs Unit at the above email or street address.

    Agenda Welcome and Roll Call Civil Rights in Kansas: 2017 Project Concepts Future Plans and Actions Public Comment Adjournment Dated: March 22, 2017. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06069 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meeting of the Ohio Advisory Committee for a Meeting To Discuss the Committee's Next Topic of Civil Rights Study: Equal Access to Education AGENCY:

    U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act that the Ohio Advisory Committee (Committee) will hold a meeting on Wednesday, April 26, 2017, at 3:00 p.m. EST for the purpose of discussing a proposal to study civil rights and equal access to education in Ohio.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Wednesday, April 26, 2017, at 3:00 p.m. EST.

    ADDRESSES:

    Public call information: Dial: 877-718-5101, Conference ID: 4192721.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Members of the public can listen to the discussion. This meeting is available to the public through the following toll-free call-in number: 877-718-5101, conference ID: 4192721. Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. An open comment period will be provided to allow members of the public to make a statement as time allows. The conference call operator will ask callers to identify themselves, the organization they are affiliated with (if any), and an email address prior to placing callers into the conference room. Callers can expect to incur regular charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, according to their wireless plan. The Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-977-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.

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

    Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Midwestern Regional Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Records of the meeting will be available via www.facadatabase.gov under the Commission on Civil Rights, Ohio Advisory Committee link (http://www.facadatabase.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=268). Select “meeting details” and “documents” to download. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's Web site, http://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Midwestern Regional Office at the above email or street address.

    Agenda Welcome and Introductions Project Proposal: “Barriers to Equal Access to Education in Ohio” Public Comment Future Plans and Actions Adjournment Dated: March 22, 2017. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06071 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meeting of the Nevada State Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) that a meeting of the Nevada Advisory Committee (Committee) to the Commission will be held at 1:00 p.m. (Pacific Time) Wednesday, March 29, 2017, for the purpose of hearing testimony on the civil rights issues regarding municipal fees in Nevada and to discuss themes and recommendations to include in an advisory memorandum issued to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Wednesday, March 29, 2017, at 1:00 p.m. PST.

    Public Call Information: Dial: 877-723-9509, Conference ID: 7100479.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This meeting is available to the public through the following toll-free call-in number: 877-723-9509, conference ID number: 7100479. Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-977-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.

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

    Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing prior to and after the meeting at http://facadatabase.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=261. Please click on the “Meeting Details” and “Documents” links. Records generated from this meeting may also be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's Web site, http://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Regional Programs Unit at the above email or street address.

    Agenda I. Welcome II. Approval of March 9, 2017 Minutes III. Testimony from Jessica Feierman, Associate Director at the Juvenile Law Center

    a. Questions

    IV. Hearing Debrief V. Public Comment VI. Next Steps VII. Adjournment Exceptional Circumstance: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Management Regulations (41 CFR 102-3.150), the notice for this meeting is given less than 15 calendar days prior to the meeting due to exceptional circumstance of the Committee project supporting the Commission's 2017 statutory enforcement report. Dated: March 22, 2017 David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06061 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Colorado Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meetings.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission), and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), that a planning meeting of the Colorado Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene at 11:00 a.m. (MST) on Friday, April 14, 2017, via teleconference. The purpose of the meeting is to review presentations on two civil rights topics for study, Refugee Resettlement and Blaine Amendment's Impact on Education in Colorado. The SACs plans are to select and vote of one of the issues for future study.

    DATES:

    Friday, April 14, 2017 at 11:00 a.m. (MST).

    ADDRESSES:

    To be held via teleconference:

    Conference Call Toll-Free Number: 1-888-461-2024, Conference ID: 2445417.

    TDD: Dial Federal Relay Service 1-800-977-8339 and give the operator the above conference call number and conference ID.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Malee V. Craft, DFO, [email protected], 303-866-1040.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Members of the public may listen to the discussion by dialing the following Conference Call Toll-Free Number: 1-888-461-2024; Conference ID: 2445417. Please be advised that before being placed into the conference call, the operator will ask callers to provide their names, their organizational affiliations (if any), and an email address (if available) prior to placing callers into the conference room. 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 phone number.

    Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the discussion by first calling the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1-800-977-8339 and provide the FRS operator with the Conference Call Toll-Free Number: 1-888-461-2024, Conference ID: 2445417. Members of the public are invited to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office by Monday, May 15, 2017. Written comments may be mailed to the Rocky Mountain Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1961 Stout Street, Suite 13-201, Denver, CO 80294, faxed to (303) 866-1050, or emailed to Evelyn Bohor at [email protected]. Persons who desire additional information may contact the Rocky Mountain Regional Office at (303) 866-1040.

    Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing as they become available at http://www.facadatabase.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=238 and clicking on the “Meeting Details” and “Documents” links. Records generated from this meeting may also be inspected and reproduced at the Rocky Mountain 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 Rocky Mountain Regional Office at the above phone number, email or street address.

    Agenda • Welcome and Roll-call Malee V. Craft, Regional Director, Rocky Mountain Regional Office (RMRO) • Discussion of Civil Rights Issues Alvina L. Earnhart, Chair, Colorado State Advisory Committee • Next Steps Dated: March 22, 2017. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06060 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meeting of the Nevada State Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) that a meeting of the Nevada Advisory Committee (Committee) to the Commission will be held at 1:00 p.m. (Pacific Time) Thursday, April 20, 2017, for the purpose of discussing themes and recommendations to include in an advisory memorandum issued to the US Commission on Civil Rights.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Thursday, April 20, 2017, at 1:00 p.m. PST.

    Public Call Information: Dial: 888-389-5988, Conference ID: 2998703.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This meeting is available to the public through the following toll-free call-in number: 888-389-5988, conference ID number: 2998703. Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-977-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.

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

    Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing prior to and after the meeting at http://facadatabase.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=261. Please click on the “Meeting Details” and “Documents” links. Records generated from this meeting may also be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's Web site, http://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Regional Programs Unit at the above email or street address.

    Agenda I. Welcome II. Discussion on Organization of Advisory Memorandum a. Themes b. Recommendations III. Public Comment IV. Next Steps V. Adjournment Dated: March 22, 2017. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06062 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meeting of the Indiana Advisory Committee To Discuss Civil Rights Concerns in the State and Determine the Next Topic of Committee Study AGENCY:

    U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act that the Indiana Advisory Committee (Committee) will hold a meeting on Tuesday, April 11, 2017, at 4:00 p.m. EST for the purpose of discussing civil rights concerns in the State for future Committee study.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Tuesday, April 11, 2017, at 4:00 p.m. EST.

    ADDRESSES:

    Public call information: Dial: 800-500-0311, Conference ID: 8736732.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Members of the public can listen to the discussion. This meeting is available to the public through the following toll-free call-in number: 800-500-0311, conference ID: 8736732. Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. An open comment period will be provided to allow members of the public to make a statement as time allows. The conference call operator will ask callers to identify themselves, the organization they are affiliated with (if any), and an email address prior to placing callers into the conference room. Callers can expect to incur regular charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, according to their wireless plan. The Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-977-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.

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

    Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Records of the meeting will be available via www.facadatabase.gov under the Commission on Civil Rights, Indiana Advisory Committee link (http://www.facadatabase.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=247). Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's Web site, http://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Regional Programs Unit Office at the above email or street address.

    Agenda Welcome and Roll Call Discussion: Civil Rights in Indiana Public Comment Future Plans and Actions Adjournment Dated: March 22, 2017. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06070 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XF289 Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; General Provisions for Domestic Fisheries; Application for Exempted Fishing Permit AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Assistant Regional Administrator for Sustainable Fisheries, Greater Atlantic Region, NMFS, has made a preliminary determination that an Exempted Fishing Permit (EFP) application submitted by the Northeast Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC) contains all of the required information and warrants further consideration. This EFP would exempt participating vessels from the following types of fishery regulations: Minimum fish size restrictions; fish possession limits for species not protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA); gear-specific fish possession restrictions for the purpose of at-sea sampling; and, in limited situations for research purposes only, retaining and landing prohibited fish species. Regulations under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act require publication of this notification to provide interested parties the opportunity to comment on EFP applications.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before April 12, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit written comments by either of the following methods:

    Email: [email protected] Include in the subject line “Comments on NEFSC Study Fleet EFP.”

    Mail: John K. Bullard, Regional Administrator, NMFS, Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office, 55 Great Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930. Mark the outside of the envelope “Comments on NEFSC Study Fleet EFP.”

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Spencer Talmage, Fishery Management Specialist, 978-281-9232, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    NEFSC submitted a complete application for an EFP on February 21, 2017, to enable data collection activities that the regulations on commercial fishing would otherwise restrict.

    The NEFSC Study Fleet Program was established in 2002 to more fully characterize commercial fishing operations and to leverage sampling opportunities to augment NMFS data collection programs. NEFSC contracts commercial fishing vessels to collect tow-by-tow catch and environmental data, and to fulfill specific biological sampling needs. To collect these data, NEFSC Study Fleet Program obtains an EFP to secure the necessary waivers for these vessels to possess and land fish that would otherwise be prohibited by regulations. The EFP would exempt 31 Federally permitted commercial fishing vessels from the following regulations while participating in the Study Fleet Program and operating under NEFSC managed projects: Minimum fish size restrictions; fish possession limits for species not protected under the ESA; gear-specific fish possession restrictions for the purpose of at-sea sampling; and, in limited situations for research purposes only, retaining and landing prohibited fish species. Table 1 lists the specific regulations that would be exempted by this permit. The participating vessels would be obligated to comply with all applicable requirements and restrictions specified at 50 CFR part 648, unless specifically exempted in this EFP.

    Fishing vessel crews trained by the NEFSC Study Fleet Program would sort, weigh, and measure fish that are to be discarded. In the course of sampling, some discarded species would be on deck slightly longer than under normal sorting procedures, which requires an exemption from the following restrictions: Minimum fish size; fish possession limits; prohibited fish species, not including species protected under the ESA; and gear-specific fish possession restrictions for at-sea sampling.

    Participating vessels would also be authorized to retain and land, in limited situations for research purposes only, fish species and/or sizes that are not in compliance with fishing regulations. The vessels would be authorized to retain specific amounts of particular species in whole or round weight condition, which would be delivered upon landing to NMFS staff. To ensure that the collection needs of the Study Fleet Program are not exceeded, participating vessels are required to obtain a formal Biological Sampling Request in writing from the NEFSC Study Fleet Program prior to landing any sublegal fish. None of the landed biological samples from these trips would be sold for commercial use, or utilized for any purpose other than scientific research.

    All catch would be attributed to the appropriate commercial fishing quota, and vessels would not be exempt from any inseason quota closure. For vessels on a groundfish sector trip, all catch of Northeast multispecies stocks allocated to sectors would be deducted from its sector's Annual Catch Entitlement (ACE). Once the ACE for a stock has been reached in a sector, vessels would no longer be allowed to fish in that stock area, unless its sector acquires additional ACE for the limiting stock. For common pool vessels, all catch of Northeast multispecies stocks would be counted toward the appropriate trimester total allowable catch (TAC). Common pool vessels would be subject to applicable trimester total allowable catch (TAC) closures.

    Table 1—Specific Regulations Covered by the Proposed Exempted Fishing Permit NEFSC Study Fleet Program EFP Number of vessels 36. Exempted regulations in 50 CFR part 648 Size limits: § 648.83 NE multispecies minimum sizes. § 648.93 Monkfish minimum fish size. § 648.147 Black sea bass minimum fish size. Possession restrictions: § 648.86(a) Haddock. § 648.86(b) Atlantic cod. § 648.86(c) Atlantic halibut. § 648.86(d) Small-mesh multispecies. § 648.86(l) Zero retention of Atlantic wolffish and windowpane flounder. § 648.86(o) Possession limits implemented by Regional Administrator. § 648.94 Monkfish possession limit. § 648.322 Skate possession and landing restrictions. § 648.145 Black sea bass possession limits. § 648.92(b)(2)(i) Prohibition from landing NE multispecies on monkfish-only day-at-sea. NEFSC Study Fleet Program Biological Sampling Needs

    As described above, participating vessels would only collect and land biological samples after the NEFSC issues a formal request in writing. Table 2 details the Study Fleet Program's sampling needs.

    Table 2—Study Fleet Program's Biological Sample Collection Needs Species Stock area * Gear types # Collection
  • frequency
  • Individual fish per collection period Maximum weight allowed per trip
  • (lb)
  • Maximum
  • allowance
  • (lb)
  • Windowpane Flounder GOM, GB OTF, DRS Monthly 40 ea./mo 30 360. Monkfish GOM, GB, SNE OTF, GNS, DRS Monthly 15 ea/mo SNE, 15 ea/mo GOM 750 9,000. Haddock GOM, GB, SNE OTF, LLB, GNS, DRS Monthly/Seasonal 40 ea/mo 320 1,600. Atlantic Cod GOM, GB, SNE OTF, LLB, GNS, DRS Monthly 120 ea/mo 270 7,200. Barndoor Skate GOM, GB, SNE OTF, GNS, DRS Quarterly 20 ea/qtr 150 600. Thorny Skate GOM, GB, SNE OTF, GNS, DRS Quarterly 20 ea/qtr 150 600. Black Sea Bass GB, SNE PTF, OTF Monthly 30 ea/mo 180 2,160. Atlantic Wolffish GOM, GB OTF, GNS, LLB Monthly 40 ea/mo 160 3,500. Cusk GOM, GB OTF,GNS, LLB Monthly 40 ea/mo 140 3,600. Atlantic Halibut GOM, GB OTF, GNS, LLB Monthly 20 ea/mo 500 6,000. Butterfish SNE, MA OTM Monthly 150 ea/mo 75 900. Atlantic Herring Any Area OTM, OTF, PTM, PUR Monthly 100 ea/mo 100 1,200. River Herring/Shad Any Area OTM, OTF, PTM, PUR Monthly 100 ea/mo of ea species 100 of ea. species 1,200 of ea. species. Round Herring Any Area OTM, OTF, PTM, PUR Monthly 100 ea/mo 100 1,200. Silver Hake Any Area OTM, OTF, PTM, PUR Monthly 100 ea/mo 260 3,120. Atlantic Mackerel Any Area OTM, OTF, PTM, HND, PUR Monthly 100 ea/mo 260 3,120. Shortfin Squid Any Area OTM, OTF Monthly 100 ea/mo 75 900. Sand Lance Any Area OTM, OTF, PTM, PUR Monthly 100 ea/mo 25 300. Longfin Squid Any Area OTM, OTF Monthly 100 ea/mo 75 900. * Stock area abbreviations: Gulf of Maine (GOM), Georges Bank (GB), Southern New England (SNE) # Gear abbreviations: Otter trawl (OTF), bottom longline (LLB), sink gillnet (GNS), sea scallop dredge (DRS), fish pot (PTF), hand lines, auto jig (HND), purse seine (PUR), otter trawl midwater (OTM), pair trawl midwater (PTM).

    If approved, the applicant may request minor modifications and extensions to the EFP throughout the year. EFP modifications and extensions may be granted without further notice if they are deemed essential to facilitate completion of the proposed research and have minimal impact that does not change the scope of the initially approved EFP request. Any fishing activity conducted outside the scope of the exempted fishing activity would be prohibited.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: March 22, 2017. Karen H. Abrams, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06057 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Meeting of the Advisory Committee on Commercial Remote Sensing ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Advisory Committee on Commercial Remote Sensing (ACCRES) will meet April 12, 2017.

    DATES:

    The meeting is scheduled as follows: April 12, 2017, 9:00 a.m.-4:00 p.m. There will be two sessions open to the public. The first open session will be from 9:00 a.m.-11:30 a.m. and a second open session from 12:30 p.m.-2:45 p.m. A short closed session will be held from 3:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    The public portion of the meeting will be held at the Institute for Defense Analyses (IDA)—Room 1301, 4850 Mark Center Drive, Alexandria, VA 22311.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Samira Patel, NOAA/NESDIS/CRSRA, 1335 East West Highway, Room 8247, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910; (301) 713-7077 or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    As required by section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. 2 (FACA) and its implementing regulations, see 41 CFR 102-3.155, notice is hereby given of the meeting of ACCRES. ACCRES was established by the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) on May 21, 2002, to advise the Secretary of Commerce through the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere on matters relating to the U.S. commercial remote sensing space industry and on the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's activities to carry out the responsibilities of the Department of Commerce set forth in the National and Commercial Space Programs Act of 2010 (51 U.S.C. 60101 et seq.).

    Purpose of the Meeting and Matters To Be Considered

    The first part of the meeting will be open to the public pursuant to Section 10(a)(1) of the FACA. During the open portion of the meeting, the Committee will receive updates on NOAA's Commercial Remote Sensing Regulatory Affairs activities. The Committee will also be available to receive public comments on its activities. The second open session of the meeting will be dedicated to discussing legislative and regulatory reform.

    After the open meeting, a short follow-on session will be closed to the public pursuant to Section 10(d) of FACA as amended by Section 5(c) of the Government in Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409 and in accordance with Section 552b(c)(1) of Title 5, United States Code, which authorizes closure of meetings likely to disclose matters that are “specifically authorized under criteria established by Executive order to be kept secret in the interests of national defense or foreign policy and . . . in fact properly classified pursuant to such Executive order.” The part of the meeting which will be closed will address new licensing conditions for the operation of U.S. remote sensing space systems, the ongoing review and implementation of the 2015 U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act and related national security, foreign policy concerns and future technology considerations for NOAA's licensing decisions. These discussions are likely to disclose matters that are specifically authorized under criteria established by Executive Order 13526 to be kept secret in the interest of national defense or foreign policy and are in fact properly classified pursuant to such Executive Order. In compliance with Section 10(d) of FACA and 41 CFR 102-3.155, ACCRES has obtained an agency determination of closure, and the notice of this determination is available upon request.

    Special Accommodations

    The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for special accommodations may be directed to Samira Patel, NOAA/NESDIS/CRSRA, 1335 East-West Highway, Room 8247, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910; (301) 713-7077 or s[email protected]

    Additional Information and Public Comments

    Any member of the public who plans to attend the open meeting should RSVP to Samira Patel at (301) 713-7077, or [email protected] by April 5, 2017. Any member of the public wishing further information concerning the meeting or who wishes to submit oral or written comments should contact Tahara Dawkins, Designated Federal Officer for ACCRES, NOAA/NESDIS/CRSRA, 1335 East-West Highway, Room 8260, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910. Copies of the draft meeting agenda can be obtained from Samira Patel at (301) 713-7077, or [email protected]

    ACCRES expects that public statements presented at its meetings will not be repetitive of previously-submitted oral or written statements. In general, each individual or group making an oral presentation may be limited to a total time of five minutes. Written comments sent to NOAA/NESDIS/CRSRA on or before April 5, 2017 will be provided to Committee members in advance of the meeting. Comments received too close to the meeting date will normally be provided to Committee members at the meeting.

    Stephen M. Volz, Assistant Administrator for Satellite and Information Services.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06072 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-HR-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Telecommunications and Information Administration Community Broadband Workshop AGENCY:

    National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of open meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), through the BroadbandUSA program, will hold a technical assistance workshop to share information to help communities build their broadband capacity and utilization. The workshop will present in-depth sessions on planning and funding broadband infrastructure projects. The planning session will explore effective business and partnership models, and the funding session will identify available funding types, including federal funding.

    DATES:

    The Technical Assistance Workshop will be held on April 19, 2017, from 8:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m., Mountain Standard Time.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held in Mesa, AZ at the Mesa Arts Center Meeting Room, 1 East Main Street, Mesa, AZ 85201.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Giselle Sanders, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 4628, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-7971; email: [email protected] Please direct media inquiries to NTIA's Office of Public Affairs, (202) 482-7002; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    NTIA's BroadbandUSA program provides expert advice and field-proven tools for assessing broadband adoption, planning new infrastructure, and engaging a wide range of partners in broadband projects. BroadbandUSA convenes workshops on a regular basis to bring stakeholders together to discuss ways to improve broadband policies, share best practices, and connect communities to federal agencies and other funding sources for the purpose of expanding broadband infrastructure and adoption throughout America's communities. This workshop will explore two topics for broadband infrastructure: Planning and funding.

    The workshop will feature subject matter experts from NTIA's BroadbandUSA program. The first session will explore key elements required for planning successful broadband projects. The second session will identify funding models, including federal programs that support broadband infrastructure projects.

    The workshop will be open to the public. Pre-registration is requested, and space is limited. NTIA will ask registrants to provide their first and last names and email addresses for both registration purposes and to receive any updates on the workshop. If capacity for the meeting is reached, NTIA will maintain a waiting list and will inform those on the waiting list if space becomes available. Meeting updates, changes in the agenda, if any, and relevant documents will be also available on NTIA's Web site at https://www2.ntia.doc.gov/arizona-technical-assistance-workshop.

    The public meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Individuals requiring accommodations, such as language interpretation or other ancillary aids, are asked to notify Giselle Sanders at the contact information listed above at least five (5) business days before the meeting.

    Dated: March 23, 2017. Kathy D. Smith, Chief Counsel, National Telecommunications and Information Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06097 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-60-P
    COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION Market Risk Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) announces that on April 25, 2017, from 10:00 a.m. to 1:30 p.m., the Market Risk Advisory Committee (MRAC) will hold a public meeting at the CFTC's Washington, DC, headquarters. At this meeting, the MRAC will discuss: (1) The staff's response to the CRM Subcommittee's recommendations, which the MRAC adopted and also recommended that the Commission consider at the November 17, 2016, MRAC meeting, on how Central Counterparties (CCPs) can further enhance their efforts in preparing for the default of a significant clearing member; (2) cybersecurity trends; and (3) how well the derivatives markets are currently functioning, including the impact and implications of the evolving structure of these markets on the movement of risk across market participants.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on April 25, 2017, from 10:00 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. Members of the public who wish to submit written statements in connection with the meeting should submit them by May 2, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will take place in the Conference Center at the CFTC's headquarters, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW., Washington, DC 20581. Written statements should be submitted by mail to: Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW., Washington, DC 20581, attention: Secretary of the Commission; or by electronic mail to: [email protected] Please use the title “Market Risk Advisory Committee” in any written statement you submit. Any statements submitted in connection with the committee meeting will be made available to the public, including by publication on the CFTC Web site, http://www.cftc.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Petal Walker, MRAC Designated Federal Officer, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW., Washington, DC 20581; (202) 418-5794.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The meeting will be open to the public with seating on a first-come, first-served basis. Members of the public may also listen to the meeting by telephone by calling a domestic toll-free telephone or international toll or toll-free number to connect to a live, listen-only audio feed. Call-in participants should be prepared to provide their first name, last name, and affiliation.

    Domestic Toll Free: 1-888-469-3048.

    International Toll and Toll Free: Will be posted on the CFTC's Web site, http://www.cftc.gov, on the page for the meeting, under Related Links.

    Pass Code/Pin Code: 3820902.

    The meeting agenda may change to accommodate other MRAC priorities. For agenda updates, please visit the MRAC committee site at: http://www.cftc.gov/About/CFTCCommittees/MarketRiskAdvisoryCommittee/mrac_meetings.

    After the meeting, a transcript of the meeting will be published through a link on the CFTC's Web site, http://www.cftc.gov. All written submissions provided to the CFTC in any form will also be published on the CFTC's Web site. Persons requiring special accommodations to attend the meeting because of a disability should notify the contact person above.

    Authority:

    5 U.S.C. app. 2 § 10(a)(2).

    Dated: March 23, 2017. Christopher J. Kirkpatrick, Secretary of the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06121 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary [Docket ID: DOD-2017-OS-0013] Proposed Collection; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) announces a proposed public information collection and seeks public comment on the provisions thereof. Comments are invited on: whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the information collection on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    DATES:

    Consideration will be given to all comments received by May 30, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by any of the following methods:

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

    Mail: Department of Defense, Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer, Directorate for Oversight and Compliance, Regulatory and Advisory Committee Division, 4800 Mark Center Drive, Mailbox #24, Suite 08D09B, Alexandria, VA 22350-1700.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name, docket number and title for this Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.

    Any associated form(s) for this collection may be located within this same electronic docket and downloaded for review/testing. Follow the instructions at http://www.regulations.gov for submitting comments. Please submit comments on any given form identified by docket number, form number, and title.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request more information on this proposed information collection or to obtain a copy of the proposal and associated collection instruments, please write to the Federal Voting Assistance Program ATTN: Mr. David Beirne, 4800 Mark Center Drive, Suite 03J25 Alexandria, VA 22350, or call at (571) 372-0740.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Overseas Citizen Population Survey; 0704-0539.

    Needs and Uses: The information collection requirement is necessary for Federal Voting Assistance Program (FVAP), an agency of the Department of Defense, to fulfill the mandate of the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA of 1986 [42 U.S.C. 1973ff]). UOCAVA requires a statistical analysis report to the President and Congress on the effectiveness of assistance under the Act, a statistical analysis of voter participation, and a description of State/Federal cooperation. The data obtained through this study will allow FVAP to refine its methodology for estimating the number of overseas U.S. civilians who are eligible to vote and who have registered and participated in the past, and using these estimates to address the question of whether the registration and voting propensity of the overseas civilian population differs from that of a comparable domestic or military populations. Conducting this research will help FVAP meet its federal and congressional mandates in terms of reporting annually on its activities and on overall voter registration and participation rates after each Presidential election. The data obtained through this study is also intended to provide insights into existing barriers to UOCAVA voting and recommendations for addressing these challenges.

    Affected Public: Individuals or Households.

    Annual Burden Hours: 3,000.

    Number of Respondents: 18,000.

    Responses per Respondent: 1.

    Annual Responses: 18,000.

    Average Burden per Response: 10 Minutes.

    Frequency: On Occasion.

    The Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA) requires the States to allow Uniformed Services personnel, their family members, and overseas citizens to use absentee registration procedures and to vote by absentee ballot in general, special, primary, and runoff elections for Federal offices. The Act covers members of the Uniformed Services and the merchant marine to include the commissioned corps of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and Public Health Service and their eligible dependents, Federal civilian employees overseas, and overseas U.S. citizens not affiliated with the Federal Government. Subsequent to each Presidential election year, FVAP must report voter registration and participation rates for uniformed service voters and overseas citizens to Congress; while FVAP collects data for this report through regular surveys of uniformed service voters and other relevant UOCAVA populations, it does not currently collect data from non-military, non-government overseas civilians. Previous attempts to collect information on the overseas citizen's population to identify and measure its voter registration and participation rates in Federal elections suffered from significant bias; the Overseas Citizens Population Survey is focused on refining a prototype method to report voter registration and participation rates from a more well-defined subgroup of overseas civilians.

    Dated: March 23, 2017. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register, Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06124 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary Defense Innovation Board; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Meeting AGENCY:

    Deputy Chief Management Officer, Department of Defense.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Defense (DoD) is publishing this notice to announce that the following Federal Advisory Committee meeting of the Defense Innovation Board will take place.

    DATES:

    Open to the public Tuesday April 4, 2017 from 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. Closed to the public Tuesday April 4, 2017 from 11:45 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    The open portion of the meeting will be held at The Pentagon, Washington DC, in the Pentagon Conference Center—Room B6. (Escort is required for attendees who do not have Pentagon credentials. See guidance in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.) The closed portion of the meeting will be held in the Pentagon.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Roma Laster, (703) 695-7563 (Voice), (703) 614-4365 (Facsimile), [email protected] (Email). Mailing address is Defense Innovation Board, 9000 Defense Pentagon, Room 5E572, Washington, DC 20350.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Due to circumstances beyond the control of the Designated Federal Officer and the Department of Defense, the Defense Innovation Board is unable to provide public notification, as required by 41 CFR 102-3.150(a), for its meeting on Tuesday, April 4, 2017. Accordingly, the Advisory Committee Management Officer for the Department of Defense, pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.150(b), waives the 15-calendar day notification requirement.

    This meeting is being held under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) of 1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and 41 CFR 102-3.140 and 102-3.150.

    Purpose of the Meeting: The mission of the Defense Innovation Board (DIB) is to examine and provide the Secretary of Defense and the Deputy Secretary of Defense independent advice and recommendations on innovative means to address future challenges in terms of integrated change to organizational structure and processes, business and functional concepts, and technology applications. The DIB focuses on (a) technology and capabilities, (b) practices and operations, and (c) people and culture.

    Agenda: During the open portion of the meeting, the DIB will receive an update from the Science and Technology Subcommittee, and deliberate and propose observations on the DIB's Interim Recommendation 12: Establish a global and secure repository for data collection, sharing, and analysis. These findings will be based upon discussions and observations of the DIB. The DIB will invite selected experts to provide analysis and inputs related to Recommendation 12 during the meeting. Potential experts include representatives from the Joint Staff Director for Logistics (J4); the Business Transformation Office—Army; the Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation office; the Defense Digital Service; the office of the Director for Global Operations (J3); the office of the Director of Future Operations (US Air Force/A3); and the office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence (Warfighter Support). Members of the public will have the opportunity to provide input on the DIB's interim recommendation to establish a global and secure repository for data collection, sharing, and analysis (limited availability). See below for additional information on how to sign up. The DIB will be briefed on DoD's implementation activities related to DIB recommendations. During the closed portion of the meeting, the DIB will have detailed and classified discussions of their observations and recommendations with DoD senior leaders to include the Secretary of Defense and/or the Deputy Secretary of Defense. They will also receive classified informational briefings related to “data” and/or machine learning from representatives from the Joint Staff, the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, and the U.S. Air Force/A3.

    Meeting Accessibility: Pursuant to Federal statutes and regulations (FACA, the Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b, and 41 CFR 102-3.140 through 102-3.165) and the availability of space, the meeting is open to the public from 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. Seating is on a first-come basis. Members of the public wishing to attend the meeting should contact the Executive Director to register and make arrangements for a Pentagon escort, if necessary, no later than five business days prior to the meeting, at the address noted in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

    Special Accommodations: Individuals requiring special accommodations to access the public meeting should contact the Executive Director at least five business days prior to the meeting so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1), the DoD has determined that the portion of the meeting from 11:45 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. shall be closed to the public. The Acting Deputy Chief Management Officer, in consultation with the Office of the DoD General Counsel, has determined in writing that this portion of the committee's meeting will be closed as the discussions will involve classified matters of national security. Such classified material is so inextricably intertwined with the unclassified material that it cannot reasonably be segregated into separate discussions without disclosing matters that are classified SECRET or higher.

    Written Statements: Pursuant to section 10(a)(3) of the FACA and 41 CFR 102-3.140, the public or interested organizations may submit written comments to the DIB about its approved agenda pertaining to this meeting or at any time regarding the DIB's mission. Individuals submitting a written statement must submit their statement to the Executive Director at [email protected] Written comments that do not pertain to a scheduled meeting may be submitted at any time. However, if individual comments pertain to a specific topic being discussed at the planned meeting, then such comments must be received in writing not later than March 30, 2017. The Executive Director will compile all written submissions received by the deadline and provide them to Board Members prior to the meeting. Comments received after this date may not be provided to or considered by the DIB until a later date.

    Oral Section: Individuals wishing to make an oral statement to the DIB at the public meeting may be permitted to speak for up to three minutes. Anyone wishing to speak to the DIB should submit a request by email at [email protected] not later than March 30, 2017 for planning. Requests for oral comments should include a copy or summary of planned remarks for archival purposes. Individuals may also be permitted to submit a comment request at the public meeting; however, depending on the number of individuals requesting to speak, the schedule may limit participation.

    Dated: March 23, 2017. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06112 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary Government-Industry Advisory Panel; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Meeting AGENCY:

    Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics), Department of Defense (DoD).

    ACTION:

    Federal advisory committee meeting notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Defense is publishing this notice to announce the following Federal advisory committee meeting of the Government-Industry Advisory Panel. This meeting is open to the public.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday and Thursday, April 5 and 6, 2017. Public registration will begin at 8:45 a.m. on each day. For entrance into the meeting, you must meet the necessary requirements for entrance into the Pentagon. For more detailed information, please see the following link: http://www.pfpa.mil/access.html.

    ADDRESSES:

    Pentagon Library, Washington Headquarters Services, 1155 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-1155. The meeting room will be displayed on the information screen for both days. The Pentagon Library is located in the Pentagon Library and Conference Center (PLC2) across the Corridor 8 bridge.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    LTC Andrew Lunoff, Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Acquisition), 3090 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-3090, email: [email protected], phone: 571-256-9004.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Due to circumstances beyond the control of the Designated Federal Officer and the Department of Defense, the Government-Industry Advisory Panel was unable to provide public notification concerning its meeting on April 5 through 6, 2017, as required by 41 CFR 102-3.150(a). Accordingly, the Advisory Committee Management Officer for the Department of Defense, pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.150(b), waives the 15-calendar day notification requirement.

    Purpose of the Meeting: This meeting is being held under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (FACA) (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and 41 CFR 102-3.150. The Government-Industry Advisory Panel will review sections 2320 and 2321 of title 10, United States Code (U.S.C.), regarding rights in technical data and the validation of proprietary data restrictions and the regulations implementing such sections, for the purpose of ensuring that such statutory and regulatory requirements are best structured to serve the interest of the taxpayers and the national defense. The scope of the panel is as follows: (1) Ensuring that the Department of Defense (DoD) does not pay more than once for the same work, (2) Ensuring that the DoD contractors are appropriately rewarded for their innovation and invention, (3) Providing for cost-effective reprocurement, sustainment, modification, and upgrades to the DoD systems, (4) Encouraging the private sector to invest in new products, technologies, and processes relevant to the missions of the DoD, and (5) Ensuring that the DoD has appropriate access to innovative products, technologies, and processes developed by the private sector for commercial use.

    Agenda: This will be the fourteenth meeting of the Government-Industry Advisory Panel. The panel will cover details of 10 U.S.C. 2320 and 2321, begin understanding the implementing regulations and detail the necessary groups within the private sector and government to provide supporting documentation for their review of these codes and regulations during follow-on meetings. Agenda items for this meeting will include the following: (1) Final review of tension point information papers; (2) Rewrite FY17 NDAA 2320 and 2321 language; (3) Review Report Framework and Format for Publishing; (4) Comment Adjudication & Planning for follow-on meeting.

    Availability of Materials for the Meeting: A copy of the agenda or any updates to the agenda for the April 5-6 meeting will be available as requested or at the following site: https://database.faca.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=2561. It will also be distributed upon request.

    Minor changes to the agenda will be announced at the meeting. All materials will be posted to the FACA database after the meeting.

    Public Accessibility to the Meeting: Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended, and 41 CFR 102-3.140 through 102-3.165, and subject to the availability of space, this meeting is open to the public. Registration of members of the public who wish to attend the meeting will begin upon publication of this meeting notice and end three business days (March 31) prior to the start of the meeting. All members of the public must contact LTC Lunoff at the phone number or email listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to make arrangements for Pentagon escort, if necessary. Public attendees should arrive at the Pentagon's Visitor's Center, located near the Pentagon Metro Station's south exit and adjacent to the Pentagon Transit Center bus terminal with sufficient time to complete security screening no later than 8:30 a.m. on April 5-6. To complete security screening, please come prepared to present two forms of identification of which one must be a pictured identification card. Government and military DoD CAC holders are not required to have an escort, but are still required to pass through the Visitor's Center to gain access to the Building. Seating is limited and is on a first-to-arrive basis. Attendees will be asked to provide their name, title, affiliation, and contact information to include email address and daytime telephone number to the Designated Federal Officer (DFO) listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Any interested person may attend the meeting, file written comments or statements with the committee, or make verbal comments from the floor during the public meeting, at the times, and in the manner, permitted by the committee.

    Special Accommodations: The meeting venue is fully handicap accessible, with wheelchair access.

    Individuals requiring special accommodations to access the public meeting or seeking additional information about public access procedures, should contact LTC Lunoff, the committee DFO, at the email address or telephone number listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section, at least five (5) business days prior to the meeting so that appropriate arrangements can be made.

    Written Comments or Statements: Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.105(j) and 102-3.140 and section 10(a)(3) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the public or interested organizations may submit written comments or statements to the Government-Industry Advisory Panel about its mission and/or the topics to be addressed in this public meeting. Written comments or statements should be submitted to LTC Lunoff, the committee DFO, via electronic mail, the preferred mode of submission, at the email address listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section in the following formats: Adobe Acrobat or Microsoft Word. The comment or statement must include the author's name, title, affiliation, address, and daytime telephone number. Written comments or statements being submitted in response to the agenda set forth in this notice must be received by the committee DFO at least five (5) business days prior to the meeting so that they may be made available to the Government-Industry Advisory Panel for its consideration prior to the meeting. Written comments or statements received after this date may not be provided to the panel until its next meeting. Please note that because the panel operates under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, all written comments will be treated as public documents and will be made available for public inspection.

    Verbal Comments: Members of the public will be permitted to make verbal comments during the meeting only at the time and in the manner allowed herein. If a member of the public is interested in making a verbal comment at the open meeting, that individual must submit a request, with a brief statement of the subject matter to be addressed by the comment, at least three (3) business days in advance to the committee DFO, via electronic mail, the preferred mode of submission, at the email address listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. The committee DFO will log each request to make a comment, in the order received, and determine whether the subject matter of each comment is relevant to the panel's mission and/or the topics to be addressed in this public meeting. A 30-minute period near the end of the meeting will be available for verbal public comments. Members of the public who have requested to make a verbal comment and whose comments have been deemed relevant under the process described in this paragraph, will be allotted no more than five (5) minutes during this period, and will be invited to speak in the order in which their requests were received by the DFO.

    Dated: March 23, 2017. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06081 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Applications for New Awards; Assistance for Arts Education Programs—Professional Development for Arts Educators Grants AGENCY:

    Office of Innovation and Improvement, Department of Education.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    Overview Information:

    Assistance for Arts Education Programs—Professional Development for Arts Educators (PDAE) Grants Notice inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 2017.

    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.351C.

    Dates:

    Applications Available: March 28, 2017.

    Deadline for Notice of Intent to Apply: April 27, 2017.

    Date of Pre-Application Webinar: For information about the pre-application Webinar, visit the Arts in Education (AIE) Web site at: https://innovation.ed.gov/what-we-do/arts/.

    Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: May 30, 2017.

    Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: July 26, 2017.

    Full Text of Announcement I. Funding Opportunity Description

    Purpose of Program: The Assistance for Arts Education program is authorized under Title IV, Part F, Subpart 4 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA).1 It is intended to enrich the academic experiences by promoting arts education for students, including disadvantaged students and students who are children with disabilities. The Professional Development for Arts Educators grant (PDAE) specifically supports the implementation of high-quality model professional development programs for arts educators and other instructional staff in the areas of music, dance, drama, media arts, and visual arts, including folk arts, for students in kindergarten through grade 12 (K-12) in which 50 percent or more of the students are from low-income families.

    1 Unless otherwise indicated, all references to the ESEA are to the ESEA, as amended by the ESSA.

    Background: The arts are included in the list of subjects comprising a well-rounded education as set out under section 8101 of the ESEA. Teachers of the arts, like teachers in other subject areas, need opportunities to gain knowledge and skills through high-quality professional development. Since 2002, the PDAE program has helped to provide these opportunities for thousands of teachers, with an emphasis on both providing sustained and intensive professional development and building capacity for continuation and expansion of professional development efforts beyond the Federal grant period. However, the need for these opportunities remains great.

    A survey of schools by the U.S. Department of Education (Department) in 2009-2010 2 indicated the need for increased professional development opportunities for teachers of the arts. Approximately one-third of high schools reported having no professional development opportunities available for music and visual arts teachers. For elementary schools, approximately 40 percent of music and visual arts teachers did not have professional development opportunities. For the disciplines of dance and drama, fewer than 20 percent of districts offered professional development opportunities for elementary school teachers.

    2 Arts Education in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools, 1999-2000 and 2009-10, National Center for Education Statistics, 2012, https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2012014rev.

    Professional development in the arts is important for both arts classrooms and integration of the arts with other subjects in a well-rounded education. Arts educators need to continually gain new knowledge and skills in the arts disciplines in order to effectively plan, deliver, and assess learning in the arts. In addition, high-quality professional development is required to ensure that arts educators, general classroom teachers, and non-arts subject teachers effectively plan, collaborate, implement, and assess arts-integration learning based on relevant content, performance standards, and research on effective professional development and arts-integration curriculum and pedagogy. High achievement standards in the arts need to be maintained in both arts-specific and arts-integrated classrooms. Further, arts educators and other instructional staff need opportunities to benefit from technology-enhanced professional development strategies and to learn how to integrate digital instructional and assessment tools into arts and arts-integrated classrooms.

    As States continue to revise their arts standards, teachers of the arts, including arts specialists, non-arts classroom teachers, teaching artists, and other instructional staff, need opportunities to gain new knowledge and skills based on State standards and to implement that knowledge and skills in K-12 classrooms. Since 2004, arts education has been guided by national voluntary standards; 49 States and the District of Columbia currently have State arts standards. In 2014, the National Coalition for Core Arts Standards (NCAS) released new voluntary pre-K to grade 12 arts standards. Fourteen States have adopted new, or revised existing, arts standards that reflect the primary concepts of the NCAS standards.3

    3 Arts Education Partnership ArtScan, www.ecs.org/ec-content/uploads/2016-State-of-the-States-of-Art.pdf.

    The 2009-2010 Department survey referenced above also indicated an “arts-opportunity gap” for thousands of American students who receive minimal or no access to arts education.4 That gap is greatest for disadvantaged students in mid-high and high-poverty schools.5 Accordingly, continuation of the requirement that schools participating in PDAE projects have a minimum 50 percent of students from low-income families supports the program's statutory purpose to promote arts education for disadvantaged students.

    4 Arts Education in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools, 1999-2000 and 2009-10, National Center for Education Statistics, 2012, https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2012014rev.

    5https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_clb.asp.

    Priority: This notice contains one competitive preference priority. We are establishing this priority for the FY 2017 grant competition and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition, in accordance with section 437(d)(1) of the General Education Provisions Act (GEPA), 20 U.S.C. 1232(d)(1).

    Competitive Preference Priority: This priority is a competitive preference priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2) we award up to an additional five points to an application, depending on how well the application meets this priority.

    This priority is:

    Leveraging Technology to Support Instructional Practice and Professional Development Projects (up to 5 points).

    Projects that are designed to leverage technology through one or more of the following:

    (a) Using high-speed Internet access and devices to increase students' and educators' access to high-quality accessible digital tools, assessments, and materials, particularly open educational resources.

    (b) Implementing high-quality, accessible online courses, online learning communities, or online simulations, such as those for which educators could earn professional development credit or continuing education units through digital credentials based on demonstrated mastery of competencies and performance-based outcomes, instead of traditional time-based metrics.

    Application Requirement: To be eligible for PDAE program funds, applicants must propose to implement professional development programs for arts educators and other instructional staff serving schools that meet the following requirement: 50 percent or more of the students served by the K-12 school are from low-income families (based on the poverty criteria in Title I, Section 1113(a)(5) of the ESEA).

    Note:

    Applicants will be required to provide in the application school enrollment data from the most recent school year available to show evidence of LEA and school eligibility under this requirement.

    Definitions: The definitions of “arts,” “arts educator,” and “integrate” are from the notice of final priority, requirements, and definitions for this program (2005 NFP), published in the Federal Register on March 30, 2005 (70 FR 16242). The definitions of “evidence of promise,” “logic model,” “randomized controlled trial,” “relevant outcome,” “quasi-experimental design study,” “What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards,” and “strong theory” are from 34 CFR 77.1(c). The definitions for the terms “digital credentials,” and “open educational resources” are from the Secretary's supplemental priorities. The definition for the term local educational agency is from section 8101 of the ESEA. The definition of “sustained and intensive” is specific to the program's Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) measure only.

    Arts includes music, dance, theater, media arts, and visual arts, including folk arts.

    Arts educator means a teacher who works in music, dance, theater, media arts, or visual arts, including folk arts.

    Digital credentials means evidence of mastery of specific competencies or performance-based abilities, provided in digital rather than physical medium (such as through digital badges). These digital credentials may then be used to supplement or satisfy continuing education or professional development requirements.

    Evidence of promise means there is empirical evidence to support the theoretical linkage(s) between at least one critical component and at least one relevant outcome presented in the logic model for the proposed process, product, strategy, or practice. Specifically, evidence of promise means the conditions in paragraphs (i) and (ii) of this definition are met:

    (i) There is at least one study that is a—

    (A) Correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias;

    (B) Quasi-experimental study that meets the What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards with reservations; or

    (C) Randomized controlled trial that meets the What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards with or without reservations.

    (ii) The study referenced in paragraph (i) of this definition found a statistically significant or substantively important (defined as a difference of 0.25 standard deviations or larger), favorable association between at least one critical component and one relevant outcome presented in the logic model for the proposed process, product, strategy, or practice.

    Integrate means to strengthen (i) the use of high-quality arts instruction within other academic content areas, and (ii) the place of the arts as a core academic subject in the school curriculum.

    Local educational agency means a public board of education or other public authority legally constituted within a State for either administrative control or direction of, or to perform a service function for, public elementary schools or secondary schools in a city, county, township, school district, or other political subdivision of a State, or of or for a combination of school districts or counties that is recognized in a State as an administrative agency for its public elementary schools or secondary schools. The term includes—

    (i) Any other public institution or agency having administrative control and direction of a public elementary school or secondary school;

    (ii) An elementary school or secondary school funded by the Bureau of Indian Education but only to the extent that including the school makes the school eligible for programs for which specific eligibility is not provided to the school in another provision of law and the school does not have a student population that is smaller than the student population of the LEA receiving assistance under the ESEA with the smallest student population, except that the school shall not be subject to the jurisdiction of any State educational agency (SEA) other than the Bureau of Indian Education;

    (iii) Educational service agencies and consortia of those agencies; and

    (iv) The SEA in a State in which the SEA is the sole educational agency for all public schools.

    Logic model (also referred to as theory of action) means a well-specified conceptual framework that identifies key components of the proposed process, product, strategy, or practice (i.e., the active “ingredients” that are hypothesized to be critical to achieving the relevant outcomes) and describes the relationships among the key components and outcomes, theoretically and operationally.

    Open educational resources means teaching, learning, and research resources that reside in the public domain or have been released under an intellectual property license that permits their free use and repurposing by others.

    Randomized controlled trial means a study that employs random assignment of, for example, students, teachers, classrooms, schools, or districts to receive the intervention being evaluated (the treatment group) or not to receive the intervention (the control group). The estimated effectiveness of the intervention is the difference between the average outcome for the treatment group and for the control group. These studies, depending on design and implementation, can meet What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards without reservations.

    Relevant outcome means the student outcome(s) (or the ultimate outcome if not related to students) the proposed process, product, strategy, or practice is designed to improve; consistent with the specific goals of a program.

    Strong theory means a rationale for the proposed process, product, strategy, or practice that includes a logic model.

    Sustained and intensive means to complete 40 hours of professional development and 75 percent of the total number of professional development hours offered over a period of six or more months.

    What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards means the standards set forth in the What Works Clearinghouse Procedures and Standards Handbook (Version 3.0, March 2014), which can be found at the following link: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/DocumentSum.aspx?sid=19.

    Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking: Under the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553), the Department generally offers interested parties the opportunity to comment on proposed priorities, definitions, requirements, and selection criteria. Section 437(d)(1) of GEPA, however, allows the Secretary to exempt from rulemaking requirements, regulations governing the first grant competition under a new or substantially revised program authority. This is the first grant competition under section 4642(a)(1)(A) of the ESEA, and therefore qualifies for this exemption. In order to ensure timely grant awards, the Secretary has decided to forgo public comment on the priority and requirements under section 437(d)(1) of GEPA. The priority and requirements will apply to the FY 2017 grant competition and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition.

    Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7291-7292.

    Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 86, 97, 98, and 99. (b) The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) in 2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 200, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3474. (d) Secretary's Supplemental Priorities. (e) The 2005 NFP.

    II. Award Information

    Type of Award: Discretionary grants.

    Estimated Available Funds: The Further Continuing and Security Assistance Appropriations Act, 2017, would provide, on an annualized basis, $26,948,673 for the Arts in Education program, of which we would use an estimated $7,100,000 for this competition. The actual level of funding, if any, depends on final congressional action. However, we are inviting applications to allow enough time to complete the grant process if Congress appropriates funds for this program.

    Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of applications, we may make additional awards in future years from the list of unfunded applications from this competition.

    Estimated Range of Awards: $150,000-$375,000.

    Estimated Average Size of Awards: $300,000 for the first year of the project. Funding for the second, third, and fourth years is subject to the availability of funds and the approval of continuation awards (see 34 CFR 75.253).

    Estimated Number of Awards: 20-25.

    Note:

    The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.

    Project Period: Up to 48 months (subject to availability of funds).

    Note:

    Based on past experience of PDAE grantees, applicants are encouraged to use the first 12 months of the project period to refine the evaluation design and instruments, specifically those related to the program's GPRA measures, build capacity to execute the evaluation, and ensure that program design and implementation are aligned with the evaluation requirements.

    III. Eligibility Information

    1. Eligible Applicants: An LEA in which 20 percent or more of the students served by the LEA are from families with an income below the Federal poverty line, and which may be a charter school that is considered an LEA under State law and regulations, and that works in partnership with one or more of the following:

    (a) A Regional Service Agency;

    (b) An SEA

    (c) An institution of higher education; or

    (d) A museum or cultural institution, or another private agency, institution, or organization.

    2. a. Cost Sharing or Matching: This program does not require cost sharing or matching.

    b. Supplement-Not-Supplant: This program involves supplement-not-supplant funding requirements. In accordance with section 4110 of the ESEA, funds made available under this subpart shall be used to supplement, and not supplant, non-Federal funds that would otherwise be used for activities authorized under this subpart.

    3. Coordination Requirement: In accordance with section 4642(b)(1) of the ESEA, grantees are required to coordinate, to the extent practicable, each project or program carried out with such assistance with appropriate activities of public or private cultural agencies, institutions, and organizations, including museums, arts education associations, libraries, and theaters.

    IV. Application and Submission Information

    1. Address To Request Application Package: You can obtain an application package via the Internet or from the Education Publications Center (ED Pubs). To obtain a copy via the Internet, use the following address: https://innovation.ed.gov/what-we-do/arts/arts-in-education-professional-development-for-arts-educators/. To obtain a copy from ED Pubs, write, fax, or call: ED Pubs, U.S. Department of Education, P.O. Box 22207, Alexandria, VA 22304. Telephone, toll free: 1-877-433-7827. FAX: (703) 605-6794. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text telephone (TTY), call, toll free: 1-877-576-7734.

    You can contact ED Pubs at its Web site, also: www.EDPubs.gov or at its email address: [email protected].

    If you request an application package from ED Pubs, be sure to identify this program or competition as follows: CFDA number 84.351C.

    Individuals with disabilities can obtain a copy of the application package in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) by contacting the person or team listed under Accessible Format in section VIII of this notice.

    2. Content and Form of Application Submission: Requirements concerning the content and form of an application, together with the forms you must submit, are in the application package for this program.

    Notice of Intent To Apply: We will be able to develop a more efficient process for reviewing grant applications if we can anticipate the number of applicants that intend to apply for funding under this competition. Therefore, we strongly encourage each potential applicant to notify us of the applicant's intent to submit an application for funding by sending a short email message. This short email should provide (1) the applicant organization's name and address; and (2) whether the applicant intends to address the competitive preference priority. Please send this email notification to [email protected] with “Intent to Apply” in the email subject line. Applicants that do not provide this email notification may still apply for funding and are not required to, or prohibited from, addressing the competitive preference priority.

    Page Limit: The application narrative is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use to evaluate your application. We recommend that you limit the application narrative to no more than 50 pages, using the following standards:

    • A “page” is 8.5″ x 11″, on one side only, with 1″ margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.

    • Double space (no more than three lines per vertical inch) all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, references, and captions, as well as all text in charts, tables, figures, and graphs.

    • Use a font that is either 12 point or larger or no smaller than 10 pitch (characters per inch).

    • Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier, Calibri, or Arial.

    The suggested page limit does not apply to the cover sheet; the budget section, including the narrative budget justification; the assurances and certifications; or the one-page abstract, the resumes, the bibliography, or the letters of support. However, the suggested page limit does apply to all of the application narrative.

    b. Submission of Proprietary Information: Given the types of projects that may be proposed in applications for the PDAE program, your application may include business information that you consider proprietary. In 34 CFR 5.11 we define “business information” and describe the process we use in determining whether any of that information is proprietary and, thus, protected from disclosure under Exemption 4 of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552, as amended).

    Because we plan to make successful applications available to the public, you may wish to request confidentiality of business information.

    Consistent with Executive Order 12600, please designate in your application any information that you believe is exempt from disclosure under Exemption 4. In the appropriate Appendix section of your application, under “Other Attachments Form,” please list the page number or numbers on which we can find this information. For additional information please see 34 CFR 5.11(c).

    3. Submission Dates and Times:

    Applications Available: March 28, 2017.

    Deadline for Notice of Intent To Apply: April 27, 2017.

    Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: May 30, 2017.

    A pre-application Webinar will be held for this competition shortly after this notice's publication in the Federal Register. The Webinar is intended to provide technical assistance to all interested grant applicants. For information about the pre-application Webinar, visit the AIE Web site at: https://innovation.ed.gov/what-we-do/arts/.

    Applications for grants under this program must be submitted electronically using the Grants.gov Apply site (Grants.gov). For information (including dates and times) about how to submit your application electronically, or in paper format by mail or hand delivery if you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, please refer to Other Submission Requirements in section IV of this notice.

    We do not consider an application that does not comply with the deadline requirements.

    Individuals with disabilities who need an accommodation or auxiliary aid in connection with the application process should contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII of this notice. If the Department provides an accommodation or auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability in connection with the application process, the individual's application remains subject to all other requirements and limitations in this notice.

    Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: July 26, 2017.

    4. Intergovernmental Review: This program is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. Information about Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs under Executive Order 12372 is in the application package for this program.

    5. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.

    6. Data Universal Numbering System Number, Taxpayer Identification Number, and System for Award Management: To do business with the Department of Education, you must—

    a. Have a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number and a Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN);

    b. Register both your DUNS number and TIN with the System for Award Management (SAM), the Government's primary registrant database;

    c. Provide your DUNS number and TIN on your application; and

    d. Maintain an active SAM registration with current information while your application is under review by the Department and, if you are awarded a grant, during the project period.

    You can obtain a DUNS number from Dun and Bradstreet at the following Web site: http://fedgov.dnb.com/webform. A DUNS number can be created within one to two business days.

    If you are a corporate entity, agency, institution, or organization, you can obtain a TIN from the Internal Revenue Service. If you are an individual, you can obtain a TIN from the Internal Revenue Service or the Social Security Administration. If you need a new TIN, please allow two to five weeks for your TIN to become active.

    The SAM registration process can take approximately seven business days, but may take upwards of several weeks, depending on the completeness and accuracy of the data you enter into the SAM database. Thus, if you think you might want to apply for Federal financial assistance under a program administered by the Department, please allow sufficient time to obtain and register your DUNS number and TIN. We strongly recommend that you register early.

    Note:

    Once your SAM registration is active, it may be 24 to 48 hours before you can access the information in, and submit an application through, Grants.gov.

    If you are currently registered with SAM, you may not need to make any changes. However, please make certain that the TIN associated with your DUNS number is correct. Also note that you will need to update your registration annually. This may take three or more business days.

    Information about SAM is available at www.SAM.gov. To further assist you with obtaining and registering your DUNS number and TIN in SAM or updating your existing SAM account, we have prepared a SAM.gov Tip Sheet, which you can find at: www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/sam-faqs.html.

    In addition, if you are submitting your application via Grants.gov, you must (1) be designated by your organization as an Authorized Organization Representative (AOR); and (2) register yourself with Grants.gov as an AOR. Details on these steps are outlined at the following Grants.gov Web page: www.grants.gov/web/grants/register.html.

    7. Other Submission Requirements:

    Applications for grants under this program must be submitted electronically unless you qualify for an exception to this requirement in accordance with the instructions in this section.

    a. Electronic Submission of Applications.

    Applications for grants under Assistance for Arts Education—PDAE, CFDA number 84.351C, must be submitted electronically using the Governmentwide Grants.gov Apply site at www.Grants.gov. Through this site, you will be able to download a copy of the application package, complete it offline, and then upload and submit your application. You may not email an electronic copy of a grant application to us.

    We will reject your application if you submit it in paper format unless, as described elsewhere in this section, you qualify for one of the exceptions to the electronic submission requirement and submit, no later than two weeks before the application deadline date, a written statement to the Department that you qualify for one of these exceptions. Further information regarding calculation of the date that is two weeks before the application deadline date is provided later in this section under Exception to Electronic Submission Requirement.

    You may access the electronic grant application for the PDAE competition at www.Grants.gov. You must search for the downloadable application package for this program by the CFDA number. Do not include the CFDA number's alpha suffix in your search (e.g., search for 84.351, not 84.351C).

    Please note the following:

    • When you enter the Grants.gov site, you will find information about submitting an application electronically through the site, as well as the hours of operation.

    • Applications received by Grants.gov are date and time stamped. Your application must be fully uploaded and submitted and must be date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system no later than 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. Except as otherwise noted in this section, we will not accept your application if it is received—that is, date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system—after 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. We do not consider an application that does not comply with the deadline requirements. When we retrieve your application from Grants.gov, we will notify you if we are rejecting your application because it was date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system after 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date.

    • The amount of time it can take to upload an application will vary depending on a variety of factors, including the size of the application and the speed of your Internet connection. Therefore, we strongly recommend that you do not wait until the application deadline date to begin the submission process through Grants.gov.

    • You should review and follow the Education Submission Procedures for submitting an application through Grants.gov that are included in the application package for this program to ensure that you submit your application in a timely manner to the Grants.gov system. You can also find the Education Submission Procedures pertaining to Grants.gov under News and Events on the Department's G5 system home page at www.G5.gov. In addition, for specific guidance and procedures for submitting an application through Grants.gov, please refer to the Grants.gov Web site at: www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/apply-for-grants.html.

    • You will not receive additional point value because you submit your application in electronic format, nor will we penalize you if you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, as described elsewhere in this section, and submit your application in paper format.

    • You must submit all documents electronically, including all information you typically provide on the following forms: The Application for Federal Assistance (SF 424), the Department of Education Supplemental Information for SF 424, Budget Information—Non-Construction Programs (ED 524), and all necessary assurances and certifications.

    • You must upload any narrative sections and all other attachments to your application as files in a read-only, non-modifiable Portable Document Format (PDF). Do not upload an interactive or fillable PDF file. If you upload a file type other than a read-only, non-modifiable PDF (e.g., Word, Excel, WordPerfect, etc.) or submit a password-protected file, we will not review that material. Please note that this could result in your application not being considered for funding because the material in question—for example, the application narrative—is critical to a meaningful review of your proposal. For that reason it is important to allow yourself adequate time to upload all material as PDF files. The Department will not convert material from other formats to PDF.

    • Your electronic application must comply with any page-limit requirements described in this notice.

    • After you electronically submit your application, you will receive from Grants.gov an automatic notification of receipt that contains a Grants.gov tracking number. This notification indicates receipt by Grants.gov only, not receipt by the Department. Grants.gov will also notify you automatically by email if your application met all the Grants.gov validation requirements or if there were any errors (such as submission of your application by someone other than a registered Authorized Organization Representative, or inclusion of an attachment with a file name that contains special characters). You will be given an opportunity to correct any errors and resubmit, but you must still meet the deadline for submission of applications.

    Once your application is successfully validated by Grants.gov, the Department will retrieve your application from Grants.gov and send you an email with a unique PR/Award number for your application.

    These emails do not mean that your application is without any disqualifying errors. While your application may have been successfully validated by Grants.gov, it must also meet the Department's application requirements as specified in this notice and in the application instructions. Disqualifying errors could include, for instance, failure to upload attachments in a read-only, non-modifiable PDF; failure to submit a required part of the application; or failure to meet applicant eligibility requirements. It is your responsibility to ensure that your submitted application has met all of the Department's requirements.

    • We may request that you provide us original signatures on forms at a later date.

    Application Deadline Date Extension in Case of Technical Issues with the Grants.gov System: If you are experiencing problems submitting your application through Grants.gov, please contact the Grants.gov Support Desk, toll free, at 1-800-518-4726. You must obtain a Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number and must keep a record of it.

    If you are prevented from electronically submitting your application on the application deadline date because of technical problems with the Grants.gov system, we will grant you an extension until 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, the following business day to enable you to transmit your application electronically or by hand delivery. You also may mail your application by following the mailing instructions described elsewhere in this notice.

    If you submit an application after 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date, please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII of this notice and provide an explanation of the technical problem you experienced with Grants.gov, along with the Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number. We will accept your application if we can confirm that a technical problem occurred with the Grants.gov system and that the problem affected your ability to submit your application by 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. We will contact you after we determine whether your application will be accepted.

    Note:

    The extensions to which we refer in this section apply only to the unavailability of, or technical problems with, the Grants.gov system. We will not grant you an extension if you failed to fully register to submit your application to Grants.gov before the application deadline date and time or if the technical problem you experienced is unrelated to the Grants.gov system.

    Exception to Electronic Submission Requirement: You qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, and may submit your application in paper format, if you are unable to submit an application through the Grants.gov system because—

    • You do not have access to the Internet; or

    • You do not have the capacity to upload large documents to the Grants.gov system;

    and

    • No later than two weeks before the application deadline date (14 calendar days or, if the fourteenth calendar day before the application deadline date falls on a Federal holiday, the next business day following the Federal holiday), you mail or fax a written statement to the Department, explaining which of the two grounds for an exception prevents you from using the Internet to submit your application.

    If you mail your written statement to the Department, it must be postmarked no later than two weeks before the application deadline date. If you fax your written statement to the Department, we must receive the faxed statement no later than two weeks before the application deadline date.

    Address and mail or fax your statement to: Bonnie Carter, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 4W223, Washington, DC 20202-6200. FAX: (202) 205-5630.

    Your paper application must be submitted in accordance with the mail or hand delivery instructions described in this notice.

    b. Submission of Paper Applications by Mail.

    If you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, you may mail (through the U.S. Postal Service or a commercial carrier) your application to the Department. You must mail the original and two copies of your application, on or before the application deadline date, to the Department at the following address: U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention: (CFDA Number 84.351C), LBJ Basement Level 1, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20202-4260.

    You must show proof of mailing consisting of one of the following:

    (1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service postmark.

    (2) A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the U.S. Postal Service.

    (3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial carrier.

    (4) Any other proof of mailing acceptable to the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education.

    If you mail your application through the U.S. Postal Service, we do not accept either of the following as proof of mailing:

    (1) A private metered postmark.

    (2) A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service.

    Note:

    The U.S. Postal Service does not uniformly provide a dated postmark. Before relying on this method, you should check with your local post office.

    We will not consider applications postmarked after the application deadline date.

    c. Submission of Paper Applications by Hand Delivery.

    If you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, you (or a courier service) may deliver your paper application to the Department by hand. You must deliver the original and two copies of your application by hand, on or before the application deadline date, to the Department at the following address: U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention: (CFDA Number 84.351C), 550 12th Street SW., Room 7039, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-4260.

    The Application Control Center accepts hand deliveries daily between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, except Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal holidays.

    Note:

    Note for Mail or Hand Delivery of Paper Applications:

    If you mail or hand deliver your application to the Department—

    (1) You must indicate on the envelope and—if not provided by the Department—in Item 11 of the SF 424 the CFDA number, including suffix letter, if any, of the competition under which you are submitting your application; and

    (2) The Application Control Center will mail to you a notification of receipt of your grant application. If you do not receive this notification within 15 business days from the application deadline date, you should call the U.S. Department of Education Application Control Center at (202) 245-6288.

    V. Application Review Information

    1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this program are from 34 CFR 75.210.

    The maximum score for all of the selection criteria is 100 points. The maximum score for each criterion is included in parentheses following the title of the specific selection criterion. Each criterion also includes the factors that reviewers will consider in determining the extent to which an applicant meets the criterion.

    Points awarded under these selection criteria are in addition to any points an applicant earns under the competitive preference priority in this notice. The maximum score that an application may receive under the competitive preference priority and the selection criteria is 105 points.

    A. Need for Project (up to 10 points).

    The Secretary considers the need for the proposed project. In determining the need for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

    (1) The extent to which the proposed project will focus on serving or otherwise addressing the needs of disadvantaged individuals.

    (2) The extent to which specific gaps or weaknesses in services, infrastructure, or opportunities have been identified and will be addressed by the proposed project, including the nature and magnitude of those gaps or weaknesses.

    B. Quality of Project Services (up to 25 points).

    The Secretary considers the quality of the services to be provided by the proposed project. In determining the quality of the services to be provided by the proposed project, the Secretary considers the quality and sufficiency of strategies for ensuring equal access and treatment for eligible project participants who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability. In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:

    (1) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed project reflect up-to-date knowledge from research and effective practice.

    (2) The likely impact of the services to be provided by the proposed project on the intended recipients of those services.

    (3) The extent to which the training or professional development services to be provided by the proposed project are of sufficient quality, intensity, and duration to lead to improvements in practice among the recipients of those services.

    C. Quality of Project Personnel (up to 15 points).

    The Secretary considers the quality of the personnel who will carry out the proposed project. In determining the quality of project personnel, the Secretary considers the extent to which the applicant encourages applications for employment from persons who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability. In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:

    (1) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, of key project personnel.

    (2) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, of project consultants or subcontractors.

    D. Quality of the Management Plan (up to 20 points).

    The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for the proposed project. In determining the quality of the management plan for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

    (1) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing project tasks.

    (2) The adequacy of procedures for ensuring feedback and continuous improvement in the operation of the proposed project.

    (3) The extent to which the time commitments of the project director and principal investigator and other key project personnel are appropriate and adequate to meet the objectives of the proposed project.

    E. Quality of the Project Evaluation (up to 30 points).

    The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be conducted of the proposed project. In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary considers the following factors:

    (1) The extent to which the methods of evaluation include the use of objective performance measures that are clearly related to the intended outcomes of the project and will produce quantitative and qualitative data to the extent possible.

    (2) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward achieving intended outcomes.

    (3) The extent to which the proposed project is supported by strong theory (as defined in this notice).

    2. Review and Selection Process: We remind potential applicants that in reviewing applications in any discretionary grant competition, the Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), the past performance of the applicant in carrying out a previous award, such as the applicant's use of funds, achievement of project objectives, and compliance with grant conditions. The Secretary may also consider whether the applicant failed to submit a timely performance report or submitted a report of unacceptable quality.

    In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary requires various assurances including those applicable to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department of Education (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).

    3. Risk Assessment and Special Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR 200.205, before awarding grants under this program the Department conducts a review of the risks posed by applicants. Under 2 CFR 3474.10, the Secretary may impose special conditions and, in appropriate circumstances, high-risk conditions on a grant if the applicant or grantee is not financially stable; has a history of unsatisfactory performance; has a financial or other management system that does not meet the standards in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D; has not fulfilled the conditions of a prior grant; or is otherwise not responsible.

    4. Integrity and Performance System: If you are selected under this competition to receive an award that over the course of the project period may exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (currently $150,000), under 2 CFR 200.205(a)(2) we must make a judgment about your integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal awards—that is, the risk posed by you as an applicant—before we make an award. In doing so, we must consider any information about you that is in the integrity and performance system (currently referred to as the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS)), accessible through SAM. You may review and comment on any information about yourself that a Federal agency previously entered and that is currently in FAPIIS.

    Please note that, if the total value of your currently active grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts from the Federal Government exceeds $10,000,000, the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII, require you to report certain integrity information to FAPIIS semiannually. Please review the requirements in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII, if this grant plus all the other Federal funds you receive exceed $10,000,000.

    VI. Award Administration Information

    1. Award Notices: If your application is successful, we notify your U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award Notification (GAN); or we may send you an email containing a link to access an electronic version of your GAN. We may notify you informally, also.

    If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding, we notify you.

    2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: We identify administrative and national policy requirements in the application package and reference these and other requirements in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.

    We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of an award in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice and include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also incorporates your approved application as part of your binding commitments under the grant.

    3. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a grant under this competition, you must ensure that you have in place the necessary processes and systems to comply with the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 170 should you receive funding under the competition. This does not apply if you have an exception under 2 CFR 170.110(b).

    (b) At the end of your project period, you must submit a final performance report, including financial information, as directed by the Secretary. If you receive a multiyear award, you must submit an annual performance report that provides the most current performance and financial expenditure information as directed by the Secretary under 34 CFR 75.118. The Secretary may also require more frequent performance reports under 34 CFR 75.720(c). For specific requirements on reporting, please go to www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.

    (c) Under 34 CFR 75.250(b), the Secretary may provide a grantee with additional funding for data collection analysis and reporting. In this case the Secretary establishes a data collection period.

    4. Performance Measures: We have established two GPRA performance measures for the PDAE program. The first GPRA measure is: The percentage of teachers participating in the PDAE program who receive professional development that is sustained and intensive (as defined in this notice). In implementing this measure, the Department will collect from grantees data on the extent to which they provide professional development that is sustained and intensive. The second GPRA measure is: The percentage of PDAE projects whose teachers show a statistically significant increase in content knowledge in the arts. In implementing this measure, grantees will be expected to administer a pre-test and a post-test of teacher content knowledge in the arts. The pre-test and post-test should be the same test or equivalent versions of the test. Successful applicants will be expected to include professional development data in their annual performance reports to the Department.

    5. Continuation Awards: In making a continuation award under 34 CFR 75.253, the Secretary considers, among other things: Whether a grantee has made substantial progress in achieving the goals and objectives of the project; whether the grantee has expended funds in a manner that is consistent with its approved application and budget; and, if the Secretary has established performance measurement requirements, the performance targets in the grantee's approved application.

    In making a continuation award, the Secretary also considers whether the grantee is operating in compliance with the assurances in its approved application, including those applicable to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).

    VII. Agency Contact FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Bonnie Carter, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., room 4W223, Washington, DC 20202-6200. Telephone: (202) 401-3576 or by email: [email protected]

    If you use a TDD or a TTY, call the FRS, toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.

    VIII. Other Information

    Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this document and a copy of the application package in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) on request to the program contact person listed under For Further Information Contact in section VII of this notice.

    Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System at: www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register, in text or PDF. To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the site.

    You may also access documents of the Department published in the Federal Register by using the article search feature at: www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published by the Department.

    Dated: March 23, 2017. Margo Anderson, Acting Assistant Deputy Secretary for Office of Innovation and Improvement.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06123 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION [Docket No. ED-2017-ICCD-0043] Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment Request; The College Assistance Migrant Program (CAMP) Annual Performance Report (APR) AGENCY:

    Office of Elementary and Secondary Education (OESE), Department of Education (ED).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, ED is proposing an extension of an existing information collection.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before May 30, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    To access and review all the documents related to the information collection listed in this notice, please use http://www.regulations.gov by searching the Docket ID number ED-2017-ICCD-0043. Comments submitted in response to this notice should be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov by selecting the Docket ID number or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. Please note that comments submitted by fax or email and those submitted after the comment period will not be accepted. Written requests for information or comments submitted by postal mail or delivery should be addressed to the Director of the Information Collection Clearance Division, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., LBJ, Room 226-62, Washington, DC 20202-4537.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact Tara Ramsey, 202-260-2063.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Department of Education (ED), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. ED is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

    Title of Collection: The College Assistance Migrant Program (CAMP) Annual Performance Report (APR).

    OMB Control Number: 1810-0727.

    Type of Review: An extension of an existing information collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: State, Local, and Tribal Governments.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 40.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 1,600.

    Abstract: The College Assistance Migrant Program (CAMP) office staff collects information for the CAMP Annual Performance Report (APR) the data being collected is in compliance with Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended, Title IV, Sec. 418A; 20 U.S.C. 1070d-2 (special programs for students whose families are engaged in migrant and seasonal farm work) (shown in appendix A), the Government Performance Results Act (GPRA) of 1993, Section 4 (1115) and the Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR), 34 CFR 75.253. EDGAR states that recipients of multi-year discretionary grants must submit an APR demonstrating that substantial progress has been made towards meeting the approved objectives of the project. In addition, EDGAR requires discretionary grantees to report on their progress toward meeting the performance measures established for the ED grant program. This data collection is a customized APR that goes beyond the generic 524B APR to facilitate the collection of more standardized and comprehensive data to inform GPRA, to improve the overall quality of data collected, and to increase the quality of data that can be used for evaluation and to inform policy decisions.

    Dated: March 22, 2017. Tomakie Washington, Acting Director, Information Collection Clearance Division, Office of the Chief Privacy Officer, Office of Management.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06056 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION Sunshine Act Notice; Notice of Public Hearing Agenda AGENCY:

    U.S. Election Assistance Commission.

    ACTION:

    Sunshine Act Notice; Notice of Public Hearing Agenda

    DATE AND TIME:

    Tuesday, April 4, 2017, (10:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m.—EDT)

    PLACE:

    1335 East West Highway (First Floor Conference Room) Silver Spring, MD 20910

    AGENDA:

    Commissioners will hold a public hearing to discuss the implications for state and local jurisdictions following the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) recent designation of election infrastructure as a national critical infrastructure subsector. Commissioners will hear from a panel of state and local election administrators about their ideas and approaches for addressing new circumstances they expect to confront as a result of the DHS designation. Commissioners will hear from a panel of DHS officials on the implications of the critical infrastructure designation, and their work with state and local election officials to promote election security.

    STATUS:

    This hearing will be open to the public.

    PERSON TO CONTACT FOR INFORMATION:

    Bryan Whitener, Telephone: (301) 563-3961.

    Bryan Whitener, Director of National Clearinghouse on Elections, U.S. Election Assistance Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06219 Filed 3-24-17; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 6820-KF-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Advanced Scientific Computing Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Office of Science, Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Notice of open meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces a meeting of the Advanced Scientific Computing Advisory Committee (ASCAC). The Federal Advisory Committee requires that public notice of these meetings be announced in the Federal Register.

    DATES:

    Tuesday, April 18, 2017; 12:00 p.m.-5:30 p.m.; Wednesday, April 19, 2017; 8:30 a.m.-5:00 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    Crystal City Marriott, 1999 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA 22202.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Christine Chalk, Office of Advanced Scientific Computing Research; SC-21/Germantown Building; U.S. Department of Energy; 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-1290; Telephone (301) 903-7486.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Purpose of the Committee: To provide advice and guidance on a continuing basis to the Office of Science and to the Department of Energy on scientific priorities within the field of advanced scientific computing research.

    Purpose of the Meeting: This meeting is the semi-annual meeting of the Committee.

    Tentative Agenda Topics:

    • View from Washington • View from Germantown • Update on Exascale project activities • Report from Subcommittee on Laboratory Directed Research and Development • Update on Charge for Committee of Visitors for Research programs • Update on Charge for Future Computing Technologies programs • Technical presentations • Public Comment (10-minute rule)

    The meeting agenda includes an update on the budget, accomplishments and planned activities of the Advanced Scientific Computing Research program; an update on Exascale computing project activities and requirements reviews; updates from the three active subcommittees including a report from the Subcommittee on Laboratory Directed Research and Development; technical presentations on machine learning and early science at the National Energy Research Scientific Computing facility; and there will be an opportunity for comments from the public. The meeting will conclude at 5:00 p.m. on April 19, 2017. Agenda updates and presentations will be posted on the ASCAC Web site prior to the meeting: http://science.energy.gov/ascr/ascac/.

    Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. Individuals and representatives of organizations who would like to offer comments and suggestions may do so during the meeting. Approximately 30 minutes will be reserved for public comments. Time allotted per speaker will depend on the number who wish to speak but will not exceed 10 minutes. Those wishing to speak should submit your request at least five days before the meeting. Those not able to attend the meeting or who have insufficient time to address the committee are invited to send a written statement to Christine Chalk, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585, email to [email protected]. The Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business.

    Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available within 90 days on the Advanced Scientific Computing Web site at http://science.energy.gov/ascr/ascac/.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 22, 2017. LaTanya R. Butler, Deputy Committee Management Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06099 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY National Coal Council AGENCY:

    Office of Fossil Energy, Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Notice of open meetings.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces a meeting of the National Coal Council (NCC). The Federal Advisory Committee Act requires that public notice of these meetings be announced in the Federal Register.

    DATES:

    Wednesday, April 19, 2017 8:15 a.m. to 12:15 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    Sheraton Suites, Old Town Alexandria; 801 N. Saint Asaph St.; Alexandria, VA 22314

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Daniel Matuszak, U.S. Department of Energy, 4G-036/Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0001; Telephone: 202-287-6915

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Purpose of the Council: The National Coal Council provides advice and recommendations to the Secretary of Energy on general policy matters relating to coal and the coal industry.

    Purpose of Meeting: The 2017 Spring Meeting of the National Coal Council.

    Tentative Agenda:

    1. Call to order and opening remarks by Mike Durham, Chair, National Coal Council 2. Remarks by U.S. Department of Energy Representative—TBD 3. Presentation by Steve Nelson, COO, Longview Power LLC on Longview Power's State-of-the-Art Clean Coal Technology Plant 4. Presentation by Anthony Leo, Vice President, FuelCell Energy on the ExxonMobil-FuelCell Energy Fuel Cell Carbon Capture Pilot Plant at Plant Barry 5. Presentation by David Denton, Senior Director Business Development, RTI International on “Advanced Technologies for CO2 Capture & Utilization: Power & Industrial Applications” 6. Presentation by Jared Moore, Principal, Meridian Energy Policy on “Thermal Hydrogen: Coal Pathways Toward an Emissions Free Hydrogen Economy” 7. Council Business: a. Finance report by Finance Committee Chair Greg Workman b. Coal Policy Committee report by Coal Policy Committee Chair Deck Slone c. Communications Committee report by Communications Committee Chair Lisa Bradley d. NCC Business Report by NCC CEO Janet Gellici 8. Other Business 9. Adjourn

    Attendees are requested to register in advance for the meeting at: http://www.nationalcoalcouncil.org/page-NCC-Events.html.

    Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. If you would like to file a written statement with the Council, you may do so either before or after the meeting. If you would like to make oral statements regarding any item on the agenda, you should contact Daniel Matuszak, 202-287-6915 or [email protected] (email). You must make your request for an oral statement at least 5 business days before the meeting. Reasonable provision will be made to include oral statements on the scheduled agenda. The Chairperson of the Council will lead the meeting in a manner that facilitates the orderly conduct of business. Oral statements are limited to 10-minutes per organization and per person.

    Minutes: A link to the transcript of the meeting will be posted on the NCC Web site at: http://www.nationalcoalcouncil.org/.

    Issued at Washington, DC, on March 22, 2017. LaTanya R. Butler, Deputy Committee Management Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06100 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy [Case No. CR-006] Notice of Petition for Waiver of AHT Incorporated From the Department of Energy Commercial Refrigeration Equipment Test Procedures and Partial Grant of Interim Waiver AGENCY:

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Notice of petition for waiver and partial grant of interim waiver, and request for public comment.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces receipt of and publishes a petition for waiver from AHT Cooling Systems GmbH and AHT Cooling Systems USA Inc. (AHT) seeking an exemption from specified portions of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) test procedure for determining the energy consumption of multi-mode commercial refrigeration equipment. ASHRAE Standard 72-2005, incorporated by reference in Appendix B, does not provide for defrost testing with built-in cooling coils into the body of AHT's unique multi-mode commercial refrigeration equipment basic models. Consequently, AHT submitted to DOE an alternate test procedure that allows for testing of six specified basic models with a different defrost cycle. This notice also announces that DOE has granted AHT an interim waiver from the DOE commercial refrigeration equipment test procedures for the specified commercial refrigeration equipment basic models, subject to use of the alternative test procedure as set forth in this notice. DOE solicits comments, data, and information concerning AHT's petition and its suggested alternate test procedure.

    DATES:

    DOE will accept comments, data, and information with regard to the AHT petition until April 27, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by Case Number CR-006, by any of the following methods:

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

    Email: [email protected] Include the case number [Case No. CR-006] in the subject line of the message. Submit electronic comments in WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, PDF, or ASCII file format, and avoid the use of special characters or any form of encryption.

    Postal Mail: Mr. Bryan Berringer, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-5B, Petition for Waiver Case No. CR-006, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-0371. If possible, please submit all items on a compact disc (CD), in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies.

    Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, 950 L'Enfant Plaza SW., 6th Floor, Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202) 586-6636. If possible, please submit all items on a CD, in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies.

    Docket: The docket, which includes Federal Register notices, comments, and other supporting documents/materials, is available for review at www.regulations.gov. All documents in the docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. However, some documents listed in the index, such as those containing information that is exempt from public disclosure, may not be publicly available.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Bryan Berringer, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-0371. Email: [email protected]

    Ms. Johanna Jochum, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 287-6307. Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background and Authority

    Title III, Part C of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA), Public Law 94-163 (42 U.S.C. 6311-6316, as codified) established the Energy Conservation Program for Certain Industrial Equipment, which includes the commercial refrigeration equipment. Part C includes definitions, test procedures, labeling provisions, energy conservation standards, and the authority to require information and reports from manufacturers. Further, Part C authorizes the Secretary of Energy to prescribe test procedures that are reasonably designed to produce results that measure energy efficiency, energy use, or estimated operating costs during a representative average-use cycle, and that are not unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(3)) The test procedure for commercial refrigeration equipment is contained in Title 10 of the CFR part 431, subpart C, appendix B, Amended Uniform Test Method for the Measurement of Energy Consumption of Commercial Refrigerators, Freezers, and Refrigerator-Freezers.

    DOE's regulations set forth at 10 CFR 431.401 contain provisions that allow a person to seek a waiver from the test procedure requirements for a particular basic model of a type of covered industrial equipment when: (1) The petitioner's basic model for which the petition for waiver was submitted contains one or more design characteristics that prevent testing according to the prescribed test procedure, or (2) the prescribed test procedures may evaluate the basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true energy consumption characteristics as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data. 10 CFR 431.401(a)(1). A petitioner must include in its petition any alternate test procedures known to the petitioner to evaluate the basic model in a manner representative of its energy consumption. 10 CFR 431.401(b)(1)(iii).

    DOE may grant a waiver subject to conditions, including adherence to alternate test procedures. 10 CFR 431.401(f)(2). As soon as practicable after the granting of any waiver, DOE will publish in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking to amend its regulations so as to eliminate any need for the continuation of such waiver. As soon thereafter as practicable, DOE will publish in the Federal Register a final rule. 10 CFR 431.401(l).

    The waiver process also allows DOE to grant an interim waiver if it appears likely that the petition for waiver will be granted and/or if DOE determines that it would be desirable for public policy reasons to grant immediate relief pending a determination on the petition for waiver. 10 CFR 431.401(e)(2). Within one year of issuance of an interim waiver, DOE will either: (i) Publish in the Federal Register a determination on the petition for waiver; or (ii) publish in the Federal Register a new or amended test procedure that addresses the issues presented in the waiver. 10 CFR 431.401(h)(1). When DOE amends the test procedure to address the issues presented in a waiver, the waiver will automatically terminate on the date on which use of that test procedure is required to demonstrate compliance. 10 CFR 431.401(h)(2).

    II. Petition for Waiver of Test Procedure and Application for Interim Waiver

    On October 25, 2016, AHT filed a petition for waiver and application for interim waiver from the test procedure applicable to commercial refrigeration equipment set forth in 10 CFR part 431, subpart C, appendix B (AHT subsequently sent DOE a letter on March 6, 2017, which responded to questions from DOE. The information from this letter is also represented in this notice). AHT has designed several basic models multi-mode commercial refrigeration equipment that use unique built-in cooling coils deep freeze, freeze, or refrigerate food as needed. Because the cooling coils are built into the body of the units and do not get covered in frost, the coils do not need to be defrosted prior to testing. However, the DOE test procedure and ASHRAE Standard 72-2005, incorporated by reference in Appendix B, assumes that commercial refrigerators or freezers need to be defrosted, or melt the ice from the evaporator coils, for the equipment to function effectively. In particular, the test procedure requires that all refrigerators and freezers with evaporator coils be tested with a full defrost cycle, along with additional defrost cycles in a 24-hour period, depending on how long the test runs (ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 72-2005, “Method of Testing Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers,” § 7.8 (Defrost Adequacy Assurance). ASHRAE 72-2005 is incorporated by reference in the DOE test procedure. 10 CFR 431.63(d)(1)). AHT appliances, however, have no need to defrost their coils. Thus, rather than running one or more defrosting cycles a day to keep the machines operating efficiently, AHT appliances have a defrost (in the generic sense rather than as defined by DOE/ASHRAE) function that operates, under standard conditions, once per week, and at most (through a manual override) twice per week. As a result, the DOE test procedure, which provides for at least one full defrost cycle in a 24-hour period, is not appropriate for these models. Consequently, AHT submitted to DOE an alternate test procedure that allows for testing of six specified basic models with a different defrost cycle.

    As previously noted, an interim waiver may be granted if it appears likely that the petition for waiver will be granted, and/or if DOE determines that it would be desirable for public policy reasons to grant immediate relief pending a determination of the petition for waiver. See 10 CFR 431.401(e)(2).

    AHT's petition for waiver claims that the DOE test procedure at 10 CFR part 431, subpart C, appendix B does not apply to AHT's advanced models, and would grossly overstate the energy used by these models. These models are multi-mode (i.e., are capable of operating in the ice cream freezer, commercial freezer, and commercial refrigerator temperature ranges) and do not have a typical defrosting cycle (i.e., the cooling coils are built into the body and require defrosts once per week).

    To address multi-mode operation, AHT requested that the basic models shall be tested and rated only for operation as ice cream freezers (with integrated average temperature of −15 °F ± 2.0 °F and use total display area (TDA) to determine associated energy conservation standards).

    To address infrequent defrosts, AHT requested in its October 25, 2016 petition that the basic models shall be subject to an alternate two-part test procedure. AHT specified that the first part would be a 24-hour test starting in steady state conditions and including eight hours of door opening (according to ASHRAE Standard 72). The energy consumed in this test would be recorded ET1. The second part would be a defrost cycle test starting after steady state conditions were established and ending after the defrost cycle was complete. The duration of the defrost cycle, tDI, and the energy consumed during the defrost cycle, ET2, would be recorded and combined with ET1 based on a once-per-week defrost frequency. In AHT's March 6, 2017 letter, AHT noted that although the standard duration of the defrost cycle was once-per-week, the basic models have an optional manual override that allows up to two defrost cycles per week and recommended revising the October 25 test procedure to reflect that. DOE has incorporated this proposal into the alternate test procedure, but requests that AHT or commenting parties provide additional data and/or information on how commonly the manual override is used.

    With regard to the first issue, multi-mode operation, DOE has taken the position in the most recent commercial refrigeration equipment test procedure final rule, that self-contained equipment or remote condensing equipment with thermostats capable of operating at temperatures that span multiple equipment categories must be certified and comply with DOE's regulations for each applicable equipment category. See 79 FR 22291. In light of that policy determination, DOE declines at this time to provide AHT an interim waiver allowing testing only in the ice cream freezer mode. However, DOE seeks comment as part of the waiver determination process to determine if its previously stated position provides for a test requirement imposing an undue burden.

    Regarding the second issue of infrequent defrosts, DOE has reviewed AHT's alternate procedure (based on the May 6, 2017 modification) and concludes that AHT's alternate test procedure results would be representative of the models' true energy consumptions and allow for the accurate measurement of the energy use of these equipment, while alleviating the testing problems associated with AHT's implementation of commercial refrigeration equipment testing for the specified multi-mode models. DOE also understands that absent a partial grant of an interim waiver, AHT's equipment cannot be tested and rated for energy consumption on a basis representative of its true energy consumption characteristics. Consequently, DOE has determined that this part of AHT's petition for waiver will likely be granted. Furthermore, DOE has determined that it is desirable for public policy reasons to grant AHT immediate relief for this part of the test procedure, pending a determination of the petition for waiver.

    III. Summary of Grant of Interim Waiver

    For the reasons stated above, DOE has partially granted AHT's application for interim waiver from testing for its specified commercial refrigeration equipment basic models. The substance of the interim waiver is summarized below.

    AHT is required to test and rate the AHT commercial refrigeration equipment multi-mode basic models SYDNEY, MIAMI, PARIS, MANHATTAN, MALTA, and IBIZA, according to the alternate test procedure as set forth in section IV, “Alternate Test Procedure.”

    AHT is permitted to make representations about the energy use of this basic model for compliance, marketing, or other purposes only to the extent that such products have been tested in accordance with the provisions set forth in the alternate test procedure and such representations fairly disclose the results of such testing in accordance with 10 CFR 431.66.

    DOE makes decisions on waivers and interim waivers for only those basic models specifically set out in the petition, not future models that may be manufactured by the petitioner. AHT may request that DOE extend the scope of a waiver or an interim waiver to include additional basic models employing the same technology as the basic models set forth in the original petition consistent with 10 CFR 431.401(g). In addition, DOE notes that granting of an interim waiver or waiver does not release a petitioner from the certification requirements set forth at 10 CFR part 431. See also 10 CFR 431.401(a) and (i).

    The interim waiver shall remain in effect consistent with 10 CFR 431.401(h). Furthermore, this interim waiver is conditioned upon the presumed validity of statements, representations, and documents provided by the petitioner. DOE may rescind or modify a waiver or interim waiver at any time upon a determination that the factual basis underlying the petition for waiver or interim waiver is incorrect, or upon a determination that the results from the alternate test procedure are unrepresentative of the basic model's true energy consumption characteristics. See 10 CFR 431.401(k).

    IV. Alternate Test Procedure

    EPCA requires that manufacturers use DOE test procedures when making representations about the energy consumption and energy consumption costs of equipment covered by the statute. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c); 6314(d)) Consistent representations about the energy efficiency of covered equipment are important for consumers evaluating equipment when making purchasing decisions and for manufacturers to demonstrate compliance with applicable DOE energy conservation standards. Pursuant to its regulations applicable to waivers and interim waivers from applicable test procedures at 10 CFR 431.401, and after considering public comments on the petition, DOE will announce its decision as to an alternate test procedure for AHT in a subsequent Decision and Order.

    During the period of the interim waiver granted in this notice, AHT shall test the multi-mode basic models listed in section III in each mode (ice-cream freezer, freezer, and refrigerator mode) according to the test procedure for commercial refrigeration equipment prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR part 431, subpart C, appendix B, for basic models, with the following modifications for defrost testing in ASHRAE 72-2005 (incorporated by reference at 10 CFR 431.63(d)), laid out in two parts:

    The first part shall be a 24-hour test starting in steady state conditions and including eight hours of door opening (according ASHRAE 72-2005). The energy consumed in this test shall be recorded, ET1.

    The second part shall be a defrost cycle test starting after steady state conditions are established. The defrost cycle is initiated and terminates after the defrost cycle is complete. The energy consumed during this defrost cycle, ET2, and the duration of the defrost cycle, tDI, shall be recorded.

    Based on the measured energy consumption in these two tests, the daily energy consumption (DEC) in kWh shall be calculated as

    EN28MR17.000 Where: DEC = Daily Energy Consumption in kilowatt-hours (kWh); ET1 = energy expended during the first part of the test, in kWh; ET2 = energy expended during the second part of the test, in kWh; E td = energy expended by defrosts per week t NDI = normalized length of defrosting time per day, in minutes; t DS = sum of defrost time per week; D = maximum number of defrosts per week 7 = conversion factor of days per week; 1440 = conversion factor to adjust to a 24-hour period in minutes per day. V. Summary and Request for Comments

    Through this notice, DOE announces receipt of AHT's petition for waiver from the DOE test procedure for certain basic models of AHT commercial refrigeration equipment, and announces DOE's decision to grant AHT an interim waiver from the test procedure for its commercial refrigeration equipment. DOE is publishing AHT's petition for waiver in its entirety, pursuant to 10 CFR 431.401(b)(1)(iv). The petition contains no confidential information. The petition includes a suggested alternate test procedure to determine the energy consumption of its commercial refrigeration equipment. DOE will consider public comments on the petition in issuing its Decision and Order.

    DOE solicits comments from interested parties on all aspects of the petition, including the suggested alternate test procedure and calculation methodology. Pursuant to 10 CFR 431.401(d), any person submitting written comments to DOE must also send a copy of such comments to the petitioner. The contact information for the petitioner's representative is Scott Blake Harris, Chairman, Harris, Wiltshire & Grannis, 1919 M Street, Eighth Floor, Washington, DC. 20036. All comment submissions must include the agency name and Case Number CR-006 for this proceeding. Submit electronic comments in WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, Portable Document Format (PDF), or text (American Standard Code for Information Interchange (ASCII)) file format and avoid the use of special characters or any form of encryption. Wherever possible, include the electronic signature of the author. DOE does not accept telefacsimiles (faxes).

    Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person submitting information that he or she believes to be confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit two copies to DOE: One copy of the document marked “confidential” with all of the information believed to be confidential included, and one copy of the document marked “non-confidential” with all of the information believed to be confidential deleted. DOE will make its own determination about the confidential status of the information and treat it according to its determination.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 23, 2017. Steven Chalk, Acting Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Before the United States Department of Energy, Washington, DC 20585 Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-TP-0025; In the Matter of Energy Efficiency Program: Test Procedure for Commercial Refrigeration Equipment RIN 1904-AC99 I. PETITION OF AHT COOLING SYSTEMS FOR WAIVER OF TEST PROCEDURE FOR COMMERCIAL REFRIGERATION EQUIPMENT

    AHT Cooling Systems GmbH and AHT Cooling Systems USA Inc. (collectively AHT) 1 respectfully submit this Petition for Waiver and Application for Interim Waiver 2 from DOE's test procedure for commercial refrigeration equipment.3

    1 AHT's U.S. subsidiary is AHT Cooling Systems USA Inc., 3235 Industry Drive, North Charleston, South Carolina 29418 (tel. 843-767-6855). AHT's worldwide headquarters are AHT Cooling Systems GmbH, Werkgasse 57, 8786 Rottenmann, Austria (tel. 011-43-3614/2451-0).

    2See 10 CFR § 431.401 (petitions for waiver and interim waiver).

    3Id. Part 431, Subpart C, Appendix B.

    AHT is a world leader in the production of plug-in refrigerators and freezers for the commercial sector. It currently manufactures its products in Austria, and imports them into the United States through its wholly-owned subsidiary in South Carolina. AHT USA is also about to open a new manufacturing facility in the Charleston area. AHT products are distributed to major supermarket retail chains, convenience stores, wholesalers, and consumer-packaged goods companies throughout the United States and Canada. AHT's pursuit of innovation has led it continuously to develop and market cutting-edge technology. Its philosophy focuses on sustainability, energy efficiency, innovation, and customer benefit. AHT's products, as is reflected by their use of propane as a refrigerant, are among the most energy efficient and environmentally friendly in the world.

    Commercial refrigeration equipment, such as AHT's, will soon be subject to a new regulatory regime. This includes new test procedures 4 and efficiency standards.5 The new procedures will apply to representations of energy efficiency or use made on and after March 28, 2017. The new standards will apply to products manufactured on or after March 27, 2017.

    4Id. Part 431, Subpart C, Appendix B, as adopted, 79 FR 22277 (April 21, 2014).

    5Id. § 431.66, as adopted, 79 FR 17725 (March 28, 2014).

    In part because of their advanced design and features, many AHT commercial refrigerators and freezers cannot be fairly evaluated by DOE's mandated testing protocols. First, because of their implicit assumptions, it is not clear which of the DOE tests should be applied to the AHT appliances. Second, any of the DOE tests would overstate the amount of energy used by the AHT appliances. Accordingly, a waiver of those test requirements is necessary.

    I. Basic Models for Which a Waiver Is Requested

    The basic models for which a waiver is requested are set forth in Appendix I. These models are all display merchandisers with transparent doors. They are distributed in commerce under the AHT brand name.

    II. Need for the Requested Waiver

    As noted, the DOE test procedures will take effect on March 28, 2017. It is not clear which DOE test procedure should apply to AHT's advanced models, and all would grossly overstate the energy used by these models. There are two critical features of the AHT models that raise issues under the forthcoming testing procedure.

    A. The AHT Appliances Are Multi-Mode.

    The AHT appliances for which we seek a waiver are all multi-mode models; they have three modes of operation among which the user can choose merely by turning a switch. In one mode, the units operate as an ice cream freezer. In another mode, they operate as a regular commercial freezer. In yet another mode, they operate as a commercial refrigerator. The advantage to a user of having a single appliance that can operate in three different modes is obvious. And if a retail operator can purchase one appliance that can operate in three modes, rather than having to buy multiple appliances to meet the same needs, there are sustainability benefits as well. The problem is that the DOE rules implicitly assume that an appliance is exclusively an ice cream freezer, exclusively a standard commercial freezer, or exclusively a commercial refrigerator.6 And the DOE rules mandate different testing protocols for an ice cream freezer than they do for a standard commercial freezer or a commercial refrigerator.

    6Id. § 431.66.

    DOE testing rules often require that products be tested in their default configuration, or in the typical configuration. In the case of the AHT multi-mode appliances however, there isn't a “default” configuration or one “typical” configuration. The machines are designed to be easily and equally usable in all three modes. DOE precedent also suggests that when there is no default or typical mode for testing purposes, products with multiple configurations should be tested in the most energy consumptive mode. In this case, that would mean that AHT should test its products in the ice cream freezer mode and treat them as such for regulatory purposes.

    Accordingly, AHT asks for a “waiver” to be allowed to do precisely that.

    The only obvious alternative to testing in the most energy consumptive mode would be to require testing in all three modes. But such a requirement would be unique, burdensome, and inconsistent with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA), which requires that the test procedures “shall be reasonably designed” and “shall not be unduly burdensome to conduct.” 7 Moreover, in this situation it is not clear how one would evaluate whether an appliance passed a multiple test regime, particularly since testing the appliances as ice cream freezers would require using total display area (TDA) as the normalizing metric, while testing them in the other modes would require using volume as a normalizing metric. Such a testing regime would be both confusing and burdensome.

    7 42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3).

    Finally, testing these appliances as ice cream freezers makes most sense because DOE has determined that TDA is the best metric for display equipment with transparent doors, and is moving increasingly in that direction in its testing protocols. As DOE has concluded, “where the function is to display merchandise for sale, TDA best quantifies the ability of a piece of equipment to perform that function.” 8 That is surely true here.

    8 79 FR 17725, 17741 (March 28, 2014).

    B. The AHT Appliances Do Not Have a Typical Defrosting Cycle.

    The AHT appliances are innovative, and perhaps unique, in one other respect: Their cooling coils are built into the body of the units. This means the cooling coils are not exposed to the air and do not get covered with frost. This also means the coils do not need to be defrosted. The DOE test procedure understandably assumes that commercial refrigerators and freezers have cooling or evaporator coils that need to be defrosted for the equipment to function effectively. Indeed, the Technical Support Document for the test procedure essentially defines “defrosting” to mean melting ice from evaporator coils:

    As the air in the refrigerated space is cooled, water vapor condenses on the surface of the evaporator coil. . . . There are several methods available for defrosting the evaporator coil. . .9

    9 DOE, Technical Support Document: Energy Efficiency Program for Consumer Products and Commercial and Industrial Equipment; Commercial Refrigeration Equipment (Feb. 2014), § 3.3.1.11 (Defrost Cycle; Defrost Mechanism).

    In addition, the ASHRAE test procedure mandated by the DOE regulations provides that the defrost adequacy assurance test “shall verify that any defrost setting and arrangement is adequate to melt all frost and ice from coils and flues and drain it out of the refrigerator.” 10 Based on the assumption that all refrigerators and freezers that have evaporator coils from which frost must be melted regularly in order to function, the test procedure calls for starting testing with a full defrost cycle, and may require additional defrost cycles in a 24-hour period before the test is complete (depending on the expected operation of the model).

    10 ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 72-2005, “Method of Testing Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers,” § 7.8 (Defrost Adequacy Assurance). ASHRAE 72-2005 is incorporated by reference in the DOE test procedure. 10 CFR 431.63(d)(1).

    AHT appliances, however, have no need to defrost their coils. Rather, small amounts of frost can build up on the inner walls of the cabinet when the appliances are in a freezer mode. But this is a strictly esthetic matter that is easily resolved. Thus, rather than running one or more defrosting cycles a day to keep the machines operating efficiently, AHT appliances have a defrost (in the generic sense rather than as defined by DOE/ASHRAE) function that operates just once per week to keep the machines looking good.11 As a result, the test procedure, which provides for at least one full defrost cycle in a 24-hour period is not appropriate for these models. It would overstate the energy usage from the defrosting function by at least a factor of seven.

    11 We also note that AHT appliances have a manual override, such that a user could activate the defrost cycle a second time in any one week period. But the default automatic setting, and we expect the typical use, is one defrost cycle per week.

    Accordingly, AHT asks for a waiver to test its appliances with the defrost cycle activated in a way that reflects the actual operation of the units. To this end, AHT proposes to test the appliances in two phases. Phase one shall be a 24-hour test according to ASHRAE 72 including eight hours of door openings but without defrost. The second phase should be a separate measurement of the energy used during the defrost cycle. One-seventh of the measured energy in phase two should be added to the energy measured in phase one. This approach would translate the once-a-week defrost cycle into an average daily energy usage factor.

    III. Proposed Alternate Test Procedure

    In line with the waivers outlined above, AHT proposes the following alternate test procedure to evaluate the performance of the basic models listed in Appendix I of this petition and application.

    Effective March 28, 2017, AHT shall be required to test the performance of the basic models listed in Appendix I according to the test procedures for commercial refrigeration equipment prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR part 431, Subpart C, Appendix B, except as follows.

    The basic models shall be tested and rated as ice cream freezers (Integrated Average Temperature of −15 °F +/−2.0 °F and use of TDA).

    The basic models shall be subject to the following testing instead of the corresponding defrost testing in the test procedure.

    The first part shall be a 24-hour test starting in steady state conditions and including eight hours of door opening (according ASHRAE Standard 72). The energy consumed in this test shall be recorded, ET1.

    The second part shall be a defrost cycle test starting after steady state conditions are established. The defrost cycle is initiated and terminates after the defrost cycle is complete. The energy consumed during this defrost cycle, ET2, and the duration of the defrost cycle, t DI, shall be recorded.

    Based on the measured energy consumption in these two tests, the daily energy consumption (DEC) in kWh shall be calculated as

    EN28MR17.001 Where DEC = Daily Energy Consumption in kilowatt-hours (kWh); ET1 = energy expended during the first part of the test, in kWh; ET2 = energy expended during the second part of the test, in kWh; t NDI = normalized length of defrosting time per day, in minutes; t DI = length of time of one defrosting cycle, in minutes; 7 = conversion factor of days per week; 1440 = conversion factor to adjust to a 24-hour period in minutes per day.

    The waiver shall continue until DOE adopts an applicable amended test procedure.

    IV. Request for Interim Waiver

    AHT also requests an interim waiver for its testing and rating of the basic models listed in Appendix I. Based on its merits, the petition for waiver is likely to be granted. Further, it is essential that an interim waiver be granted, as AHT plans to distribute units of the models that would be affected by the DOE rule as otherwise applicable on and after the March 28, 2017, compliance date. Without waiver relief, AHT will be at a competitive disadvantage in the market for these important products and would suffer economic hardship. AHT would be subject to requirements that clearly should not apply to such products.

    V. Other Manufacturers

    A list of manufacturers of all other basic models distributed in commerce in the United States and known to AHT to incorporate overall design characteristic(s) similar to those found in the basic model(s) that are the subject of the petition is set forth in Appendix II.

    AHT requests expedited treatment of the Petition and Application.

    Respectfully submitted, Scott Blake Harris John A. Hodges Harris, Wiltshire & Grannis LLP 1919 M Street, NW Washington, DC 20036, (202) 730-1313 Counsel to AHT Cooling Systems GmbH and AHT Cooling Systems USA Inc. October 25, 2016 Appendix I

    The waiver and interim waiver requested herein should apply to testing and rating of the following basic models that are manufactured by AHT:

    SYDNEY ^ * MIAMI ^ * PARIS ^ * MANHATTAN ^ * MALTA ^ * IBIZA ^ *

    II. The models use the following model number layout:

    SYDNEY, MIAMI, etc.—Represent the name of the model platform. (^)—Represents characters in the model number that correspond to the size. (*)—Represents characters in the model number that correspond to marketing features. The * and ^ characters have no impact on the compartment function, product class, or test method. BILLING CODE 6450-01-P EN28MR17.002 EN28MR17.003 EN28MR17.004
    [FR Doc. 2017-06107 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-C
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP17-62-000] Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP; Notice Extending Comment Date

    On March 1, 2017, the Commission issued a notice of application (March 1 Notice) in the above captioned proceeding.1 To give interested parties who were not on the original landowner list an opportunity to comment, the comment due date on the March 1 Notice is hereby extended from March 22, 2017 to April 12, 2017.

    1Gulf South Pipeline Co., LP, 82 FR 12,814 (2017).

    As stated in the March 1 Notice, in its application, Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP requests to amend its certificate issued by the Commission in Docket No. CP15-517-000 to (i) install a gas-fired Solar Titan 130 turbine compressor unit in place of the currently certificated gas-fired Solar Mars 100 turbine compressor unit at the Magasco Compressor Station, located in Sabine County, Texas, increasing the horsepower from 15,748 hp to 20,482 hp and (ii) modify the emergency generator from an 800 brake-horsepower (bhp) unit to a 691 bhp unit. This amendment will not require any additional workspace or land disturbance beyond what has been approved by the Commission. The estimated cost of the amendment is approximately $3 million, all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. The filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site web at http://www.ferc.gov using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at [email protected] or call toll-free, (886) 208-3676 or TYY, (202) 502-8659.

    Any questions regarding this application may be directed to Kathy D. Fort, Manager, Certificates & Tariffs, Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP, 9 Greenway Plaza, Suite 2800, Houston, Texas 77046, by telephone at (713) 479-8252, or by email to [email protected]

    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9, within 90 days of this Notice 2 the Commission staff will either: Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of the EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's EA.

    2 The 90-day timeframe restarts from the date of this notice.

    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or before the comment date stated below file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit seven copies of filings made in the proceeding with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding.

    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the protest.

    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order.

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 7 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on April 12, 2017.

    Dated: March 22, 2017. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06066 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. PF17-3-000] Midship Pipeline Company, LLC; Supplemental Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the Planned Midcontinent Supply Header Interstate Pipeline Project and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues Related to New Pipeline Lateral and Booster Station

    As previously noticed on January 27, 2017, and supplemented herein, the staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) will prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) that will discuss the environmental impacts of the Midcontinent Supply Header Interstate Pipeline Project (MIDSHIP Project) involving construction and operation of facilities by Midship Pipeline Company, LLC (Midship Pipeline) 1 in Kingfisher, Canadian, Grady, Garvin, Stephens, Carter, Johnston, and Bryan Counties, Oklahoma and leased capacity on existing pipeline infrastructure in Oklahoma, Texas, and Louisiana. The Commission will use this EIS in its decision-making process to determine whether the project is in the public convenience and necessity.

    1 The sponsor of the Midcontinent Supply Header Interstate Pipeline Project, previously identified as Cheniere Midstream Holdings, Inc., has changed its name to Midship Pipeline Company, LLC.

    The Commission previously solicited public input on the MIDSHIP Project in January 2017. With this Supplemental Notice of Intent (NOI) we2 are specifically seeking comments on additional facilities planned by Midship Pipeline and recently identified as part of the MIDSHIP Project, specifically the Velma Lateral and Sholem Booster Station. Your comments should focus on the potential environmental effects, reasonable alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts from these facilities. Your input will help the Commission staff determine what issues we need to evaluate in the EIS. To ensure that your comments are timely and properly recorded, please send your comments so that the Commission receives them in Washington, DC on or before April 21, 2017. If you have already submitted comments for the MIDSHIP Project prior to this Supplemental NOI, you do not need to resubmit your comments.

    2 “We,” “us,” and “our” refer to the environmental staff of the FERC's Office of Energy Projects.

    This notice is being sent to the Commission's current environmental mailing list for this project, including the newly affected landowners along the planned Velma Lateral and Sholem Booster Station. State and local government representatives should notify their constituents of this planned project and encourage them to comment on their areas of concern.

    If you are a newly affected landowner receiving this notice, a pipeline company representative may have already contacted you or may contact you soon about the acquisition of an easement to construct, operate, and maintain the planned facilities. The company would seek to negotiate a mutually acceptable agreement. However, if the Commission approves the project, that approval conveys with it the right of eminent domain. Therefore, if the easement negotiations fail to produce an agreement, the pipeline company could initiate condemnation proceedings where compensation would be determined in accordance with state law.

    A fact sheet prepared by the FERC entitled “An Interstate Natural Gas Facility on My Land? What Do I Need To Know?” is available for viewing on the FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov). This fact sheet addresses a number of typically asked questions, including the use of eminent domain and how to participate in the Commission's proceedings.

    Summary of the Velma Lateral and Sholem Booster Station

    The Velma Lateral would consist of 13.3 miles of 16-inch-diameter pipeline and associated appurtenances in Oklahoma. It would begin at a gas supply facility near Velma in Stephens County, continue northeast for approximately 6.5 miles, and connect with a gas supply facility near Sholem, Oklahoma. Midship Pipeline would construct a new 3,750 horsepower compressor station, referred to as the Sholem Booster Station, adjacent to the existing gas facility. From the compressor station, the Velma Lateral would continue in a northeast direction through portions of Stephens, Carter, and Garvin Counties for a total of 6.8 miles, where it would terminate at the Tatums Compressor Station near mainline Milepost 99.1. Midship Pipeline would construct a receipt meter station at the tie-in within the Tatums Compressor Station. An overview map of the planned project, including the Velma Lateral and Sholem Booster Station, is provided in appendix 1. Construction of the Velma Lateral and Sholem Booster Station would disturb about 168.3 acres of land. After construction, Midship Pipeline would maintain about 82.2 acres for operation of these facilities; the remaining acreage would be restored and revert to former uses.

    Public Participation

    For your convenience, there are three methods you can use to submit your comments to the Commission. The Commission will provide equal consideration to all comments received, whether filed via mail or provided electronically. The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments and has expert staff available to assist you at (202) 502-8258 or [email protected] Please carefully follow these instructions so that your comments are properly recorded.

    (1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment feature on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the link to Documents and Filings. This is an easy method for submitting brief, text-only comments on a project;

    (2) You can file your comments electronically using the eFiling feature on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the link to Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide comments in a variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your submission. New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking on “eRegister.” If you are filing a comment on a particular project, please select “Comment on a Filing” as the filing type; or

    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to the following address. Be sure to reference the project docket number (PF17-3-000) with your submission: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.

    Please note this is not your only public input opportunity; please refer to the review process flow chart in appendix 2.

    The EIS Process

    The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the Commission to take into account the environmental impacts that could result from an action whenever it considers the issuance of a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. NEPA also requires us to discover and address concerns the public may have about proposals. This process is referred to as scoping. The main goal of the scoping process is to focus the analysis in the EIS on the important environmental issues. By this notice, the Commission requests public comments on the scope of the issues with the Velma Lateral and Sholem Booster Station to address in the EIS. We will consider all filed comments during the preparation of the EIS.

    In the EIS we will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of the construction and operation of the MIDSHIP Project under these general headings:

    • Geology and soils; • water resources and wetlands; • vegetation, wildlife, and fisheries; • endangered and threatened species; • land use, outdoor recreation, and scenery; • socioeconomics; • cultural resources; • air quality and noise; • public safety; and • cumulative impacts.

    We will also evaluate possible alternatives to the planned project or portions of the project, and make recommendations on how to lessen or avoid impacts on the various resource areas.

    Although no formal application has been filed for the MIDSHIP Project, we initiated our NEPA review of the project under the Commission's pre-filing process on November 9, 2016. The purpose of the pre-filing process is to encourage early involvement of interested stakeholders and to identify and resolve issues before FERC receives an application. As part of our pre-filing review, we have begun to contact some federal and state agencies to discuss their involvement in the scoping process and the preparation of the EIS. In addition, FERC representatives participated in the public open houses sponsored by Midship Pipeline in El Reno, Lindsay, Ardmore, and Durant, Oklahoma from December 12 through 15, 2016. On February 13, 14, 15, and 16, 2017, FERC held public scoping sessions in Durant, Ardmore, Elmore City, and El Reno, respectively, to solicit comments regarding the planned MIDSHIP Project.

    The EIS will present our independent analysis of the issues. We will publish and distribute the draft EIS for public comment. After the comment period, we will consider all timely comments and revise the document, as necessary, before issuing a final EIS. To ensure we have the opportunity to consider and address your comments, please carefully follow the instructions in the Public Participation section, beginning on page 2.

    With this Supplemental NOI, we are asking agencies with jurisdiction by law and/or special expertise with respect to the environmental issues related to this project to formally cooperate with us in the preparation of the EIS.3 Agencies that would like to request cooperating agency status should follow the instructions for filing comments provided under the Public Participation section of this notice.

    3 The Council on Environmental Quality regulations addressing cooperating agency responsibilities are at Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1501.6.

    Consultations Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act

    In accordance with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's implementing regulations for section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, we are using this notice to initiate consultation with the applicable State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPO), and to solicit their views and those of other government agencies, interested Native American tribes, and the public on the project's potential effects on historic properties.4 We will define the project-specific Area of Potential Effects (APE) in consultation with the SHPOs as the project develops. On natural gas facility projects, the APE at a minimum encompasses all areas subject to ground disturbance (examples include construction right-of-way, contractor/pipe storage yards, compressor stations, and access roads). Our EIS for this project will document our findings on the impacts on historic properties and summarize the status of consultations under section 106.

    4 The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation regulations are at Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 800. Those regulations define historic properties as any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places.

    Currently Identified Environmental Issues

    We have already identified several issues that we think deserve attention based on a preliminary review of the planned facilities, the environmental information provided by Midship Pipeline, comments received at the project open houses, and scoping comments. This preliminary list of potential issues may change based on your comments and our analysis:

    • Impacts on water wells;

    • impacts on waterbodies and wetlands;

    • impacts on threatened and endangered species;

    • geological hazards;

    • impacts on future development due to pipeline route on property;

    • impacts on air quality;

    • impacts on noise from planned compressor stations;

    • public safety; and

    • pipeline route alternatives.

    Environmental Mailing List

    The environmental mailing list includes federal, state, and local government representatives and agencies; elected officials; environmental and public interest groups; Native American Tribes; other interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers. This list also includes all affected landowners (as defined in the Commission's regulations) who are potential right-of-way grantors, whose property may be used temporarily for project purposes, or who own homes within certain distances of aboveground facilities, as well as anyone who submits comments on the project. We will update the environmental mailing list as the analysis proceeds to ensure that we send the information related to this environmental review to all individuals, organizations, and government entities interested in and/or potentially affected by the planned project.

    Copies of the completed draft EIS will be sent to the environmental mailing list for public review and comment. If you would prefer to receive a paper copy of the document instead of the CD version or would like to remove your name from the mailing list, please return the attached Information Request (appendix 3).

    Becoming an Intervenor

    Once Midship Pipeline files its application with the Commission, you may want to become an “intervenor,” which is an official party to the Commission's proceeding. Intervenors play a more formal role in the process and are able to file briefs, appear at hearings, and be heard by the courts if they choose to appeal the Commission's final ruling. An intervenor formally participates in the proceeding by filing a request to intervene. Motions to intervene are more fully described at http://www.ferc.gov/resources/guides/how-to/intervene.asp. Instructions for becoming an intervenor are in the “Document-less Intervention Guide” under the “e-filing” link on the Commission's Web site. Please note that the Commission will not accept requests for intervenor status at this time. You must wait until the Commission receives a formal application for the project.

    Additional Information

    Additional information about the project is available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. Click on the eLibrary link, click on “General Search,” and enter the docket number, excluding the last three digits (i.e., PF17-3). Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected] or toll free at (866) 208-3676, or for TTY, contact (202) 502-8659. The eLibrary link also provides access to the texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders, notices, and rulemakings.

    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to the documents. Go to www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.

    Finally, Midship Pipeline has established toll-free telephone numbers (888) 214-7275 for general inquiries or (800) 305-2466 for landowner inquiries) and an email support address ([email protected]) so that parties can contact them directly with questions about the project. You may also refer to Midship Pipeline's project Web site for additional information at http://www.cheniere.com/pipelines/midship/.

    Dated: March 22, 2017. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06068 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. EL16-6-004] PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on March 2, 2017, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. submitted tariff filing per: Further Compliance Filing to be effective February 1, 2017, pursuant to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Order issued on January 31, 2017 Order.1

    1PJM Interconnection, LLC, et al., 158 FERC 61,093 (2017).

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected], or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on April 4, 2017.

    Dated: March 21, 2017. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06035 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. EL17-52-000] Republic Transmission, LLC; Notice of Petition for Declaratory Order

    Take notice that on March 15, 2017, pursuant to section 219 of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 824s (2012), and Rule 207 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.207 (2015), Republic Transmission, LLC (Republic) filed a petition for declaratory order authorizing Republic to use specific limited transmission rate incentives and treatments for Republic's development of the Duff-Coleman EHV 345 kV Competitive Transmission Project, all as more fully explained in the petition.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in this proceeding must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Petitioner.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    The filings in the above proceeding are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected] call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on April 14, 2017.

    Dated: March 22, 2017. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06067 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-9958-90-Region 3] EPA-Mid-Atlantic Region III; Maryland Marine Sanitation Device Standard—Receipt of Petition AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice—Receipt of petition.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that a petition has been received from the Secretary of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources on behalf of the State of Maryland requesting a determination by the Regional Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Mid-Atlantic Region, that adequate facilities for the safe and sanitary removal and treatment of sewage from all vessels are reasonably available for the Chester River, Kent and Queen Anne's Counties, Maryland. EPA is requesting comments on this petition and whether EPA should designate the Chester River and its tributaries as a No Discharge Zone as provided in the Clean Water Act. The petition is available upon request from EPA (at the email address below) or at http://dnr.maryland.gov/boating/Documents/FINAL_CRA_NDZ_APPLICATION.pdf.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received in writing to EPA on or before April 27, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments should be sent to Michael D. Hoffmann, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—Mid-Atlantic Region, 1650 Arch Street, Mail Code 3WP10, Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029, or emailed to [email protected] Only written comment will be considered.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Michael D. Hoffmann, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—Mid-Atlantic Region. Telephone: (215) 814-2716, Fax number: (215) 814-2301; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given that a petition has been received from the Secretary of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources on behalf of the State of Maryland requesting a determination by the Regional Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Mid-Atlantic Region pursuant to Section 312(f)(3) of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1322(f)(3), that adequate facilities for the safe and sanitary removal and treatment of sewage from all vessels is reasonably available for the entirety of the Chester River and its tributaries. EPA is requesting comments on this petition and whether EPA should designate the Chester River as a No Discharge Zone as provided in that provision of the Clean Water Act. The petition is available upon request from EPA (at the address above) or at http://dnr.maryland.gov/boating/Documents/FINAL_CRA_NDZ_APPLICATION.pdf.

    The State of Maryland makes this request as part of its application for a No Discharge Zone which will prohibit the discharge of sewage from vessels into the Chester River and its tributaries. The delineation of the proposed No Discharge Zone of the Chester River and its tributaries from the Chesapeake Bay will begin at 39°8′54.48″ N., 76°16′37.11″ W. and extend down to 39°2′23.56″ N., 76°18′8.89″ W. From there it will continue east throughout any navigable waters including all tributaries and bays. Included within this zone are Lankford Bay, Corsica River, Southeast Creek, and many smaller tributaries.

    The State of Maryland has certified that there are nineteen stationary and four mobile pumpout stations located at 17 marinas or docks throughout the Chester River. Sixteen of the nineteen stationary units also have a method to empty portable toilets. All of the pump-out stations noted were funded with grants administered by the Maryland Department of Natural Resources and all comply with local and state sanitary permitting requirements. A list of the facilities, phone numbers, locations, and hours of operation can be found below.

    List of Facilities With Pumpouts in the Proposed No Discharge Zone Pumpout facility Operating hours in season Mean low water depth
  • (ft)
  • Phone No. Address
    Bayside Landing Park 24-7 5 410-778-2600 20927 Bayside Avenue, Rock Hall, MD 21661. Castle Harbor Marina 24-7 6 410-643-5599 301 Tackle Cir, Chester, MD 21619. Chestertown Marina 9:00-5:00 daily 10 410-778-0500 207 S Water St, Chestertown, MD 21620. Gratitude Marina 9:00-5:00 daily 7 410-639-7011 5924 Lawton Ave, Rock Hall, MD 21661. Haven Harbor Marina 8:00-5:00 daily 6 410-778-6687 20880 Rock Hall Ave, Rock Hall, MD 21661. Kennersley Point Marina 8:00-5:00 daily 3 410-758-2394 223 Marina Ln, Church Hill, MD 21623. Lankford Bay Marina 24-7 7 410-778-1414 23002 McKinleyville Rd, Rock Hall, MD 21661. Long Cove Marina 8:00-5:00 daily 6 410-778-6777 22589 Hudson Rd, Rock Hall, MD 21661. Mears Point Marina 8:30-7:00 daily 6 410-827-8888 428 Kent Narrow Way N, Grasonville, MD 21638. North Point Marina 9:00-5:00 daily 6 410-639-2907 5639 Walnut St, Rock Hall, MD 21661. Osprey Point Marina 24-7 6 410-639-2194 20786 Rock Hall Ave, Rock Hall, MD 21661. Piney Narrows Yacht Haven 8:30-6:30 daily 8 410-643-6600 500 Piney Narrows Rd, Chester, MD 21619. Queenstown Harbor Community Pier 24-7 6 301-343-5487 252 Harbor Lane, Queenstown, MD 21658. Rock Hall Landing Marina 9:00-5:00 daily 5 410-639-2224 5657 S Hawthorne Ave, Rock Hall, MD 21661. Sailing Emporium 8:00-5:00 daily 8 410-778-1342 21144 Green Lane, Rock Hall, MD 21661. Spring Cove Marina 24-7 5 410-639-2110 21035 Spring Cove Rd, Rock Hall, MD 21661. Swan Creek Marina 24-7 7 410-639-7813 6043 Lawton Ave, Rock Hall, MD 21661.

    The State of Maryland has provided documentation indicating that the total vessel population is estimated to be between 2,705 and 4,700 boats in the proposed area. Using the higher of those estimates, approximately 3,196 are identified as recreational vessels, 1,151 are identified as commercial vessels, and 353 are classified as “Other.” The estimated vessel population in all of the affected areas is based on length: The most conservative estimates provided by the State of Maryland suggest that there are no vessels less than 16 feet in length, 15 vessels between 16 feet and 25 feet in length, 3,034 vessels between 25 feet and 40 feet in length, and 1,651 vessels greater than 40 feet in length. Based on the number and size of vessels and EPA guidance for state and local officials, the estimated number of vessels requiring pumpout facilities in the Chester River during peak occupancy is 1,207.

    In their application, Maryland has certified that the Chester River and its tributaries need greater environmental protection and enhancement of the waters. Maryland has classified the Chester River and the Chesapeake Bay which it drains into, as impaired for not meeting applicable state water quality standards. One hundred percent (100%) of the Chester River is considered impaired by either nutrients, sediment, bacteria or a combination thereof. The counties of Kent and Queen Anne's that surround the Chester River rank as the top two Maryland waterfront counties in terms of beach closings by percentage of beaches. All beach closings were due to elevated bacteria as evidenced by high levels of enterococci.

    The Chester River is an important economic driver for the region, providing jobs and revenue through tourism, commercial and recreational fishing for fish and shellfish, boating, and more. Many people use the Chester River for hunting, cruising, nature observation, sightseeing, waterskiing, tubing, racing, and swimming. Based on a study by the Sage Policy Group in 2012, cited in the application, the Chester River supports $86 million in annual local economic activity, 900 jobs, and $26.7 million in annual labor income.

    Dated: March 10, 2017. Cecil Rodrigues, Acting Regional Administrator, Mid-Atlantic Region.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06113 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, including the companies listed below.

    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications will also be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States.

    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than April 24, 2017.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (Colette A. Fried, Assistant Vice President) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414:

    1. Wisconsin Mutual Bancorp, MHC, Kaukauna, Wisconsin and EWSB Bancorp, Inc., Kaukauna, Wisconsin; to become bank holding companies by acquiring 100 percent of the voting shares of East Wisconsin Savings Bank, Kaukauna, Wisconsin, upon its conversion from mutual to stock form.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, March 23, 2017. Yao-Chin Chao, Assistant Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06110 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2017-N-0932] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Experimental Study on Warning Statements for Cigarette Graphic Health Warnings AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information and to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the notice. This notice solicits comments on the Experimental Study on Warning Statements for Cigarette Graphic Health Warnings that is being conducted in support of the graphic label statement provision of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (the Tobacco Control Act).

    DATES:

    Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection of information by May 30, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments as follows:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social Security number, or confidential business information, such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.

    • If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

    Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper submissions): Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    • For written/paper comments submitted to the Division of Dockets Management, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. FDA-2017-N-0932 for “Agency Information Collection Activities, Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Experimental Study on Warning Statements for Cigarette Graphic Health Warnings.” Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    • Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the Division of Dockets Management. If you do not wish your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of your comments and you must identify this information as “confidential.” Any information marked as “confidential” will not be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access the information at: http://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/dockets/default.htm.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    JonnaLynn Capezzuto, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A63, 11601 Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852, 301-796-3794.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection of information set forth in this document.

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

    Experimental Study on Warning Statements for Cigarette Graphic Health Warnings OMB Control Number—0910-New

    The health risks associated with the use of cigarettes can be significant and far-reaching. In 2009, Congress enacted the Tobacco Control Act (Pub. L. 111-31), which amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) to grant FDA authority to regulate the manufacture, marketing, and distribution of tobacco products to protect the public health and to reduce tobacco use by minors. Section 201 of the Tobacco Control Act amends section 4 of the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act (FCLAA) (15 U.S.C. 1333) to require FDA to issue “regulations that require color graphics depicting the negative health consequences of smoking to accompany the label statements specified in subsection (a)(1).” Section 202(b) of the Tobacco Control Act further amends section 4 the FCLAA by adding that the Secretary, through notice and comment rulemaking, may adjust the “text of any of the label requirements . . . if the Secretary finds that such a change would promote greater public understanding of the risks associated with the use of tobacco products.”

    In the Federal Register of June 22, 2011 (76 FR 36628), FDA issued a final rule entitled “Required Warnings for Cigarette Packages and Advertisements,” which specified nine images to accompany the new textual warning statements for cigarettes. Although the rule was scheduled to become effective 15 months after it issued, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia held, on August 24, 2012, that the rule in its current form violated the First Amendment. In a letter to Congress on March 15, 2013, the Attorney General reported FDA's intention to undertake research to support a new rulemaking consistent with the Tobacco Control Act. Preliminary research has been underway since 2013. Informed by the previous court decisions on this matter, including on the First Amendment, the next phase of the research includes the study proposed here, which is an effort by FDA to collect data concerning revised textual warning statements for use with new images as part of cigarette graphic health warnings, and their potential impact on public understanding of the risks associated with the use of cigarettes.

    As currently proposed, this Experimental Study on Warning Statements for Cigarette Graphic Health Warnings is a voluntary online experiment conducted with consumers. The purpose of the proposed study is to assess whether potential textual warnings statements, which have been revised from those enumerated in section 4 of FCLAA, promote greater public understanding of the negative health consequences of cigarette smoking. The study will collect data from various groups of consumers, including adolescent (under age 18) current cigarette smokers, adolescents who are susceptible to initiation of cigarette smoking, young adult (ages 18- to 24) current cigarette smokers, and older adult (ages 25 and above) current cigarette smokers. The results will inform the Agency's development of cigarette graphic health warnings to be tested in future studies with the goal of implementing the mandatory graphic warning label statement consistent with section 4(d) of FCLAA and the First Amendment.

    Proposed Study Overview: In this study, adolescent current cigarette smokers, adolescents who are susceptible to initiation of cigarette smoking, young adult current cigarette smokers, and older adult current smokers will be recruited from an Internet panel of more than 1.2 million people and screened for inclusion into the study. Participants who meet the inclusion criteria will be randomized into one of 17 conditions in a between-subjects design. In each condition, participants will be exposed to a series of nine warning statements, presented sequentially. Participants randomized to the control condition will view all nine of the warning statements listed in section 4(a)(1) of FCLAA:

    • WARNING: Cigarettes are addictive. • WARNING: Tobacco smoke can harm your children. • WARNING: Cigarettes cause fatal lung disease. • WARNING: Cigarettes cause cancer. • WARNING: Cigarettes cause strokes and heart disease. • WARNING: Smoking during pregnancy can harm your baby. • WARNING: Smoking can kill you. • WARNING: Tobacco smoke causes fatal lung disease in nonsmokers. • WARNING: Quitting smoking now greatly reduces serious risks to your health.

    Participants randomized to 1 of the 16 experimental conditions will view 8 of the warning statements listed in section 4(a)(1) of FCLAA (above) plus 1 statement that is a revised version of a statutory text warning. The revised warning statements being tested in this proposed study are:

    • WARNING: Smoking causes mouth and throat cancer. • WARNING: Smoking causes head and neck cancer. • WARNING: Smoking causes bladder cancer, which can lead to bloody urine. • WARNING: Smoking during pregnancy causes premature birth. • WARNING: Smoking during pregnancy stunts fetal growth. • WARNING: Smoking during pregnancy causes premature birth and low birth weight. • WARNING: Secondhand smoke causes respiratory illnesses in children, like pneumonia. • WARNING: Smoking can cause heart disease and strokes by clogging arteries. • WARNING: Smoking causes COPD, a lung disease that can be fatal. • WARNING: Smoking causes serious lung diseases like emphysema and chronic bronchitis. • WARNING: Smoking reduces blood flow, which can cause erectile dysfunction. • WARNING: Smoking reduces blood flow to the limbs, which can require amputation. • WARNING: Smoking raises blood sugar, which can cause type 2 diabetes. • WARNING: Smoking causes age-related macular degeneration, which can lead to blindness. • WARNING: Smoking causes cataracts, which can lead to blindness.

    In all conditions, after viewing each statement, participants will respond to a small number of questions about that specific statement. Following viewing all nine statements, participants will respond to a larger set of questions. Next, participants will view an additional nine revised warning statements, drawn from the revised statements listed above, and respond to an additional set of questions. Primary study outcomes include beliefs and knowledge of the negative health consequences of cigarette smoking. Prior to the main data collection, two pretests, each with 50 participants, will take place to ensure correct programming and to identify any issues with the proposed study design and implementation.

    Estimated Burden: FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows:

    Table 1—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden 1 Portion of study Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses
  • per
  • respondent
  • Total
  • annual
  • responses
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • Total hours
    Screening for pretest 762 1 762 .033 (2 minutes) 25 Pretest 100 1 100 .25 (15 minutes) 25 Screening for main data collection 19,082 1 19,082 .033 (2 minutes) 630 Main data collection 2,500 1 2,500 .25 (15 minutes) 625 Total 1,305 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

    FDA's burden estimate is based on prior experience with research that is similar to this proposed study. Screening potential participants for the 2 pretests will occur with 762 respondents (487 adults and 275 adolescents) identified and recruited through the Internet panel. This brief screening will take an average of 2 minutes (0.033 hours) per respondent. Each of the 2 pretests will consist of 50 respondents (34 adults and 16 adolescents) conducted during a single session and take an average of 15 minutes (0.25 hours) per respondent. Screening potential participants for the main data collection will occur with 19,082 respondents (11,925 adults and 7,157 adolescents) identified and recruited through the same Internet panel as used for the pretests. This brief screening will take an average of 2 minutes (0.033 hours) per respondent. Recent national estimates of the numbers of adolescent current cigarette smokers, adolescents who are susceptible to initiation of cigarette smoking, young adult current cigarette smokers, and older adult current cigarette smokers informed the estimates of 13.9 percent qualification rate for adults and 11.6 percent qualification rate for adolescents. Applying these estimates and other assumptions from previous experience conducting similar studies to the number of adolescents and adults to be screened results in the desired sample size for the main data collection of 2,500 participants, of which 1,667 will be adults and 833 will be adolescents. The main data collection will occur with those 2,500 respondents during a single session. The main data collection will take an average of 15 minutes (0.25 hours) per respondent. The total estimated burden is 1,305 hours (25 hours + 25 hours + 630 hours + 625 hours).

    Dated: March 22, 2017. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06078 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Announcement of Meeting of the Secretary's Advisory Committee on National Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Objectives for 2030 AGENCY:

    Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, Office of the Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announces the next federal advisory committee meeting regarding the development of national health promotion and disease prevention objectives for 2030. This meeting will be held online via webinar and is open to the public. The Committee will discuss the nation's health promotion and disease prevention objectives and will provide recommendations to improve health status and reduce health risks for the nation by the year 2030. The Committee will advise the Secretary on the Healthy People 2030 mission, vision, framework, and organizational structure. The Committee will provide advice regarding criteria for identifying a more focused set of measurable, nationally representative objectives. The Committee's advice must assist the Secretary in reducing the number of objectives while ensuring that the selection criteria identifies the most critical public health issues that are high-impact priorities supported by current national data.

    DATES:

    The Committee will meet on April 27, 2017, from 12:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET).

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held online via webinar. To register to attend the meeting, please visit the Healthy People Web site at http://www.healthypeople.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Emmeline Ochiai, Designated Federal Officer, Secretary's Advisory Committee on National Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Objectives for 2030, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, 1101 Wootton Parkway, Room LL-100, Rockville, MD 20852, (240) 453-8280 (telephone), (240) 453-8281 (fax). Additional information is available on the Healthy People Web site at http://www.healthypeople.gov.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The names and biographies of the Committee members are available at https://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/about/history-development/healthy-people-2030-advisory-committee.

    Purpose of Meeting: Through the Healthy People initiative, HHS leverages scientific insights and lessons from the past decade, along with new knowledge of current data, trends, and innovations, to develop the next iteration of national health promotion and disease prevention objectives. Healthy People provides science-based, 10-year national objectives for promoting health and preventing disease. Since 1979, Healthy People has set and monitored national health objectives that meet a broad range of health needs, encourage collaboration across sectors, guide individuals toward making informed health decisions, and measure the impact of our prevention and health promotion activities. Healthy People 2030 health objectives will reflect assessments of major risks to health and wellness, changing public health priorities, and emerging technologies related to our nation's health preparedness and prevention.

    Public Participation at Meeting: Members of the public are invited to join the online Committee meeting. There will be no opportunity for oral public comments during this online Committee meeting. However, written comments are welcome throughout the entire development process of the national health promotion and disease prevention objectives for 2030 and may be emailed to [email protected]

    To join the Committee meeting, individuals must pre-register at the Healthy People Web site at http://www.healthypeople.gov. Participation in the meeting is limited. Registrations will be accepted until maximum webinar capacity is reached and must be completed by 9:00 a.m. ET on April 26, 2017. A waiting list will be maintained should registrations exceed capacity, and those individuals will be contacted as additional space for the meeting becomes available. Registration questions may be directed to: Jim Nakayama at [email protected], or (240) 672-4011.

    Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 217a. The Secretary's Advisory Committee on National Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Objectives for 2030 is governed by provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), Public Law 92-463, as amended (5 U.S.C., App.) which sets forth standards for the formation and use of federal advisory committees.

    Dated: March 10, 2017. Don Wright, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Health (Disease Prevention and Health Promotion).
    [FR Doc. 2017-06033 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4150-32-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis Panel; NCI Provocative Question #10.

    Date: March 29, 2017.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Cancer Institute Shady Grove, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 7W104, Rockville, MD 20850 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Eun Ah Cho, Ph.D., Chief, Special Review Branch, Division of Extramural Activities, National Cancer Institute, NIH, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 7W104, Bethesda, MD 20892-9750, 240-276-6342, [email protected].

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.392, Cancer Construction; 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Cancer Control, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: March 22, 2017. Melanie J. Pantoja, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06039 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Library of Medicine; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App), notice is hereby given of a meeting of the PubMed Central National Advisory Committee.

    The meeting will be open to the public as indicated below, with attendance limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting.

    Name of Committee: PubMed Central National Advisory Committee.

    Date: June 21, 2017.

    Time: 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: Review and Analysis of Systems.

    Place: National Library of Medicine, Building 38, 2nd Floor, The Lindberg Room, 8600 Rockville Pike, Building 38, Conference Room B, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Teleconference).

    Contact Person: David J. Lipman, MD, Director, National Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine, Building 38, Room 8N807, Bethesda, MD 20894, 301-435-5985, [email protected].

    Any interested person may file written comments with the committee by forwarding the statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person.

    In the interest of security, NIH has instituted stringent procedures for entrance onto the NIH campus. All visitor vehicles, including taxicabs, hotel, and airport shuttles will be inspected before being allowed on campus. Visitors will be asked to show one form of identification (for example, a government-issued photo ID, driver's license, or passport) and to state the purpose of their visit.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 93.879, Medical Library Assistance, National Institutes of Health, HHS).
    Dated: March 22, 2017. Michelle Trout, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06045 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2); notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The purpose of this meeting is to evaluate requests for preclinical development resources for potential new therapeutics for the treatment of cancer. The outcome of the evaluation will provide information to internal NCI committees that will decide whether NCI should support requests and make available contract resources for development of the potential therapeutic to improve the treatment of various forms of cancer. The research proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the proposed research projects, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis Panel; Feb2017 Cycle 25 NExT SEP Committee Meeting.

    Date: April 19, 2017.

    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To evaluate the NCI Experimental Therapeutics Program Portfolio.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 9000 Rockville Pike, Building 31, Wing C; 6th Floor, Conference Room 10, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Barbara Mroczkowski, Ph.D., Executive Secretary, Discovery Experimental Therapeutics Program, National Cancer Institute, NIH, 31 Center Drive, Room 3A44, Bethesda, MD 20817, (301) 496-4291, [email protected].

    Toby Hecht, Ph.D., Executive Secretary, Development Experimental Therapeutics Program, National Cancer Institute, NIH, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 3W110, Rockville, MD 20850, (240) 276-5683, [email protected].

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.392, Cancer Construction; 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Cancer Control, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: March 22, 2017. Melanie J. Pantoja, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06040 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Prospective Grant of an Exclusive Patent License for Commercialization: Cerclage Annuloplasty Devices for Treating Mitral Valve Regurgitation AGENCY:

    National Institutes of Health, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Institutes of Health (NIH), Department of Health and Human Services, is contemplating the grant of a worldwide exclusive license to practice the inventions embodied in:

    NIH Ref. No. Patent No. or
  • application No.
  • Filing date Title
    E-249-2006/0-US-01 60/858,716 November 14, 2006 A Device To Protect Coronary Arteries Against Compression During Transcatheter Mitral Valve Annuloplasty (PMVA). E-249-2006/1-US-01 60/932,611 May 31, 2006 E-249-2006/2-PCT-01 PCT/US2007/023876 November 13, 2007 E-249-2006/2-EP-02 07861997.0 November 13, 2007 Transcatheter Coronary Sinus Mitral Valve Annuloplasty Procedure And Coronary Artery And Myocardial Protection Device. E-249-2006/2-US-03 8,211,171 November 13, 2007 E-249-2006/2-US-04 9,271,833 November 13, 2007 E-249-2006/3-US-01 15/056,599 February 29, 2016 Transcatheter Coronary Sinus Mitral Valve Annuloplasty Procedure and Coronary Artery and Myocardial Protection Device with “Landing Zone”.
    to Transmural Systems, LLC, a limited liability company incorporated under the laws of the State of Massachusetts and having its principle place of business in Andover, Massachusetts. The contemplated exclusive license may be limited to cerclage annuloplasty devices for treating mitral valve regurgitation. DATES:

    Only written comments and/or applications for a license that are received by NIH at the address indicated below on or before April 12, 2017 will be considered.

    ADDRESSES:

    Requests for a copy of any unpublished patent application, inquiries, objections to this notice, comments and other requests relating to the contemplated license should be directed to: Michael Shmilovich, Esq., CLP, Senior Licensing and Patent Manager, 31 Center Drive Room 4A29, MSC2479, Bethesda, MD 20892-2479, phone number 301-435-5019, or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice is published in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 209(c)(1) and 37 CFR 404.7(a)(1)(i).

    Mitral regurgitation (MR) is amongst the most common valvular heart disorders, with an estimated prevalence of approximately 1.7% in the United States, increasing with age to approximately 9.3% in those over the age of 75. MR is classified as primary (also known as “organic”) when principally due to a structural or degenerative abnormality of the mitral valve (MV), whether of the leaflets, chordae tendineae, papillary muscles, or mitral annulus. Secondary (also known as functional) MR occurs in the absence of organic MV disease, usually from left ventricular (LV) dysfunction. It is more common than primary MR and is associated with a worse prognosis (compounded by the underlying cardiomyopathy), and (in contrast to primary MR) the benefits of MV surgery are uncertain. The MV consists of two leaflets (anterior and posterior) sitting within the annulus (see picture below). The posterior mitral leaflet originates from the left atrial (LA) endocardium. A subvalvular apparatus, comprising two papillary muscles (anterolateral and posteromedial) arising from the LV myocardium and the chordae tendineae, supports the leaflets. LV dilation due to ischemic or nonischemic cardiomyopathy secondarily impairs leaflet coaptation of a structurally normal MV, resulting in secondary MR. Specifically, LV dysfunction and remodeling lead to apical and lateral papillary muscle displacement, resulting in leaflet tethering, dilation and flattening of the mitral annulus, and reduced valve closing forces.

    The subject mitral repair system devices are primarily intended to treat secondary mitral regurgitation. The proposed mitral cerclage with coronary artery protection is an approach capable of overcoming many of the problems that exist with existing devices namely allowing a larger subset of patients to be treated compared to other coronary sinus devices, providing a full annuloplasty type device which is flexible enough to preserve annular motion, reduce hospitalization costs and shorten recovery time. The associated method closely resembles the surgical placement of a full annuloplasty ring.

    E-249-2009/0-2

    Catheter-based mitral valve regurgitation treatments that use coronary sinus trajectory or coronary sinus implant can have unwanted effects because the coronary sinus and its branches have been found to cross the outer diameter of major coronary arteries in a majority of humans. As a result, pressure applied by any prosthetic device in the coronary sinus (such as tension on the annuloplasty device) can compress the underlying coronary artery and induce myocardial ischemia or infarction. This invention pertains to devices and methods that avoid constricting coronary artery branches during coronary sinus-based annuloplasty. These devices and methods protect coronary artery branches from constriction during trans-sinus mitral annuloplasty. The device protects a coronary vessel from compression during mitral annuloplasty by extending an annuloplasty element, such as a tensioning device, at least partially through the coronary sinus over a coronary artery. The device is a surgically sterile bridge configured for placement within the coronary sinus at a location where the coronary sinus passes over a coronary artery, so that the protection device provides a support for a mitral annuloplasty element, such as a compressive prosthesis, including a tension element when it is placed under tension. The protection device has an arch of sufficient rigidity and dimensions to support the tensioning element over the coronary artery, redistribute tension away from an underlying coronary artery, and inhibit application of pressure to the underlying artery, for example when an annuloplasty tension element is placed under tension during mitral annuloplasty. In particular, the protective device can be a support interposed in the coronary sinus between the annuloplasty device and the coronary artery. The device may be substantially tubular so that the tensioning element is contained within the protective device and supported in spaced relationship to the coronary artery. An arch may be configured to extend between a proximal end and a distal end that are substantially collinear with one another so that the ends form stabilizing members such as feet that retain the bridge in position over the coronary artery.

    E-249-2009/3

    Another embodiment of the cerclage protection device is a combination with a cerclage tension element that can be used to facilitate transcatheter mitral valve implantation. The transcatheter strategy includes a “valve-in-ring” wherein a cerclage annuloplasty is first performed. During the same session or during a separate procedure, a transcatheter mitral valve implantation could be performed that would take advantage of the cerclage annuloplasty system to serve as a visual and a mechanical “landing zone” for mitral valve implantation. A cerclage annuloplasty ring would allow outward expansion of the mitral valve to achieve fixation. However, without the cerclage protection device in place, such a strategy would cause compression of an entrapped coronary artery. This new embodiment of the protection device protects coronary arteries not from extrinsic compression but from “inside-out” compression, thereby allowing cerclage to be the first step for transcatheter mitral valve implantation. It also allows the latter to be employed as second-stage adjunct or bailout for inadequate cerclage mitral valve annuoplasty.

    The prospective exclusive license will be royalty bearing and will comply with the terms and conditions of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. The prospective exclusive license may be granted unless, within fifteen (15) days from the date of this published notice, NIH receives written evidence and argument that establishes that the grant of the license would not be consistent with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7.

    Properly filed competing applications for a license filed in response to this notice will be treated as objections to the contemplated license. Comments and objections submitted in response to this notice will not be made available for public inspection, and, to the extent permitted by law, will not be released under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552.

    Dated: March 17, 2017. Michael Shmilovich, Senior Licensing and Patenting Manager, Office of Technology Transfer and Development, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06036 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Submission for OMB Review; 30-Day Comment Request; Early Career Reviewer Program Application and Vetting System (EAVS) (Center for Scientific Review) AGENCY:

    National Institutes of Health, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request for review and approval of the information collection listed below. This proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register on December 29, 2016, page 96020 (Vol. 81, No. 250) and allowed 60 days for public comment. No public comments were received. The purpose of this notice is to allow an additional 30 days for public comment.

    DATES:

    Comments regarding this information collection are best assured of having their full effect if received within 30-days of the date of this publication.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the item(s) contained in this notice, especially regarding the estimated public burden and associated response time, should be directed to the: Office of Management and Budget, Office of Regulatory Affairs, [email protected] or by fax to 202-395-6974, Attention: Desk Officer for NIH.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request more information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the data collection plans and instruments, contact: Dr. Mary Ann Guadagno, Project Clearance Liaison, Center for Scientific Review, NIH, Room 3182, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 or call non-toll-free number (301) 435-1251 or Email your request, including your address to: [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Center for Scientific Review (CSR), National Institutes of Health, may not conduct or sponsor, and the respondent is not required to respond to, an information collection that has been extended, revised, or implemented on or after October 1, 1995, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    In compliance with Section 3507(a)(1)(D) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request for review and approval of the information collection listed below.

    Proposed Collection: Early Career Reviewer Program Application and Vetting System (EAVS) OMB #0925-0695, Expiration Date: 04/30/2017, Extension, Center for Scientific Review (CSR), National Institutes of Health (NIH).

    Need and Use of Information Collection: The Center for Scientific Review (CSR) is the portal for NIH grant applications and their review for scientific merit. Our mission is to see that NIH grant applications receive fair, independent, expert, and timely reviews—free from inappropriate influences—so NIH can fund the most promising research. To accomplish this goal, Scientific Review Officers (SRO) form study sections consisting of scientists who have the technical and scientific expertise to evaluate the merit of grant applications. Study section members are generally scientists who have established independent programs of research as demonstrated by their publications and their grant award experiences.

    The CSR Early Career Reviewer program was developed to identify and train qualified scientists who are early in their scientific careers and who have not had prior CSR review experience. The goals of the program are to expose these early career scientists to the peer review experience so that they become more competitive as applicants as well as to enrich the existing pool of NIH reviewers. Currently, online application software, the Early Career Reviewer Application and Vetting System, is accessed online by applicants to the Early Career Reviewer Program who provide their names, contact information, a description of their areas of expertise, their study section preferences, professional Curriculum Vitae and links to their professional Web site. This Information Collection Request (ICR) is to extend the Early Career Reviewer Application and Vetting System to process applications for the Early Career Reviewer program.

    OMB approval is requested for 3 years. There are no costs to respondents other than their time. The total estimated annualized burden hours are 450.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Form name Type of respondent Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • Total annual burden hour
    A Applicants 1080 1 25/60 450 Totals 1080 450
    Dated: March 20, 2017. Mary Ann Guadagno, Project Clearance Liaison, Center for Scientific Review (CSR), National Institutes of Health.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06116 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of a meeting of the National Advisory Board on Medical Rehabilitation Research.

    The meeting will be open to the public, with attendance limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting.

    Name of Committee: National Advisory Board on Medical Rehabilitation Research.

    Date: May 1-2, 2017.

    Time: May 1, 2017, 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: NICHD Director's report; NIH Research Plan on Rehabilitation Annual Report; Clinical trials; Update on the NIH Cures Act; Training Efforts to Support Rehabilitation Research; Breakout sessions.

    Place: Bethesda Marriott Suites, Patriot Ball Room, 6711 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20817.

    Time: May 2, 2017, 8:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

    Agenda: Update on Clinical Trials Policy; Update on Cerebral Palsy Plan; Update on StrokeNet; Scientific Presentation on Neuroplasticity.

    Place: Bethesda Marriott Suites, Patriot Ball Room, 6711 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20817.

    Contact Person: Ralph M. Nitkin, Ph.D., Deputy Director, National Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research (NCMRR), Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute, of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, DHHS, 6710B Rockledge Drive, Room 2116, MSC 7002, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 402-4206, [email protected].

    Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page: http://www.nichd.nih.gov/about/advisory/nabmrr/Pages/index.aspx where the current roster and minutes from past meetings are posted.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: March 22, 2017. Michelle Trout, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06044 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Special Emphasis Panel; Environmental Aspects of Mexican Migration, 1995-2010.

    Date: April 19, 2017.

    Time: 2:00 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6710B Rockledge Drive Bethesda, MD 20817 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Minki Chatterji, 6710B Bethesda Drive, 2221A, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301.806.2515, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: March 22, 2017. Michelle Trout, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06043 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of a meeting of the National Advisory Council on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.

    The meeting will be open to the public as indicated below, with attendance limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting. The open session on May 3, 2017 will be videocast and can be accessed from the NIH Videocasting and Podcasting Web site (https://videocast.nih.gov/live.asp?live=21960).

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Advisory Council on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.

    Closed: May 2, 2017.

    Time: 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, Terrace Level Conference Room, 5635 Fishers Lane, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Open: May 2, 2017.

    Time: 10:15 a.m. to 3:15 p.m.

    Agenda: Presentations and other business of the Council.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, Terrace Level Conference Room, 5635 Fishers Lane, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Abraham P. Bautista, Ph.D., Executive Secretary, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse & Alcoholism, National Institutes of Health, 5635 Fishers Lane, Rm 2085, Rockville, MD 20852 301-443-9737 [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Advisory Council on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, National Cancer Advisory Board, and National Advisory Council on Drug Abuse.

    Open: May 3, 2017.

    Time: 9:00 a.m. to 2:15 p.m.

    Agenda: Presentation of NIAAA, NCI, and NIDA Director's Update, Scientific Reports, and other topics within the scope of the Collaborative Research on Addiction at NIH (CRAN).

    Place: National Institutes of Health, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, Terrace Level Conference Room, 5635 Fishers Lane, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Abraham P. Bautista, Ph.D., Executive Secretary, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse & Alcoholism, National Institutes of Health, 5635 Fishers Lane, Room 2085 Rockville, MD 20852 301-443-9737 [email protected].

    Paulette S. Gray, Ph.D., Director, Division of Extramural Activities, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room, 7W444 Bethesda, MD 20892 240-276-6340 [email protected].

    Susan Weiss, Ph.D., Director, Division of Extramural Research, National Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institutes of Health, 6001 Executive Boulevard, NSC, Room 5274 301-443-6487 [email protected].

    Any interested person may file written comments with the committee by forwarding the statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person.

    Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page: https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/news-events/meetings-events-exhibits?field_event_category_tid=16, where an agenda and any additional information for the meeting will be posted when available.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.271, Alcohol Research Career Development Awards for Scientists and Clinicians; 93.272, Alcohol National Research Service Awards for Research Training; 93.273, Alcohol Research Programs; 93.891, Alcohol Research Center Grants; 93.701, ARRA Related Biomedical Research and Research Support Awards., National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: March 22, 2017. Melanie J. Pantoja, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06041 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Special Emphasis Panel; RFA-AA-17-014 Collaborative Research in HIV/AIDS, Alcohol and Related Comorbidities

    Date: April 12-14, 2017.

    Time: 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, Terrace Level 508/509, 5635 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20851.

    Contact Person: Ranga Srinivas, Ph.D., Chief, Extramural Project Review Branch, National Institutes of Health, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 5365 Fishers Lane, Room 2085, Rockville, MD 20852, (301) 451-2067, [email protected]

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Special Emphasis Panel; RFA-AA-17-015 Expanding Alcohol-Focused High-Priority Translational Research for HIV/AIDS.

    Date: April 12-14, 2017.

    Time: 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, Terrace Level 508/509, 5635 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20851.

    Contact Person: Ranga Srinivas, Ph.D., Chief, Extramural Project Review Branch, National Institutes of Health, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 5365 Fishers Lane, Room 2085, Rockville, MD 20852 (301) 451-2067, [email protected]

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.271, Alcohol Research Career Development Awards for Scientists and Clinicians; 93.272, Alcohol National Research Service Awards for Research Training; 93.273, Alcohol Research Programs; 93.891, Alcohol Research Center Grants; 93.701, ARRA Related Biomedical Research and Research Support Awards., National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: March 22, 2017. Melanie J. Pantoja, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06042 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health Special Emphasis Panel; T32 Institutional Grant Review Meeting.

    Date: May 2, 2017.

    Time: 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Ashlee Tipton, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer Division of Extramural Activities, National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Room 401, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-451-3849, [email protected].

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.213, Research and Training in Complementary and Integrative Health, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: March 22, 2017. Michelle Trout, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06038 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard [Docket No. USCG-2016-0165] Port Access Route Study (PARS): In Nantucket Sound AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of study; final report.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) conducted the Nantucket Sound Port Access Route Study (PARS) in accordance with the Ports and Waterways Safety Act (PWSA) (33 U.S.C. 1223(c)), as directed by the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2015. The USCG used the standards and methodology of the Atlantic Coast PARS to determine whether existing regulations should be revised to improve navigation safety in Nantucket Sound due to factors such as increased vessel traffic, changing vessel traffic patterns, weather conditions, or navigational difficulty. The report, as submitted to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate on February 27, 2017, is available in the docket for viewing. It concluded that no regulatory changes to existing vessel routing measures are needed.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this notice, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Discussion

    The Nantucket Sound PARS considered whether existing regulations should be revised to improve navigation safety in Nantucket Sound due to factors such as vessel traffic density, vessel traffic patterns, weather conditions, or navigation challenges in the study area. All available sources of data relevant to this process, including existing and potential traffic patterns, existing regulations, public submissions, and other factors were analyzed. Although the study recommended no regulatory changes to existing vessel routing measures, the USCG will continue to actively monitor and initiate appropriate actions on all waterways subject to its jurisdiction as needed to support navigation safety.

    Public Participation and Comments

    On March 22, 2016, we published a Notice of Study; request for comments entitled “Port Access Route Study (PARS): In Nantucket Sound” in the Federal Register (81 FR 15327). Six comments were received in response to our Federal Register Notice and other outreach efforts.

    Viewing Documents and Comments

    To view the final report as submitted to Congress and comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type “USCG-2016-0165” into the search bar and click search, next to the displayed search results click “Open Docket Folder”, which will display all comments and documents associated with this study.

    Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received to the docket by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

    Conclusion

    The Nantucket Sound PARS focused on gathering factual and relevant information to aid the USCG assess potential risk of marine casualties and efficiency of vessel traffic in the region. The USCG analyzed vessel traffic density, hazards, agency and stakeholder experience in vessel traffic management, navigation, ship handling, the effects of weather, and impacts to marine mammals and other wildlife. The USCG also considered public comments in the final report. The Nantucket Sound PARS concluded that no regulatory changes to existing vessel routing measures are needed but reiterated that the USCG actively monitors all waterways subject to its jurisdiction to help ensure navigation safety. As such, the USCG will continue to monitor Nantucket Sound for changing conditions and consider appropriate actions to promote waterway and user safety.

    Dated: March 10, 2017. S.D. Poulin, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06088 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard [Docket No. USCG-2017-0191] Certificate of Alternate Compliance for the Gladding-Hearn Hulls 418 and 419 AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard announces that a Certificate of Alternate Compliance (COAC) was issued for the GLADDING-HEARN HULLS 418 AND 419. We are issuing this notice because its publication is required by statute.

    DATES:

    The Certificate of Alternate Compliance was issued on March 14, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For information or questions about this notice call or email Mr. Kevin Miller, First District Towing Vessel/Barge Safety Specialist, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone (617) 223-8272, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The United States is signatory to the International Maritime Organization's International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972 (72 COLREGS), as amended. The special construction or purpose of some vessels makes them unable to comply with the light, shape, and sound signal provisions of the 72 COLREGS. Under statutory law 1 and Coast Guard regulation,2 a vessel may instead meet alternative requirements and the vessel's owner, builder, operator, or agent may apply for a COAC. For vessels of special construction, the cognizant Coast Guard District Office determines whether the vessel for which the COAC is sought complies as closely as possible with the 72 COLREGS, and decides whether to issue the COAC. Once issued, a COAC remains valid until information supplied in the COAC application or the COAC terms become inapplicable to the vessel. Under the governing statute 3 and regulation,4 the Coast Guard must publish notice of this action.

    1 33 U.S.C. 1605(c)

    2 33 CFR. 81.3

    3 33 U.S.C. 1605(c)

    4 33 CFR 81.18

    The Coast Guard encourages the use of two masthead lights on power-driven vessels less than 50 meters in length in accordance with “The Boating Safety Circular” 75, June 1993, page 15. The Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard, certifies that the Gladding-Hearn Hulls 418 and 419 are vessels of special construction or purpose, and that, with respect to the position of the two masthead lights, it is not possible to comply fully with the requirements of the provisions enumerated in the 72 COLREGS, without interfering with the normal operation of the vessel. This certificate authorizes the placement of these vessels' two masthead lights to not meet the minimum horizontal separation requirements specified in Annex I of 72 COLREGS. All other navigational lighting dimensions will remain in compliance with 72 COLREGS, including vertical separation required for masthead lights and sidelights.

    This notice is issued under authority of 33 U.S.C. 1605(c) and 33 CFR 81.

    Dated: March 14, 2017. B.L. Black, Chief, Prevention Department, First District, U.S. Coast Guard.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06089 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-NRNHL-23061; PPWOCRADI0, PCU00RP14.R50000] National Register of Historic Places; Notification of Pending Nominations and Related Actions AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Park Service is soliciting comments on the significance of properties nominated before March 4, 2017, for listing or related actions in the National Register of Historic Places.

    DATES:

    Comments should be submitted by April 12, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments may be sent via U.S. Postal Service to the National Register of Historic Places, National Park Service, 1849 C St. NW., MS 2280, Washington, DC 20240; by all other carriers, National Register of Historic Places, National Park Service, 1201 Eye St. NW., 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20005; or by fax, 202-371-6447.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The properties listed in this notice are being considered for listing or related actions in the National Register of Historic Places. Nominations for their consideration were received by the National Park Service before March 4, 2017. Pursuant to section 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60, written comments are being accepted concerning the significance of the nominated properties under the National Register criteria for evaluation.

    Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    Nominations submitted by State Historic Preservation Officers:

    CALIFORNIA Monterey County Point Sur Light Station (Boundary Increase) (Light Stations of California MPS), Moro Rock and adjacent NAVFAC parcels, Big Sur vicinity, BC100000880 San Diego County Portuguese Chapel of San Diego, 2818 Avenida de Portugal, San Diego, SG100000881 Yolo County Washington Firehouse, 317 3rd St., West Sacramento, SG100000882 GEORGIA De Kalb County Northcrest Historic District, Roughly bounded by Chamblee-Tucker, Northcrest & Pleasantdale Rds., Doraville vicinity, SG100000883 MICHIGAN Manistee County Walther League Camp—Camp Arcadia, 3046 Oak St., Arcadia Township, SG100000884 Monroe County Hall of the Divine Child, 810 W. Elm Ave., Monroe, SG100000885 Ottawa County De Pree, Max and Esther, House, 279 S. Division St., Zeeland, SG100000886 MISSOURI Newton County Neosho Colored School, 639 Young St., Neosho, SG100000887 MONTANA Fergus County Gamble—Robinson Company Warehouse, 302 E. Main St., Lewistown, SG100000888 NEW YORK Albany County Bleeker Stadium and Swinburne Park, Clinton Ave., Albany, SG100000889 Lincoln Park Lincoln Park, Albany, SG100000890 Erie County Burt, F.N., Company Factory “C”, 1502 Niagara St., Buffalo, SG100000891 Hamilton County Dollar Island Camp, 1 Dollar Island (in Fourth Lake), Inlet, SG100000892 Jefferson County Robinson, George T., House, 15082 Bluff Island, Clayton, SG100000893 Madison County Nelson Methodist Episcopal Church, 3333 US 20 E., Cazenovia, SG100000894 Seneca County Waterloo Downtown Historic District, 1-42 E. Main, 1-40 W. Main & 16-41 Virginia Sts., Waterloo, SG100000895 NORTH CAROLINA Durham County Little River High School, 8307 N. Roxboro Rd., Bahama vicinity, SG100000896 Haywood County Green Hill Cemetery, Veterans Cir., Waynesville, SG100000897 Lenoir County Imperial Tobacco Company Office Building (Kinston MPS), 426 N. Heritage St., Kinston, MP100000898 Lincoln County Rock Spring Camp Ground (Boundary Increase), 6831 Campground Rd., Denver, BC100000899 Macon County Prince, Elizabeth Wright, House, 524 N. 4th St., Highlands, SG100000901 Pender County SS. Peter and Paul's Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church, 2384 Front St., St. Helena, SG100000903 TENNESSEE Robertson County McMurray, William M., House, 313 N. Main St., Springfield, SG100000904

    An additional documentation has been received for the following resource(s):

    NORTH CAROLINA Lincoln County Rock Spring Camp Ground, 6831 Campground Rd., Denver, AD100000899 Northampton County Edgewood, NC 305, 0.4 mi NE of NC 258, Rich Square vicinity, AD01001114
    Authority:

    60.13 of 36 CFR part 60.

    Dated: March 7, 2017. J. Paul Loether, Chief, National Register of Historic Places/National Historic Landmarks Program.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06064 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-52-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1121-0277] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Extension Without Change, of a Previously Approved Collection OJJDP National Training and Technical Assistance Center (NTTAC) Feedback Form package AGENCY:

    Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    60-day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of Justice Programs will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until May 30, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have comments, especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Linda Rosen, Training and Technical Assistance Specialist at 1-202-353-9222, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office of Justice Programs, Department of Justice, 810 7th Street NW., Washington, DC 20530 or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    — Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, including whether the information will have practical utility; — Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; — Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected can be enhanced; and — Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. Overview of This Information Collection

    1. Type of Information Collection: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    2. The Title of the Form/Collection: OJJDP NTTAC Feedback Form Package.

    3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection: All forms approved under number 1121-0277. The applicable component within the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office of Justice Programs, Department of Justice.

    4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: The Office for Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention National Training and Technical Assistance Center (NTTAC) Feedback Form Package is designed to collect in-person and online data necessary to continuously assess the outcomes of the assistance provided for both monitoring and accountability purposes and for continuously assessing and meeting the needs of the field. OJJDP NTTAC will send these forms to technical assistance (TA) recipients; conference attendees; training and TA providers; online meeting participants; in-person meeting participants; and focus group participants to capture important feedback on the recipients' satisfaction with the quality, efficiency, referrals, information and resources provided and assess the recipients' additional training and TA needs. The data will then be used to advise NTTAC on ways to improve the support provided to its users; the juvenile justice field at-large; and ultimately improve services and outcomes for youth.

    5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: It is estimated that 5140 respondents will complete forms and the response time will range from .03 hours to 1.5 hours.

    6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: There are an estimated 470.83 total annual burden hours associated with this collection.

    If additional information is required contact: Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., 3E.405A, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: March 23, 2017. Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06115 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [OMB Number 1117-0043] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Extension With or Without Change, of a Previously Approved Collection Drug Questionnaire (DEA-341) AGENCY:

    Drug Enforcement Administration, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    60-day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until May 30, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have additional comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Diane E. Filler, Assistant Administrator, Human Resources Division, Drug Enforcement Administration, 8701 Morrissette Dr., Springfield, VA 22152.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    —Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Bureau of Justice Statistics, including whether the information will have practical utility; —Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; —Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected can be enhanced; and —Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. Overview of This Information Collection

    1. Type of Information Collection: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Drug Questionnaire.

    3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection: The form number is DEA-341. The applicable component within the Department of Justice is the Drug Enforcement Administration.

    4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

    Affected Public: Individuals.

    Others: None.

    DEA is requesting an extension of a currently approved collection. This collection requires the drug history of any individual seeking employment with DEA. DEA policy states that a past history of illegal drug use may result in ineligibility for employment. The form asks job applicants specific questions about their personal history, if any, of illegal drug use.

    5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: An estimated 15,000 respondents will respond taking approximately 5 minutes to complete the questionnaire.

    6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The estimated public burden associated with this collection is 1,250 hours. It is estimated that respondents will take 5 minutes to complete the questionnaire. The burden hours for collecting respondent data sum to 1,250 hours (15,000 respondents × 5 minutes = 75,000 hours/60 seconds = 1250 hours).

    If additional information is required contact: Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., 3E.405A, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: March 23, 2017. Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06079 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Office of Justice Programs [OJP (OJP) Docket No. 1736] Meeting of the Global Justice Information Sharing Initiative Federal Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Office of Justice Programs (OJP), Justice.

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    This is an announcement of a meeting of the Global Justice Information Sharing Initiative (Global) Federal Advisory Committee (GAC) to discuss the Global Initiative, as described at www.it.ojp.gov/global.

    DATES:

    The meeting will take place on Monday, May 15, 2017, from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. ET.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will take place at the Office of Justice Programs offices (in the Main Conference Room), 810 7th Street, Washington, DC 20531; Phone: (202) 514-2000 [note: this is not a toll-free number].

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    J. Patrick McCreary, Global Designated Federal Employee (DFE), Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, 810 7th Street, Washington, DC 20531; Phone: (202) 616-0532 [note: this is not a toll-free number]; Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This meeting is open to the public. Due to security measures, however, members of the public who wish to attend this meeting must register with Mr. J. Patrick McCreary at the above address at least (7) days in advance of the meeting. Registrations will be accepted on a space available basis. Access to the meeting will not be allowed without registration. All attendees will be required to sign in at the meeting registration desk. Please bring photo identification and allow extra time prior to the meeting.

    Anyone requiring special accommodations should notify Mr. McCreary at least seven (7) days in advance of the meeting.

    Purpose: The GAC will act as the focal point for justice information systems integration activities in order to facilitate the coordination of technical, funding, and legislative strategies in support of the Administration's justice priorities.

    The GAC will guide and monitor the development of the Global information sharing concept. It will advise the Assistant Attorney General, OJP; the Attorney General; the President (through the Attorney General); and local, state, tribal, and federal policymakers in the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. The GAC will also advocate for strategies for accomplishing a Global information sharing capability.

    Interested persons whose registrations have been accepted may be permitted to participate in the discussions at the discretion of the meeting chairman and with approval of the DFE.

    J. Patrick McCreary, Global Designated Federal Employee, Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06063 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Fiscal Year (FY) 2016 Through FY 2017 Stand Down Grant Requests AGENCY:

    Veterans' Employment and Training Service (VETS), Department of Labor.

    ACTION:

    Amendment to Federal Register, 80 FR 80390 (Dec. 24, 2015) [FR Doc. 2015-32406 Filed 12-23-15; 8:45 a.m.].

    SUMMARY:

    This notice amends 80 FR 80390 (Dec. 24, 2015) [FR Doc. 2015-32406 Filed 12-23-15; 8:45 a.m.]. The revised language is below:

    I. Funding Opportunity Description

    The following service must be available for homeless veteran participants during the Stand Down event:

    • Department of Labor (DOL)—State Workforce Agency (SWA) employment and training services to include Disabled Veterans' Outreach Program (DVOP) specialist or other American Job Center (AJC) staff (see the following link to locate available resources in your area: www.servicelocator.org).

    The following services are strongly encouraged, where available:

    • Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)—benefits, medical and mental health services, and

    • Referral services to secure immediate emergency housing.

    IV. Application Content

    7. The following letter of support must be provided:

    The state or local AJC and/or DVOP specialist(s) stating they will provide Department of Labor-funded employment and training services at the Stand Down event. These basic or core services are required in Section I.

    The following three letters of support are strongly encouraged but not required to receive an award:

    A. the VA stating what benefits, medical and mental health services will be available at the event as encouraged in Section I.

    B. the organization that will provide immediate emergency housing based on referrals from the Stand Down event as encouraged in Section I, and

    C. different organizations such as the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the local Continuum of Care, Veteran Service Organizations, state and local government agencies, local businesses, and local on-profit organizations including community based and faith-based organizations that will support the event.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Thomas Martin, Grant Officer, Office of Grants Management, at (202) 693‐2989, [email protected]

    Sam Shellenberger, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Veterans' Employment and Training Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06106 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-79-P
    DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Office of the Secretary Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Job Corps Enrollee Allotment Determination ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Labor (DOL) is submitting the Employment Training Administration (ETA) sponsored information collection request (ICR) titled, “Job Corps Enrollee Allotment Determination,” to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval for continued use, without change, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). Public comments on the ICR are invited.

    DATES:

    The OMB will consider all written comments that agency receives on or before April 27, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    A copy of this ICR with applicable supporting documentation; including a description of the likely respondents, proposed frequency of response, and estimated total burden may be obtained free of charge from the RegInfo.gov Web site at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewICR?ref_nbr=201702-1205-002 (this link will only become active on the day following publication of this notice) or by contacting Michel Smyth by telephone at 202-693-4129, TTY 202-693-8064, (these are not toll-free numbers) or by email at [email protected]

    Submit comments about this request by mail or courier to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for DOL-ETA Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503; by Fax: 202-395-5806 (this is not a toll-free number); or by email: [email protected] Commenters are encouraged, but not required, to send a courtesy copy of any comments by mail or courier to the U.S. Department of Labor-OASAM, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Attn: Departmental Information Compliance Management Program, Room N1301, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; or by email: [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Michel Smyth by telephone at 202-693-4129, TTY 202-693-8064, (these are not toll-free numbers) or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This ICR seeks to extend PRA authority for the Job Corps Enrollee Allotment Determination information collection. More specifically, a Job Corps enrollee may elect to have a portion of his or her readjustment allowance/transition payment sent to a dependent on a bi-weekly basis. Form ETA 658, Allotment Request, provides the information necessary to administer these allotments. Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act section 145 authorizes this information collection. See 29 U.S.C. 3195.

    This information collection is subject to the PRA. A Federal agency generally cannot conduct or sponsor a collection of information, and the public is generally not required to respond to an information collection, unless it is approved by the OMB under the PRA and displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. In addition, notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall generally be subject to penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information that does not display a valid Control Number. See 5 CFR 1320.5(a) and 1320.6. The DOL obtains OMB approval for this information collection under Control Number 1205-0030.

    OMB authorization for an ICR cannot be for more than three (3) years without renewal, and the current approval for this collection is scheduled to expire on March 31, 2017. The DOL seeks to extend PRA authorization for this information collection for three (3) more years, without any change to existing requirements. The DOL notes that existing information collection requirements submitted to the OMB receive a month-to-month extension while they undergo review. For additional substantive information about this ICR, see the related notice published in the Federal Register on December 9, 2016 (81 FR 89153).

    Interested parties are encouraged to send comments to the OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the address shown in the ADDRESSES section within thirty (30) days of publication of this notice in the Federal Register. In order to help ensure appropriate consideration, comments should mention OMB Control Number 1205-0030. The OMB is particularly interested in comments that:

    • Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; • Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; • Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and • Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    Agency: DOL-ETA.

    Title of Collection: Job Corps Enrollee Allotment Determination.

    OMB Control Number: 1205-0030.

    Affected Public: Individuals or Households.

    Total Estimated Number of Respondents: 1,749.

    Total Estimated Number of Responses: 1,749.

    Total Estimated Annual Time Burden: 87 hours.

    Total Estimated Annual Other Costs Burden: $0.

    Authority:

    44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D).

    Dated: March 20, 2017. Michel Smyth, Departmental Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06073 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FT-P
    DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Mine Safety and Health Administration [OMB Control No. 1219-0089] Proposed Extension of Information Collection; Safety Defects; Examination, Correction, and Records AGENCY:

    Mine Safety and Health Administration, Labor.

    ACTION:

    Request for public comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, conducts a pre-clearance consultation program to provide the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed collections of information in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This program helps to assure that requested data can be provided in the desired format, reporting burden (time and financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are clearly understood, and the impact of collection requirements on respondents can be properly assessed. Currently, the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) is soliciting comments on the information collection for Safety Defects; Examination, Correction, and Records.

    DATES:

    All comments must be received on or before May 30, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments concerning the information collection requirements of this notice may be sent by any of the methods listed below.

    Federal E-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments for docket number MSHA-2017-0002.

    Regular Mail: Send comments to USDOL-MSHA, Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances, 201 12th Street South, Suite 4E401, Arlington, VA 22202-5452.

    Hand Delivery: USDOL-Mine Safety and Health Administration, 201 12th Street South, Suite 4E401, Arlington, VA 22202-5452. Sign in at the receptionist's desk on the 4th floor via the East elevator.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sheila McConnell, Director, Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances, MSHA, at [email protected] (email); 202-693-9440 (voice); or 202-693-9441 (facsimile).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    Section 103(h) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Mine Act), 30 U.S.C. 813(h), authorizes MSHA to collect information necessary to carry out its duty in protecting the safety and health of miners.

    Compressed-air receivers and other unfired pressure vessels must be inspected by inspectors holding a valid National Board Commission and in accordance with the applicable chapters of the National Board Inspection Code, a Manual for Boiler and Pressure Vessels Inspectors, 1979. Safety defects found on compressed-air receivers and other unfired pressure vessels have caused injuries and fatalities in the mining industry.

    Records of inspections must be kept in accordance with the requirements of the National Board Inspection Code and the records must be made available to the Secretary or an authorized representative.

    Fired pressure vessels (boilers) must be equipped with water level gauges, pressure gauges, automatic pressure-relief valves, blowdown piping and other safety devices approved by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) to protect against hazards from overpressure, flameouts, fuel interruptions and low water level.

    Records of inspection and repairs must be retained by the mine operator in accordance with the requirements of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, 1977, and the National Board Inspection Code (progressive records—no limit on retention time) and shall be made available to the Secretary or an authorized representative.

    Operators must inspect equipment, machinery, and tools that are to be used during a shift for safety defects before the equipment is placed in operation. Defects affecting safety are required to be corrected in a timely manner. In instances where the defect makes continued operation of the equipment hazardous to persons, the equipment must be removed from service, tagged to identify that it is out of use, and repaired before use is resumed.

    Safety defects on self-propelled mobile equipment account for many injuries and fatalities in the mining industry. Inspection of this equipment prior to use is required to ensure safe operation. The equipment operator is required to make a visual and operational check of the various primary operating systems that affect safety, such as brakes, lights, horn, seatbelts, tires, steering, back-up alarm, windshield, cab safety glass, rear and side view mirrors, and other safety and health related items.

    Any defects found are required to be either corrected immediately, or reported to and recorded by the mine operator prior to the timely correction. A record is not required if the defect is corrected immediately, i.e. a defect that the operator can fix without a mechanic such as a light bulb that needs turned tighter. The precise format in which the record is kept is left to the discretion of the mine operator. Reports of uncorrected defects are required to be recorded by the mine operator and kept at the mine office from the date the defects are recorded, until the defects are corrected.

    A competent person designated by the operator must examine each working place at least once each shift for conditions which may adversely affect safety or health. A record of such examinations must be kept by the operator for a period of one year and must be made available for review by the Secretary or an authorized representative.

    II. Desired Focus of Comments

    MSHA is soliciting comments concerning the proposed information collection related to Safety Defects; Examination, Correction, and Records. MSHA is particularly interested in comments that:

    • Evaluate whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information has practical utility;

    • Evaluate the accuracy of MSHA's estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

    • Suggest methods to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    • Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    The information collection request will be available on http://www.regulations.gov. MSHA cautions the commenter against providing any information in the submission that should not be publicly disclosed. Full comments, including personal information provided, will be made available on www.regulations.gov and www.reginfo.gov.

    The public may also examine publicly available documents at USDOL-Mine Safety and Health Administration, 201 12th South, Suite 4E401, Arlington, VA 22202-5452. Sign in at the receptionist's desk on the 4th floor via the East elevator.

    Questions about the information collection requirements may be directed to the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION section of this notice.

    III. Current Actions

    This request for collection of information contains provisions for Safety Defects; Examination, Correction, and Records. MSHA has updated the data with respect to the number of respondents, responses, burden hours, and burden costs supporting this information collection request.

    Type of Review: Extension, without change, of a currently approved collection.

    Agency: Mine Safety and Health Administration.

    OMB Number: 1219-0089.

    Affected Public: Business or other for-profit.

    Number of Respondents: 11,660.

    Frequency: On occasion.

    Number of Responses: 3,470,695.

    Annual Burden Hours: 768,728 hours.

    Annual Respondent or Recordkeeper Cost: $154,300.

    Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for Office of Management and Budget approval of the information collection request; they will also become a matter of public record.

    Sheila McConnell, Certifying Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06074 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-43-P
    DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Office of Workers' Compensation Programs Division of Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Proposed Extension of Existing Collection; Comment Request ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, conducts a preclearance consultation program to provide the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing collections of information in accordance with the paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This program helps to ensure that requested data can be provided in the desired format, reporting burden (time and financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are clearly understood, and the impact of collection requirements on respondents can be properly assessed. Currently, the Office of Workers' Compensation (OWCP) is soliciting comments concerning the proposed collection: Pre-Hearing Statement (LS-18). A copy of the proposed information collection request can be obtained by contacting the office listed below in the address section of this Notice.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be submitted to the office listed in the addresses section below on or before May 30, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Ms. Yoon Ferguson, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Ave. NW., Room S-3233, Washington, DC 20210, telephone/fax (202) 354-9647, Email [email protected] Please use only one method of transmission for comments (mail, fax, or Email).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background: The Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, (OWCP) administers the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act. The Act provides benefits to workers injured in maritime employment on the navigable waters of the United States or in an adjoining area customarily used by an employer in loading, unloading, repairing, or building a vessel. In addition, several acts extend the Longshore Act's coverage to certain other employees.

    Title 20, CFR 702.317 provides for the referral of claims under the Longshore Act for formal hearings. This Section provides that before a case is transferred to the Office of Administrative Law Judges the district director shall furnish each of the parties or their representatives with a copy of a pre-hearing statement form. Each party shall, within 21 days after receipt of each form, complete it and return it to the district director. Upon receipt of the forms, the district director, after checking them for completeness and after any further conferences that, in his/her opinion, are warranted, shall transmit them to the Office of the Chief Administrative Law Judge with all available evidence which the parties intend to submit at the hearing. This information collection is currently approved for use through August 31, 2017.

    II. Review Focus: The Department of Labor is particularly interested in comments which:

    * Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    * evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

    * enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    * minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submissions of responses.

    III. Current Actions: The Department of Labor seeks the extension of approval of this information collection in order to carry out its responsibility to refer cases for formal hearings.

    Agency: Office of Workers' Compensation Programs.

    Type of Review: Extension.

    Title: Pre-Hearing Statement.

    OMB Number: 1240-0036.

    Agency Number: LS-18.

    Affected Public: Insurance carriers and self-insurers.

    Total Respondents: 3,513.

    Total Annual Responses: 3,513.

    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 597.

    Estimated Time per Response: 10 minutes.

    Frequency: On occasion.

    Total Burden Cost (capital/startup): $0.

    Total Burden Cost (operating/maintenance): $1,590.

    Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for Office of Management and Budget approval of the information collection request; they will also become a matter of public record.

    Dated: March 15, 2017. Yoon Ferguson, Agency Clearance Officer, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, U.S. Department of Labor.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06108 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-CF-P
    NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION [Notice (17-015)] Notice of Intent To Grant an Exclusive License AGENCY:

    National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

    ACTION:

    Notice of intent to grant an exclusive license.

    SUMMARY:

    NASA hereby gives notice of its intent to grant an exclusive license in the United States to practice the invention described and claimed in U.S Non-Provisional Patent Application Serial No. 13/757,929, entitled “MULTI-Gb/s LASER COMMUNICATIONS TERMINAL FOR MINI-SPACECRAFT,” NASA Case No. NPO-48413, and any issued patents or continuations in part resulting therefrom, to OnOffBlock, Inc., having its principal place of business in Naperville, Illinois.

    DATES:

    The prospective exclusive license may be granted unless, within fifteen (15) days from the date of this published notice, NASA receives written objections including evidence and argument that establish that the grant of the license would not be consistent with the requirements regarding the licensing of federally owned inventions as set forth in the Bayh-Dole Act and implementing regulations. Competing applications completed and received by NASA within fifteen (15) days of the date of this published notice will also be treated as objections to the grant of the contemplated exclusive license. Objections submitted in response to this notice will not be made available to the public for inspection and, to the extent permitted by law, will not be released under the Freedom of Information Act.

    ADDRESSES:

    Objections relating to the prospective license may be submitted to Patent Counsel, NASA Management Office, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, 4800 Oak Grove Drive, M/S 180-800C, Pasadena, CA 91109, (818) 854-7770 (phone), (818) 393-2607 (fax).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mark Homer, Patent Counsel, NASA Management Office, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, 4800 Oak Grove Drive, M/S 180-800C, Pasadena, CA 91109, (818) 854-7770 (phone), (818) 393-2607 (fax).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice of intent to grant an exclusive patent license is issued in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 209(c)(1) and 37 CFR 404.7(a)(1)(i). The patent rights in these inventions have been assigned to the United States of America as represented by the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The prospective exclusive license will comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7.

    Information about other NASA inventions available for licensing can be found online at http://technology.nasa.gov.

    Mark P. Dvorscak, Agency Counsel for Intellectual Property.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06122 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7510-13-P
    NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Sunshine Act Meeting; National Science Board

    The National Science Board's Committee on Awards and Facilities, pursuant to NSF regulations (45 CFR part 614), the National Science Foundation Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1862n-5), and the Government in the Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b), hereby gives notice of the scheduling of a teleconference for the transaction of National Science Board business, as follows:

    DATE AND TIME:

    April 11, 2017 from 11:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m. EDT.

    SUBJECT MATTER:

    (1) Committee Chair's opening remarks; (2) Antarctic Infrastructure Modernization for Science (AIMS).

    STATUS:

    Closed.

    This meeting will be held by teleconference at the National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22230. Please refer to the National Science Board Web site www.nsf.gov/nsb for additional information. Meeting information and updates (time, place, subject or status of meeting) may be found at http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/meetings/notices.jsp. Point of contact for this meeting is: Elise Lipkowitz, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22230. Telephone: (703) 292-7000.

    Chris Blair, Executive Assistant to the NSB Office.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06193 Filed 3-24-17; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
    NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Sunshine Act Meeting; National Science Board

    The National Science Board's Committee on Awards and Facilities, pursuant to NSF regulations (45 CFR part 614), the National Science Foundation Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1862n-5), and the Government in the Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b), hereby gives notice of the scheduling of a teleconference for the transaction of National Science Board business, as follows:

    Date and Time:

    April 10, 2017 from 4:00-5:00 p.m. EDT.

    Subject Matter:

    (1) Committee Chair's opening remarks; (2) NEON update including scenarios for operations and maintenance.

    Status:

    Closed.

    This meeting will be held by teleconference at the National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22230. Please refer to the National Science Board Web site www.nsf.gov/nsb for additional information. Meeting information and updates (time, place, subject or status of meeting) may be found at http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/meetings/notices.jsp. Point of contact for this meeting is: Elise Lipkowitz, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22230. Telephone: (703) 292-7000.

    Chris Blair, Executive Assistant to the NSB Office.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06191 Filed 3-24-17; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with the purposes of Sections 29 and 182b of the Atomic Energy Act (42 U.S.C. 2039, 2232b), the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) will hold a meeting on April 6-8, 2017, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.

    Thursday, April 6, 2017, Conference Room T2-B1, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 8:30 a.m.-8:35 a.m.: Opening Remarks by the ACRS Chairman (Open)—The ACRS Chairman will make opening remarks regarding the conduct of the meeting 8:35 a.m.-9:45 a.m.: Preparation for Commission Meeting (Open)—The Committee will prepare for the Commission Meeting 10:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m.: Meeting with the Commission (Open)—The Committee will discuss mutual topics of interest with the Commission 1:30 p.m.-3:00 p.m.: NuScale Topical Report 1015-18653, “Highly Integrated Protection System Platform” (Open/Closed)—The Committee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff and NuScale regarding the subject topical report. [Note: A portion of this session may be closed in order to discuss and protect information designated as proprietary, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4)]. 3:15 p.m.-5:30 p.m.: Subsequent License Renewal (Open)—The Committee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding revision to the Generic Aging Lessons Learned Report and Standard Review Plan to ensure effective aging management of structures and components in the 60-80 year operating period 5:30 p.m.-6:00 p.m.: Preparation of ACRS Reports (Open/Closed)—The Committee will discuss proposed ACRS reports on matters discussed during this meeting. [Note: A portion of this session may be closed in order to discuss and protect information designated as proprietary, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4)]. Friday, April 7, 2017, Conference Room T2-B1, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 8:30 a.m.-10:15 a.m.: Future ACRS Activities/Report of the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee and Reconciliation of ACRS Comments and Recommendations (Open/Closed)—The Committee will discuss the recommendations of the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee regarding items proposed for consideration by the Full Committee during future ACRS Meetings, and matters related to the conduct of ACRS business, including anticipated workload and member assignments. The Committee will discuss the responses from the NRC Executive Director for Operations to comments and recommendations included in recent ACRS reports and letters. [Note: A portion of this meeting may be closed pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2) and (6) to discuss organizational and personnel matters that relate solely to internal personnel rules and practices of ACRS, and information the release of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.] 10:30 a.m.-6:00 p.m.: Preparation of ACRS Reports (Open/Closed)—The Committee will continue its discussion of proposed ACRS reports during this meeting. [Note: A portion of this session may be closed in order to discuss and protect information designated as proprietary, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4)]. Saturday, April 8, 2017, Conference Room T2-B1, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 8:30 a.m.-11:30 a.m.: Preparation of ACRS Reports (Open/Closed)—The Committee will continue its discussion of proposed ACRS reports discussed during this meeting. [Note: A portion of this session may be closed in order to discuss and protect information designated as proprietary, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4)]. 11:30 a.m.-12:00 p.m.: Miscellaneous (Open)—The Committee will continue its discussion related to the conduct of Committee activities and specific issues that were not completed during previous meetings.

    Procedures for the conduct of and participation in ACRS meetings were published in the Federal Register on October 17, 2016 (81 FR 71543). In accordance with those procedures, oral or written views may be presented by members of the public, including representatives of the nuclear industry. Persons desiring to make oral statements should notify Quynh Nguyen, Cognizant ACRS Staff (Telephone: 301-415-5844, Email: [email protected]), 5 days before the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made to allow necessary time during the meeting for such statements. In view of the possibility that the schedule for ACRS meetings may be adjusted by the Chairman as necessary to facilitate the conduct of the meeting, persons planning to attend should check with the Cognizant ACRS staff if such rescheduling would result in major inconvenience.

    Thirty-five hard copies of each presentation or handout should be provided 30 minutes before the meeting. In addition, one electronic copy of each presentation should be emailed to the Cognizant ACRS Staff one day before meeting. If an electronic copy cannot be provided within this timeframe, presenters should provide the Cognizant ACRS Staff with a CD containing each presentation at least 30 minutes before the meeting.

    In accordance with Subsection 10(d) of Public Law 92-463 and 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), certain portions of this meeting may be closed, as specifically noted above. Use of still, motion picture, and television cameras during the meeting may be limited to selected portions of the meeting as determined by the Chairman. Electronic recordings will be permitted only during the open portions of the meeting.

    ACRS meeting agendas, meeting transcripts, and letter reports are available through the NRC Public Document Room at [email protected], or by calling the PDR at 1-800-397-4209, or from the Publicly Available Records System (PARS) component of NRC's document system (ADAMS) which is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html or http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/ACRS/.

    Video teleconferencing service is available for observing open sessions of ACRS meetings. Those wishing to use this service should contact Mr. Theron Brown, ACRS Audio Visual Technician (301-415-8066), between 7:30 a.m. and 3:45 p.m. (ET), at least 10 days before the meeting to ensure the availability of this service. Individuals or organizations requesting this service will be responsible for telephone line charges and for providing the equipment and facilities that they use to establish the video teleconferencing link. The availability of video teleconferencing services is not guaranteed.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23rd day of March 2017.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    Andrew L. Bates, Advisory Committee Management Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06095 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC-2017-0066] Information Collection: NRC Form 4, “Cumulative Occupational Exposure History” AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Renewal of existing information collection; request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) invites public comment on the renewal of Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval for an existing collection of information. The information collection is entitled, NRC Form 4, “Cumulative Occupational Exposure History.”

    DATES:

    Submit comments by May 30, 2017. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the Commission is able to ensure consideration only for comments received on or before this date.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2017-0066. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-3463; email: [email protected] For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

    Mail comments to: David Cullison, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Mail Stop: T-5 F53, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

    For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting comments, see “Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments” in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David Cullison, Office of the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-2084; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2017-0066 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2017-0066.

    NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “ADAMS Public Documents” and then select “Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected] The supporting statement and is available in ADAMS under Accession ADAMS ML16357A562.

    NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    NRC's Clearance Officer: A copy of the collection of information and related instructions may be obtained without charge by contacting NRC's Clearance Officer, David Cullison, Office of the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-2084; email: [email protected]

    B. Submitting Comments

    Please include Docket ID NRC-2017-0066 in the subject line of your comment submission, in order to ensure that the NRC is able to make your comment submission available to the public in this docket.

    The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information in comment submissions that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions into ADAMS, and the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove identifying or contact information.

    If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.

    II. Background

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 35), the NRC is requesting public comment on its intention to request the OMB's approval for the information collection summarized below.

    1. The title of the information collection: NRC Form 4, “Cumulative Occupational Dose History.”

    2. OMB approval number: 3150-0005.

    3. Type of submission, new, revision, or Extension: Extension.

    4. The form number, if applicable: NRC Form 4.

    5. How often the collection is required or requested: On occasion. The NRC does not collect NRC Form 4. However, NRC inspects the NRC Form 4 records at NRC-licensed facilities.

    6. Who will be required or asked to respond: NRC licensees who are required to comply with part 20 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR part 20).

    7. The estimated number of annual responses: 221,220 (217,079 third party disclosure + 4,141 recordkeepers).

    8. The estimated number of annual respondents: 4,141.

    9. The estimated number of hours needed annually to comply with the information collection requirement or request: 29,350.

    10. Abstract: The NRC Form 4 is used to record the summary of an occupational worker's cumulative occupational radiation dose, including prior occupational exposure and the current year's occupational radiation exposure. The NRC Form 4 is used by licensees, and inspected by the NRC, to ensure that occupational radiation doses do not exceed the regulatory limits specified in 10 CFR 20.1501.

    III. Specific Requests for Comments

    The NRC is seeking comments that address the following questions:

    1. Is the proposed collection of information necessary for the NRC to properly perform its functions? Does the information have practical utility?

    2. Is the estimate of the burden of the information collection accurate?

    3. Is there a way to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected?

    4. How can the burden of the information collection on respondents be minimized, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology?

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 22nd day of March 2017.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    David Cullison, NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06018 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC-2017-0001] Sunshine Act Meeting Notice Date:

    Weeks of March 27, April 3, 10, 17, 24, May 1, 2017.

    Place:

    Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.

    Status:

    Public and Closed.

    Week of March 27, 2017

    There are no meetings scheduled for the week of March 27, 2017.

    Week of April 3, 2017—Tentative Tuesday, April 4, 2017 10:00 a.m. Meeting with the Organization of Agreement States and the Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors (Public Meeting) (Contact: Paul Michalak: 301-415-5804)

    This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address—http://www.nrc.gov/.

    Thursday, April 6, 2017 10:00 a.m. Meeting with Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (Public Meeting) (Contact: Mark Banks: 301-415-3718)

    This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address—http://www.nrc.gov/.

    Week of April 10, 2017—Tentative

    There are no meetings scheduled for the week of April 10, 2017.

    Week of April 17, 2017—Tentative

    There are no meetings scheduled for the week of April 17, 2017.

    Week of April 24, 2017—Tentative Wednesday, April 26, 2017 9:00 a.m.—Briefing on the Status of Subsequent License Renewal Preparations (Public Meeting) (Contact: Steven Bloom: 301-415-2431)

    This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address—http://www.nrc.gov/.

    Thursday, April 27, 2017 10:00 a.m.—Meeting with the Advisory Committee on the Medical Uses of Isotopes (Public Meeting) (Contact: Douglas Bollock: 301-415-6609)

    This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address—http://www.nrc.gov/.

    Week of May 1, 2017—Tentative

    There are no meetings scheduled for the week of May 1, 2017.

    The schedule for Commission meetings is subject to change on short notice. For more information or to verify the status of meetings, contact Denise McGovern at 301-415-0681 or via email at [email protected]

    The NRC Commission Meeting Schedule can be found on the Internet at: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/public-meetings/schedule.html.

    The NRC provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable accommodation to participate in these public meetings, or need this meeting notice or the transcript or other information from the public meetings in another format (e.g., braille, large print), please notify Kimberly Meyer, NRC Disability Program Manager, at 301-287-0739, by videophone at 240-428-3217, or by email at [email protected] Determinations on requests for reasonable accommodation will be made on a case-by-case basis.

    Members of the public may request to receive this information electronically. If you would like to be added to the distribution, please contact the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of the Secretary, Washington, DC 20555 (301-415-1969), or email [email protected] or [email protected]

    Dated: March 23, 2017. Denise L. McGovern, Policy Coordinator, Office of the Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06161 Filed 3-24-17; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC-2017-0080] Biweekly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving No Significant Hazards Considerations AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Biweekly notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Pursuant to Section 189a.(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is publishing this regular biweekly notice. The Act requires the Commission to publish notice of any amendments issued, or proposed to be issued, and grants the Commission the authority to issue and make immediately effective any amendment to an operating license or combined license, as applicable, upon a determination by the Commission that such amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, notwithstanding the pendency before the Commission of a request for a hearing from any person.

    This biweekly notice includes all notices of amendments issued, or proposed to be issued, from February 28, 2017 to March 13, 2017. The last biweekly notice was published on March 14, 2017.

    DATES:

    Comments must be filed by April 27, 2017. A request for a hearing must be filed by May 30, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2017-0080. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-3463; email: [email protected] For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

    Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, Office of Administration, Mail Stop: OWFN-12-H08, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

    For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting comments, see “Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments” in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Paula Blechman, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-2242; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2017-0080, facility name, unit number(s), plant docket number, application date, and subject when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2017-0080.

    NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “ADAMS Public Documents” and then select “Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected] The ADAMS accession number for each document referenced (if it is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that it is mentioned in the document.

    NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    B. Submitting Comments

    Please include Docket ID NRC-2017-0080, facility name, unit number(s), plant docket number, application date, and subject in your comment submission.

    The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC posts all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as entering the comment submissions into ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove identifying or contact information.

    If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment submissions into ADAMS.

    II. Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses and Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination

    The Commission has made a proposed determination that the following amendment requests involve no significant hazards consideration. Under the Commission's regulations in § 50.92 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), this means that operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated, or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated, or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The basis for this proposed determination for each amendment request is shown below.

    The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination.

    Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expiration of 60 days after the date of publication of this notice. The Commission may issue the license amendment before expiration of the 60-day period provided that its final determination is that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. In addition, the Commission may issue the amendment prior to the expiration of the 30-day comment period if circumstances change during the 30-day comment period such that failure to act in a timely way would result, for example in derating or shutdown of the facility. If the Commission takes action prior to the expiration of either the comment period or the notice period, it will publish in the Federal Register a notice of issuance. If the Commission makes a final no significant hazards consideration determination, any hearing will take place after issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently.

    A. Opportunity To Request a Hearing and Petition for Leave To Intervene

    Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, any persons (petitioner) whose interest may be affected by this action may file a request for a hearing and petition for leave to intervene (petition) with respect to the action. Petitions shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's “Agency Rules of Practice and Procedure” in 10 CFR part 2. Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309. The NRC's regulations are accessible electronically from the NRC Library on the NRC's Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. Alternatively, a copy of the regulations is available at the NRC's Public Document Room, located at One White Flint North, Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. If a petition is filed, the Commission or a presiding officer will rule on the petition and, if appropriate, a notice of a hearing will be issued.

    As required by 10 CFR 2.309(d) the petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following general requirements for standing: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the petitioner; (2) the nature of the petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest.

    In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f), the petition must also set forth the specific contentions which the petitioner seeks to have litigated in the proceeding. Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner must provide a brief explanation of the bases for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner must also provide references to the specific sources and documents on which the petitioner intends to rely to support its position on the issue. The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant or licensee on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions must be limited to matters within the scope of the proceeding. The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner who fails to satisfy the requirements at 10 CFR 2.309(f) with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.

    Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene. Parties have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing with respect to resolution of that party's admitted contentions, including the opportunity to present evidence, consistent with the NRC's regulations, policies, and procedures.

    Petitions must be filed no later than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice. Petitions and motions for leave to file new or amended contentions that are filed after the deadline will not be entertained absent a determination by the presiding officer that the filing demonstrates good cause by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i) through (iii). The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in the “Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)” section of this document.

    If a hearing is requested, and the Commission has not made a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will serve to establish when the hearing is held. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing would take place after issuance of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves a significant hazards consideration, then any hearing held would take place before the issuance of the amendment unless the Commission finds an imminent danger to the health or safety of the public, in which case it will issue an appropriate order or rule under 10 CFR part 2.

    A State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof, may submit a petition to the Commission to participate as a party under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1). The petition should state the nature and extent of the petitioner's interest in the proceeding. The petition should be submitted to the Commission by May 30, 2017. The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in the “Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)” section of this document, and should meet the requirements for petitions set forth in this section, except that under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(2) a State, local governmental body, or federally recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof does not need to address the standing requirements in 10 CFR 2.309(d) if the facility is located within its boundaries. Alternatively, a State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof may participate as a non-party under 10 CFR 2.315(c).

    If a hearing is granted, any person who is not a party to the proceeding and is not affiliated with or represented by a party may, at the discretion of the presiding officer, be permitted to make a limited appearance pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person making a limited appearance may make an oral or written statement of his or her position on the issues but may not otherwise participate in the proceeding. A limited appearance may be made at any session of the hearing or at any prehearing conference, subject to the limits and conditions as may be imposed by the presiding officer. Details regarding the opportunity to make a limited appearance will be provided by the presiding officer if such sessions are scheduled.

    B. Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)

    All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene (petition), any motion or other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a request for hearing or petition to intervene, and documents filed by interested governmental entities that request to participate under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in accordance with the NRC's E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007, as amended at 77 FR 46562, August 3, 2012). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit and serve all adjudicatory documents over the internet, or in some cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions may be found in the Guidance for Electronic Submissions to the NRC and on the NRC's Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants may not submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in accordance with the procedures described below.

    To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 10 days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the Office of the Secretary by email at [email protected], or by telephone at 301-415-1677, to (1) request a digital identification (ID) certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or representative) to digitally sign submissions and access the E-Filing system for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a petition or other adjudicatory document (even in instances in which the participant, or its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). Based upon this information, the Secretary will establish an electronic docket for the hearing in this proceeding if the Secretary has not already established an electronic docket.

    Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/getting-started.html. Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a docket has been created, the participant can then submit adjudicatory documents. Submissions must be in Portable Document Format (PDF). Additional guidance on PDF submissions is available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/electronic-sub-ref-mat.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the document is submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Filing system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends the submitter an email notice confirming receipt of the document. The E-Filing system also distributes an email notice that provides access to the document to the NRC's Office of the General Counsel and any others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the document on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for and receive a digital ID certificate before adjudicatory documents are filed so that they can obtain access to the documents via the E-Filing system.

    A person filing electronically using the NRC's adjudicatory E-Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC's Electronic Filing Help Desk through the “Contact Us” link located on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by email to [email protected], or by a toll-free call at 1-866-672-7640. The NRC Electronic Filing Help Desk is available between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays.

    Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing stating why there is good cause for not filing electronically and requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants filing adjudicatory documents in this manner are responsible for serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing the document with the provider of the service. A presiding officer, having granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a participant or party to use E-Filing if the presiding officer subsequently determines that the reason for granting the exemption from use of E-Filing no longer exists.

    Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in the NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at https://adams.nrc.gov/ehd, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the Commission or the presiding officer. If you do not have an NRC-issued digital ID certificate as described above, click cancel when the link requests certificates and you will be automatically directed to the NRC's electronic hearing dockets where you will be able to access any publicly available documents in a particular hearing docket. Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information, such as social security numbers, home addresses, or personal phone numbers in their filings, unless an NRC regulation or other law requires submission of such information. For example, in some instances, individuals provide home addresses in order to demonstrate proximity to a facility or site. With respect to copyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use application, participants are requested not to include copyrighted materials in their submission.

    For further details with respect to these license amendment applications, see the application for amendment which is available for public inspection in ADAMS and at the NRC's PDR. For additional direction on accessing information related to this document, see the “Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments” section of this document.

    Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50-293, Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station (PNPS), Plymouth County, Massachusetts

    Date of amendment request: February 14, 2017. A publicly available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17053A468.

    Description of amendment request: The amendment would revise certain staffing and training requirements, reports, programs, and editorial changes in the Technical Specifications (TS) Table of Contents; Section 1.0, “Definitions”; Section 4.0, “Design Features”; and Section 5.0, “Administrative Controls” that will no longer be applicable once PNPS is permanently defueled.

    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed amendment would not take effect until PNPS has permanently ceased operation and entered a permanently defueled condition and the Certified Fuel Handler Training and Retraining Program is approved by the NRC. The proposed amendment would modify the PNPS TS by deleting the portions of the TS that are no longer applicable to a permanently defueled facility, while modifying the other sections to correspond to the permanently defueled condition.

    The deletion and modification of provisions of the administrative controls do not directly affect the design of structures, systems, and components (SSCs) necessary for safe storage of irradiated fuel or the methods used for handling and storage of such fuel in the spent fuel pool. The changes to the administrative controls are administrative in nature and do not affect any accidents applicable to the safe management of irradiated fuel or the permanently shutdown and defueled condition of the reactor. Thus, the consequences of an accident previously evaluated are not increased.

    In a permanently defueled condition, the only credible accidents are the fuel handling accident (FHA) and those involving radioactive waste systems remaining in service. The probability of occurrence of previously evaluated accidents is not increased, because extended operation in a defueled condition will be the only operation allowed. This mode of operation is bounded by the existing analyses. Additionally, the occurrence of postulated accidents associated with reactor operation is no longer credible in a permanently defueled reactor. This significantly reduces the scope of applicable accidents.

    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed changes have no impact on facility SSCs affecting the safe storage of irradiated fuel, or on the methods of operation of such SSCs, or on the handling and storage of irradiated fuel itself. The administrative removal or modifications of the TS that are related only to administration of the facility cannot result in different or more adverse failure modes or accidents than previously evaluated because the reactor will be permanently shutdown and defueled and PNPS will no longer be authorized to operate the reactor or retain or place fuel in the reactor vessel.

    The proposed changes to the PNPS TS do not affect systems credited in the accident analysis for the FHA or radioactive waste system upsets at PNPS. The proposed TS will continue to require proper control and monitoring of safety significant parameters and activities.

    The proposed amendment does not result in any new mechanisms that could initiate damage to the remaining relevant safety barriers for defueled plants (fuel cladding and spent fuel cooling). Extended operation in a defueled condition will be the only operation allowed, and it is bounded by the existing analyses, such a condition does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident.

    Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.

    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

    Response: No.

    Since the 10 CFR part 50 license for PNPS will no longer authorize operation of the reactor or emplacement or retention of fuel into the reactor vessel once the certifications required by 10 CFR 50.82(a)(1) are docketed, as specified in 10 CFR 50.82(a)(2), the occurrence of postulated accidents associated with reactor operation is no longer credible. The only remaining credible accidents are a FHA and those involving radioactive waste systems remaining in service. The proposed amendment does not adversely affect the inputs or assumptions of any of the design basis analyses that impact these analyzed conditions.

    The proposed changes are limited to those portions of the TS that are not related to the safe storage of irradiated fuel. The requirements that are proposed to be revised or deleted from the PNPS TS are not credited in the existing accident analysis for the remaining applicable postulated accident; and as such, do not contribute to the margin of safety associated with the accident analysis. Postulated design basis accidents involving the reactor are no longer possible because the reactor will be permanently shutdown and defueled and PNPS will no longer be authorized to operate the reactor or retain or place fuel in the reactor vessel.

    Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

    Attorney for licensee: Jeanne Cho, Assistant General Counsel, Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., 440 Hamilton Avenue, White Plains, NY 10601.

    NRC Branch Chief: Douglas A. Broaddus.

    Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-410, Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit 2 (NMP2), Oswego County, New York

    Date of amendment request: December 13, 2016, as supplemented by letter dated February 17, 2017. Publicly-available versions are in ADAMS under Accession Nos. ML16348A368 and ML17048A034, respectively.

    Description of amendment request: The amendment would revise the NMP2 technical specification (TS) safety limit (SL) to increase the low pressure isolation setpoint allowable value, which will result in earlier main steam line isolation. The revised main steam line low pressure isolation capability and the revised SL are intended to ensure that NMP2 remains within the TS SLs in the event of a pressure regulator failure maximum demand transient.

    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below, with NRC staff edits in square brackets:

    1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed changes do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated because decreasing the reactor dome pressure in TS SL 2.1.1.1 and TS SL 2.1.1.2 for reactor RTP [rated thermal power] ranges and increasing the AV [allowable value] for the Main Steam Line Pressure-Low on TS Table 3.3.6.1-1, Function b, effectively expands the range of applicability for GEXL correlation and the calculation of MCPR [minimum critical power ratio]. The CPR [critical power ratio] rises during the pressure reduction following the scram that terminates the PRFO [pressure regulator failure—maximum demand (open)] transient. The reduction in the reactor dome pressure value in the SL from 785 psig [pounds per square inch gauge] to 700 psia [pounds per square inch absolute] and the increase in the AV from ≥746 psig to ≥814 psig adequately accommodate the pressure reduction during the PRFO transient within the revised TS limit without compromising fuel integrity.

    The expanded GEXL correlation range supports NMP2 revised low pressure safety limit of 700 psia. The proposed TS revision involves no significant changes to the operation of any systems or components in normal or accident or transient operating conditions.

    Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated because the proposed reduction in the reactor dome pressure value in the SL from 785 psig to 700 psia reflects a wider range of applicability for the GEXL correlation which is approved by the NRC for both GE14 currently in NMP2 and GNF2 fuels proposed for NMP2. The proposed changes do not involve physical changes to the plant or its operating characteristics. In addition, the increase in the AV for the MSL [main steam line] low pressure from ≥746 psig to ≥814 psig will result in the MSIV [main steam isolation valve] closure signal initiation at a higher temperature. As a result, no new failure modes are being introduced.

    Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

    Response: No.

    The proposed changes do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety because the margin of safety is established through the design of the plant structures, systems, and components, and through the parameters for safe operation and setpoints for the actuation of equipment relied upon to respond to transients and design basis accidents. The proposed change in reactor dome pressure SLs and the AV for the MSL low pressure ensures the safety margin is maintained, which protects the fuel cladding integrity during steady state operation, normal operational transients, or AOOs [anticipated operational occurrences] such as a depressurization transient, but does not change the requirements governing operation or availability of safety equipment assumed to operate to preserve the margin of safety. The proposed changes do not involve physical changes to the plant or its operating characteristics. The reduction in the reactor dome pressure value in the SL from 785 psig to 700 psia and the increase to the AV for the MSL low pressure provides added margin to accommodate the pressure reduction during the PRFO transient within the revised TS limit without compromising fuel integrity.

    Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

    Attorney for licensee: Tamra Domeyer, Associate General Counsel, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 60555.

    NRC Acting Branch Chief: Stephen S. Koenick.

    Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Exelon), Docket No. 50-219, Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (OCNGS), Ocean County, New Jersey

    Date of amendment request: February 20, 2017. A publicly-available version is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17051A003.

    Description of amendment request: The licensee proposes to delete from the Facility Operating License (FOL) certain license conditions, which impose specific requirements on the decommissioning trust agreement. The licensee proposes to meet the provisions of 10 CFR 50.75(h) for OCNGS.

    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The requested changes delete License Conditions 3.F through 3.K pertaining to Decommissioning Trust Agreements currently in the OCNGS FOL. The requested changes are consistent with the types of license amendments [identified] in 10 CFR 50.75(h)(4).

    The regulations of 10 CFR 50.75(h)(4) state “Unless otherwise determined by the Commission with regard to a specific application, the Commission has determined that any amendment to the license of a utilization facility that does no more than delete specific license conditions relating to the terms and conditions of decommissioning trust agreements involves “no significant hazard considerations.”

    This request involves changes that are administrative in nature. No actual plant equipment or accident analyses will be affected by the proposed changes.

    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequence of an accident previously evaluated.

    2. Does the [p]roposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    This request involves administrative changes to the license that will be consistent with the NRC's regulations at 10 CFR 50.75(h).

    No actual plant equipment or accident analyses will be affected by the proposed change and no failure modes not bounded by previously evaluated accidents will be created.

    Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.

    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

    Response: No.

    Margin of safety is associated with confidence in the ability of the fission product barriers to limit the level of radiation dose to the public.

    This request involves administrative changes to the license that will be consistent with the NRC's regulations at 10 CFR 50.75(h).

    No actual plant equipment or accident analyses will be affected by the proposed change. Additionally, the proposed changes will not relax any criteria used to establish safety limits, will not relax any safety systems settings, or will not relax the bases for any limiting conditions of operation.

    Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

    Attorney for licensee: Tamra Domeyer, Associate General Counsel, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 60555.

    NRC Branch Chief: Douglas A. Broaddus.

    Exelon Generation Company, LLC and PSEG Nuclear LLC, Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, York and Lancaster Counties, Pennsylvania

    Date of amendment request: January 30, 2017. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17030A302.

    Description of amendment request: The amendments would replace existing Technical Specification (TS) requirements related to “operations with a potential for draining the reactor vessel” (OPDRVs) with new requirements on reactor pressure vessel (RPV) water inventory control (WIC) to protect Safety Limit 2.1.1.3. Safety Limit 2.1.1.3 requires RPV water level to be greater than the top of active irradiated fuel. The proposed changes are based on TS Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF-542, Revision 2, “Reactor Pressure Vessel Water Inventory Control.”

    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed changes replace existing TS requirements related to OPDRVs with new requirements on RPV WIC that will protect Safety Limit 2.1.1.3. Draining of RPV water inventory in Mode 4 (i.e., cold shutdown) and Mode 5 (i.e., refueling) is not an accident previously evaluated and, therefore, replacing the existing TS controls to prevent or mitigate such an event with a new set of controls has no effect on any accident previously evaluated. RPV water inventory control in Mode 4 or Mode 5 is not an initiator of any accident previously evaluated. The existing OPDRV controls or the proposed RPV WIC controls are not mitigating actions assumed in any accident previously evaluated.

    The proposed changes reduce the probability of an unexpected draining event (which is not a previously evaluated accident) by imposing new requirements on the limiting time in which an unexpected draining event could result in the reactor vessel water level dropping to the top of the active fuel (TAF). These controls require cognizance of the plant configuration and control of configurations with unacceptably short drain times. These requirements reduce the probability of an unexpected draining event. The current TS requirements are only mitigating actions and impose no requirements that reduce the probability of an unexpected draining event.

    The proposed changes reduce the consequences of an unexpected draining event (which is not a previously evaluated accident) by requiring an Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS) subsystem to be operable at all times in Modes 4 and 5. The current TS requirements do not require any water injection systems, ECCS or otherwise, to be Operable in certain conditions in Mode 5. The change in requirement from two ECCS subsystems to one ECCS subsystem in Modes 4 and 5 does not significantly affect the consequences of an unexpected draining event because the proposed Actions ensure equipment is available within the limiting drain time that is as capable of mitigating the event as the current requirements. The proposed controls provide escalating compensatory measures to be established as calculated drain times decrease, such as verification of a second method of water injection and additional confirmations that containment and/or filtration would be available if needed.

    The proposed changes reduce or eliminate some requirements that were determined to be unnecessary to manage the consequences of an unexpected draining event, such as automatic initiation of an ECCS subsystem and control room ventilation. These changes do not affect the consequences of any accident previously evaluated since a draining event in Modes 4 and 5 is not a previously evaluated accident and the requirements are not needed to adequately respond to a draining event.

    Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

    2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed changes replace existing TS requirements related to OPDRVs with new requirements on RPV WIC that will protect Safety Limit 2.1.1.3. The proposed changes will not alter the design function of the equipment involved. Under the proposed changes, some systems that are currently required to be operable during OPDRVs would be required to be available within the limiting drain time or to be in service depending on the limiting drain time. Should those systems be unable to be placed into service, the consequences are no different than if those systems were unable to perform their function under the current TS requirements. The event of concern under the current requirements and the proposed changes are an unexpected draining event. The proposed changes do not create new failure mechanisms, malfunctions, or accident initiators that would cause a draining event or a new or different kind of accident not previously evaluated or included in the design and licensing bases.

    Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

    3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

    Response: No.

    The proposed changes replace existing TS requirements related to OPDRVs with new requirements on RPV WIC. The current requirements do not have a stated safety basis and no margin of safety is established in the licensing basis. The safety basis for the new requirements is to protect Safety Limit 2.1.1.3. New requirements are added to determine the limiting time in which the RPV water inventory could drain to the top of the fuel in the reactor vessel should an unexpected draining event occur. Plant configurations that could result in lowering the RPV water level to the TAF within one hour are now prohibited. New escalating compensatory measures based on the limiting drain time replace the current controls. The proposed TS establish a safety margin by providing defense-in-depth to ensure that the Safety Limit is protected and to protect the public health and safety. While some less restrictive requirements are proposed for plant configurations with long calculated drain times, the overall effect of the change is to improve plant safety and to add safety margin.

    Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

    Attorney for licensee: Tamra Domeyer, Associate General Counsel, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Rd., Warrenville, IL 60555.

    NRC Branch Chief: James G. Danna.

    Florida Power & Light Company, et al., Docket Nos. 50-335 and 50-389, St. Lucie Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, St. Lucie County, Florida

    Date of amendment request: January 23, 2017. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17025A399.

    Description of amendment request: The amendments would modify the St. Lucie Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Technical Specifications (TSs) by limiting the MODE of applicability for the Reactor Protection System (RPS), Startup, and Operating Rate of Change of Power—High, functional unit trip. Additionally, the proposed license amendments add new Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) 3.0.5 and relatedly modifies LCO 3.0.2, to provide for placing inoperable equipment under administrative control for the purpose of conducting testing required to demonstrate OPERABILITY.

    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    Limiting the MODE 1 applicability for RPS functional unit, Startup and Operating Rate of Change of Power—High, to Power Range Neutron Flux Power ≤15% of RATED THERMAL POWER, is an administrative change in nature and does not alter the manner in which the functional unit is operated or maintained. The proposed changes do not represent any physical change to plant [structures, systems, and components (SSC(s))], or to procedures established for plant operation. The subject RPS functional unit is not an event initiator nor is it credited in the mitigation of any event or credited in the [probabilistic risk assessment (PRA)]. As such, the initial conditions associated with accidents previously evaluated and plant systems credited for mitigating the consequences of accidents previously evaluated remain unchanged.

    The proposed addition of new LCO 3.0.5 to the St. Lucie Unit 1 and Unit 2 TS and related modification to LCO 3.0.2 is consistent with the guidance provided in NUREG-1432, Volume 1 [ADAMS Accession No. ML12102A165] (Reference 6.1 [of the amendment request]) and thereby has been previously evaluated by the Commission with a determination that the proposed change does not involve a significant hazards consideration.

    Therefore, facility operation in accordance with the proposed license amendments would not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    Limiting the MODE 1 applicability for the RPS functional unit, Startup and Operating Rate of Change of Power—High, to Power Range Neutron Flux Power ≤ 5% of RATED THERMAL POWER, is an administrative change in nature and does not involve the addition of any plant equipment, methodology or analyses. The proposed changes do not alter the design, configuration, or method of operation of the subject RPS functional unit or of any other SSC. More specifically, the proposed changes neither alter the power rate-of-change trip function nor its ability to bypass and reset as required. The subject RPS functional unit remains capable of performing its design function.

    The proposed addition of new LCO 3.0.5 to the St. Lucie Unit 1 and Unit 2 TS and related modification to LCO 3.0.2 is consistent with the guidance provided in NUREG-1432, Volume 1 (Reference 6.1 [of the amendment request]) and thereby has been previously evaluated by the Commission with a determination that the proposed change does not involve a significant hazards consideration.

    Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.

    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

    Response: No.

    Limiting the MODE 1 applicability for RPS functional unit, Startup and Operating Rate of Change of Power—High, to Power Range Neutron Flux Power ≤15% of RATED THERMAL POWER is an administrative change in nature. The proposed changes neither involve changes to any safety analyses assumptions, safety limits, or limiting safety system settings nor do they adversely impact plant operating margins or the reliability of equipment credited in safety analyses.

    The proposed addition of new LCO 3.0.5 to the St. Lucie Unit 1 and Unit 2 TS and related modification to LCO 3.0.2 is consistent with the guidance provided in NUREG-1432, Volume 1 (Reference 6.1 [of the amendment request]) and thereby has been previously evaluated by the Commission with a determination that the proposed change does not involve a significant hazards consideration.

    Therefore, operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment will not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

    Attorney for licensee: William S. Blair, Managing Attorney—Nuclear, Florida Power & Light Company, 700 Universe Boulevard, MS LAW/JB, Juno Beach, FL 33408-0420.

    NRC Branch Chief: Benjamin G. Beasley.

    Omaha Public Power District, Docket No. 50-285, Fort Calhoun Station, Unit No. 1 (FCS), Washington County, Nebraska

    Date of amendment request: December 16, 2016. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML16351A464.

    Description of amendment request: The proposed amendment would revise the FCS Emergency Plan and Emergency Action Level (EAL) scheme for the permanently defueled condition. The proposed permanently defueled Emergency Plan and EAL scheme are commensurate with the significantly reduced spectrum of credible accidents that can occur in the permanently defueled condition and are necessary to properly reflect the conditions of the facility while continuing to preserve the effectiveness of the emergency plan.

    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed changes to the FCS Emergency Plan and EAL scheme do not impact the function of facility structures, systems, or components. The proposed changes do not affect accident initiators or precursors, nor does it alter design assumptions. The proposed changes do not prevent the ability of the on-shift staff and emergency response organization to perform their intended functions to mitigate the consequences of any accident or event that will be credible in the permanently defueled condition.

    The probability of occurrence of previously evaluated accidents is not increased, because most previously analyzed accidents can no longer occur and the probability of the few remaining credible accidents are unaffected by the proposed amendment.

    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed changes reduce the scope of the FCS Emergency Plan and EAL scheme commensurate with the hazards associated with a permanently shutdown and defueled facility. The proposed changes do not involve installation of new equipment or modification of existing equipment, so that no new equipment failure modes are introduced. Also, the proposed changes do not result in a change to the way that the equipment or facility is operated resulting in new or different kinds of accident initiators or accident mitigation.

    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.

    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

    Response: No.

    Margin of safety is associated with confidence in the ability of the fission product barriers (i.e., fuel cladding, reactor coolant system pressure boundary, and containment structure) to limit the level of radiation dose to the public. The proposed changes are associated with the FCS Emergency Plan and EAL scheme and do not impact operation of the facility or its response to transients or accidents. The change does not affect the Technical Specifications. The proposed changes do not involve a change in the method of facility operation, and no accident analyses will be affected by the proposed changes. Safety analysis acceptance criteria are not affected by the proposed changes. The revised Emergency Plan will continue to provide the necessary response staff.

    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

    Attorney for licensee: David A. Repka, Esq., Winston & Strawn, 1700 K Street NW., Washington, DC 20006-3817.

    NRC Branch Chief: Douglas A. Broaddus.

    PSEG Nuclear LLC, Docket Nos. 50-354, 50-272, and 50-311, Hope Creek Generating Station (HCGS) and Salem Nuclear Generating Station (SGS), Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Salem County, New Jersey

    Date of amendment request: February 13, 2017. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Package Accession No. ML17044A346.

    Description of amendment request: The amendments would revise the HCGS and SGS, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, emergency action level (EAL) schemes. Specifically, the licensee proposes to adopt the EAL scheme described in Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 99-01, Revision 6, “Development of Emergency Action Levels for Non-Passive Reactors.” NEI 99-01, Revision 6, has been endorsed by the NRC.

    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed changes to the HCGS and SGS EALs do not impact the physical function of plant structures, systems or components (SSC) or the manner in which SSCs perform their design function. The proposed changes neither adversely affect accident initiators or precursors, nor alter design assumptions. The proposed changes do not alter or prevent the ability of SSCs to perform their intended function to mitigate the consequences of an initiating event within assumed acceptance limits. No operating procedures or administrative controls that function to prevent or mitigate accidents are affected by the proposed changes. Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

    2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed changes do not involve a physical alteration of the plant (i.e., no new or different types of equipment will be installed or removed) or a change in the method of plant operation. The proposed changes will not introduce failure modes that could result in a new accident, and the changes do not alter assumptions made in the safety analysis. The proposed changes to the HCGS and SGS EALs are not initiators of any accidents. Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.

    3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

    Response: No.

    Margin of safety is associated with the ability of the fission product barriers (i.e., fuel cladding, reactor coolant system pressure boundary, and containment structure) to limit the level of radiation dose to the public. The proposed changes do not impact operation of the plant or its response to transients or accidents. The changes do not affect the Technical Specifications or the operating license. The proposed changes do not involve a change in the method of plant operation, and no accident analyses will be affected by the proposed changes. Additionally, the proposed changes will not relax any criteria used to establish safety limits and will not relax any safety system settings. The safety analysis acceptance criteria are not affected by these changes. The proposed changes will not result in plant operation in a configuration outside the design basis. The proposed changes do not adversely affect systems that respond to safely shut down the plant and to maintain the plant in a safe shutdown condition. The emergency plan will continue to activate an emergency response commensurate with the extent of degradation of plant safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

    Attorney for licensee: Jeffrie J. Keenan, PSEG Nuclear LLC—N21, P.O. Box 236, Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038.

    NRC Branch Chief: James G. Danna.

    South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, Docket Nos. 52-027 and 52-028, Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, Units 2 and 3, Fairfield, South Carolina

    Date of amendment request: February 15, 2017. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17046A660.

    Description of amendment request: The amendment request proposes to revise the licensing basis information to reflect changes to the locations of the hydrogen venting primary openings in the passive core cooling system (PXS) valve/accumulator rooms inside containment. Because this proposed change requires a departure from Tier 1 information in the Westinghouse Electric Company's AP1000 Design Control Document (DCD), the licensee also requested an exemption from the requirements of the Generic DCD Tier 1 in accordance with 10 CFR 52.63(b)(1).

    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed revision to the hydrogen venting for the Passive Core Cooling System (PXS) Valve/Accumulator Room A (Room 11206) and clarification of the venting path definition for PXS Valve/Accumulator Room B (Room 11207) do not affect any safety-related equipment or function. The hydrogen ignition subsystem, including designed hydrogen venting features, is designed to mitigate beyond design basis hydrogen generation in the containment. The hydrogen venting changes do not involve any accident, initiating event or component failure; thus, the probabilities of the accidents previously evaluated are not affected. The modified venting locations and definitions will maintain the hydrogen ignition subsystem designed and analyzed beyond design basis function to maintain containment integrity. The maximum allowable containment leakage rate specified in the Technical Specifications is unchanged, and radiological material release source terms are not affected; thus, the radiological releases in the accident analyses are not affected.

    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed revision to the hydrogen venting for the Passive Core Cooling System (PXS) Valve/Accumulator Room A (Room 11206) and clarification of the venting path definition for PXS Valve/Accumulator Room B (Room 11207) will maintain the beyond design basis function of the hydrogen ignition subsystem. The hydrogen venting changes do not impact the hydrogen ignition subsystem's function to maintain containment integrity during beyond design basis accident conditions, and, thus does not introduce any new failure mode. The proposed changes do not create a new fault or sequence of events that could result in a radioactive release. The proposed changes would not affect any safety-related accident mitigating function.

    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident.

    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

    Response: No.

    The proposed revision to the hydrogen venting for the Passive Core Cooling System (PXS) Valve/Accumulator Room A (Room 11206) and clarification of the venting path definition for PXS Valve/Accumulator Room B (Room 11207) will maintain the beyond design basis function of the hydrogen ignition subsystem. The proposed changes do not have any effect on the ability of safety-related structures, systems, or components to perform their beyond design basis functions. The proposed changes are a result of a low probability, severe accident scenario being evaluated. The revision to this scenario does not result in an increase in the plant risk (frequency and/or consequences). The frequency is low and there is no increase to the consequences because containment integrity is maintained and there is no containment leakage. There is no change to the maximum allowed containment leakage rate (0.10% of containment air weight per day) for the containment vessel. The proposed changes do not affect the ability of the hydrogen igniter subsystem to maintain containment integrity following a beyond design basis accident. The hydrogen igniter subsystem continues to meet the requirements for which it was designed and continues to meet the regulations.

    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

    Attorney for licensee: Ms. Kathryn M. Sutton, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, LLC, 1111 Pennsylvania NW., Washington, DC 20004-2514.

    NRC Branch Chief: Jennifer Dixon-Herrity.

    South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, Docket Nos. 52-027 and 52-028, Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, Units 2 and 3, Fairfield County, South Carolina

    Date of amendment request: February 16, 2017. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17047A192.

    Description of amendment request: The requested amendment proposes to depart from Tier 2 information in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) and involves changes to related plant-specific Tier 1 information, with corresponding changes to the associated combined license (COL) Appendix C information, to clarify text that currently refers to raceways with an electrical classification (i.e., Class 1E/non-Class 1E). This includes rewording multiple Inspections, Tests, Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria (ITAAC) and UFSAR material to clarify that any text referring to Class 1E or non-Class 1E raceways or raceway systems is referring to raceways or raceway systems that route Class 1E or non-Class 1E circuits.

    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    These proposed changes are for clarification and consistency. No structure, system, or component (SSC) or function is changed within this activity. There is no change to the application of regulatory guides or industry standards to raceways or raceway systems, nor is there a change to how they are designed, fabricated, procured or installed. Raceway systems that route Class 1E circuits will continue to be designated and designed as equipment Class C, safety-related, and seismic Category I structures. The proposal to align the text in COL Appendix C (and plant-specific Tier 1) Section 3.3 with the associated ITAAC is made for clarification and consistency to reduce misinterpretation. The proposal to reword multiple ITAAC in 3.3.00.07 does not change the intent of the ITAAC, nor is the ITAAC scope or closure method impacted.

    The proposed amendment does not affect the prevention and mitigation of abnormal events; e.g., accidents, anticipated operation occurrences, earthquakes, floods, turbine missiles, and fires or their safety or design analyses. This change does not involve containment of radioactive isotopes or any adverse effect on a fission product barrier. There is no impact on previously evaluated accidents.

    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed changes do not involve a new failure mechanism or malfunction, which affects an SSC accident initiator, or interface with any SSC accident initiator or initiating sequence of events considered in the design and licensing bases. There is no adverse effect on radioisotope barriers or the release of radioactive materials. The proposed amendment does not adversely affect any accident, including the possibility of creating a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

    Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different type of accident.

    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

    Response: No.

    These proposed changes are for clarification and consistency to reduce misinterpretation. No SSC or function is changed within this activity. There is no change to the application of regulatory guides or industry standards to raceways or raceway systems, nor is there a change to how they are designed, fabricated, procured or installed. Raceway systems that route Class 1E circuits will continue to be designated and designed as Equipment Class C, safety-related, and seismic Category I.

    The proposed changes would not affect any safety-related design code, function, design analysis, safety analysis input or result, or existing design/safety margin. No safety analysis or design basis acceptance limit/criterion is challenged or exceeded by the requested changes.

    Therefore the proposed amendment does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

    Attorney for licensee: Ms. Kathryn M. Sutton, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLC, 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC, 20004-2514.

    NRC Branch Chief: Jennifer Dixon-Herrity.

    Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Docket Nos. 52-025 and 52-026, Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP), Units 3 and 4, Burke County, Georgia

    Date of amendment request: August 30, 2016. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML16243A373.

    Description of amendment request: The amendment request proposes a change to Updated Final Safety Analysis Report in the form of departures from the incorporated plant-specific Design Control Document (DCD) Tier 2 * information and related changes to the VEGP Units 3 and 4 Combined License (COL) Appendix C (and corresponding plant-specific DCD Tier 1) information.

    Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 52.63(b)(1), an exemption from elements of the design as certified in the 10 CFR part 52, Appendix D, a design certification rule is also requested for the plant-specific Tier 1 material departures. The proposed change is to the thickness of one floor in the auxiliary building located between Column Lines I to J-1 and Column Lines 2 to 4 at Elevation 153′-0″. This submittal requests approval of the license amendment, necessary to implement these changes.

    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below with NRC staff edits in square brackets:

    1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The design functions of the nuclear island structures are to provide support, protection, and separation for the seismic Category I mechanical and electrical equipment located in the nuclear island. The nuclear island structures are structurally designed to meet seismic Category I requirements as defined in Regulatory Guide 1.29.

    The change of the thickness of the floor above the [Component Cooling Water System (CCS)] Valve Room in the auxiliary building meets criteria and requirements of American Concrete Institute (ACI) 349 and American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) N690 and does not have an adverse impact on the response of the nuclear island structures safe shutdown earthquake ground motions or loads due to anticipated transient or postulated accident conditions. The proposed changes do not impact the support, design, or operation of mechanical and fluid systems. There is no change to plant systems or the response of systems to postulated accident conditions. There is no change to the predicted radioactive releases due to normal operation or postulated accident conditions. The plant response to previously evaluated accidents or external events is not adversely affected, nor does the change described create any new accident precursors.

    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed change is to revise the thickness of the floor above the CCS Valve Room in the auxiliary building. The proposed changes do not change the design requirements of the nuclear island structures. The proposed changes do not change the design function, support, design, or operation of mechanical and fluid systems. The proposed changes do not result in a new failure mechanism for the nuclear island structures or new accident precursors. As a result, the design function of the nuclear island structures is not adversely affected by the proposed change.

    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

    Response: No.

    No safety analysis or design basis acceptance limit/criterion is challenged or exceeded by the proposed changes, thus, no margin of safety is reduced.

    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

    Attorney for licensee: M. Stanford Blanton, Balch & Bingham LLP, 1710 Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, AL 35203-2015.

    NRC Branch Chief: Jennifer Dixon-Herrity.

    Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Docket Nos. 52-025 and 52-026, Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 3 and 4, Burke County, Georgia

    Date of amendment request: January 31, 2017. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17031A446.

    Description of amendment request: The requested amendment proposes to depart from Tier 2 information in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) and to change Combined License Appendix A, Technical Specifications (TS), to modify engineered safety features logic for containment vacuum relief actuation.

    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed changes to the UFSAR and TS will include the Containment Pressure—Low automatic reset function for the containment vacuum relief valves manual initiation logic, such that the containment vacuum relief manual actuation will be automatically reset when the containment pressure rises above the Containment Pressure—Low setpoint. This reset allows a containment isolation signal to close the valves when necessary. The Containment Pressure—Low signal is an interlock for the containment vacuum relief manual actuation such that the valves cannot be opened unless the Containment Pressure—Low setpoint has been reached in any two-out-of-four divisions. The modified logic will ensure that the automatic initiation of containment isolation is made available following manual initiation of containment vacuum relief actuation. The analyzed design and function of the Engineered Safety Features Actuation System and its actuated components is not affected. The proposed changes do not adversely affect any safety-related equipment and does not involve any accident, initiating event, or component failure, thus the probabilities of accidents previously evaluated are not affected. The proposed changes do not adversely interface with or adversely affect any system containing radioactivity or affect any radiological material release source term; thus the radiological releases in an accident are not affected.

    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The changes to the UFSAR and TS to include the Containment Pressure—Low manual actuation interlock and automatic reset function for the containment vacuum relief valves manual initiation logic will maintain the Engineered Safety Features Actuation System and Plant Safety and Monitoring System in accordance with the design objectives as licensed. The design of the Class 1E Containment Pressure—Low manual actuation interlock and automatic reset function is required to meet the licensing basis for the Engineered Safety Features Actuation System and Plant Safety and Monitoring System. The changes to the manual initiation logic do not adversely affect the function of any safety-related structure, system, or component, and thus does not introduce a new failure mode. The changes to the containment vacuum relief valves manual initiation logic do not adversely interface with any safety-related equipment or any equipment associated with radioactive material and, thus, do not create a new fault or sequence of events that could result in a new or different kind of accident.

    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

    Response: No.

    The changes to the UFSAR and TS to include the Containment Pressure—Low automatic reset function for the containment vacuum relief valves manual initiation logic will maintain the Engineered Safety Features Actuation System and Plant Safety and Monitoring System in accordance with the design objectives as licensed. The changes to the manual initiation logic do not adversely interface with any safety-related equipment or adversely affect any safety-related function. The changes to the containment vacuum relief manual initiation logic continue to comply with existing design codes and regulatory criteria, and do not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.

    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

    Attorney for licensee: Mr. M. Stanford Blanton, Balch & Bingham LLP, 1710 Sixth Avenue North Birmingham, AL 35203-2015.

    NRC Branch Chief: Jennifer Dixon-Herrity.

    Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Docket Nos. 52-025 and 52-026, Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 3 and 4, Burke County, Georgia

    Date of amendment request: March 2, 2017. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17061A747.

    Description of amendment request: The requested amendment consist of changes to Inspections, Tests, Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria (ITAAC) in combined license (COL) Appendix C, with corresponding changes to the associated plant-specific Tier 1 information, to consolidate a number of ITAAC to improve efficiency of the ITAAC completion and closure process.

    Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 52.63(b)(1), an exemption from elements of the design as certified in the 10 CFR part 52, Appendix D, design certification rule is also requested for the plant-specific Design Control Document Tier 1 material departures.

    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed non-technical change to COL Appendix C will consolidate, relocate and subsume redundant ITAAC in order to improve and create a more efficient process for the ITAAC Closure Notification submittals. No structure, system, or component (SSC) design or function is affected. No design or safety analysis is affected. The proposed changes do not affect any accident initiating event or component failure, thus the probabilities of the accidents previously evaluated are not affected. No function used to mitigate a radioactive material release and no radioactive material release source term is involved, thus the radiological releases in the accident analyses are not affected.

    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed change to COL Appendix C does not affect the design or function of any SSC, but will consolidate, relocate and subsume redundant ITAAC in order to improve efficiency of the ITAAC completion and closure process. The proposed changes would not introduce a new failure mode, fault or sequence of events that could result in a radioactive material release.

    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

    Response: No.

    The proposed change to COL Appendix C to consolidate, relocate and subsume redundant ITAAC in order to improve efficiency of the ITAAC completion and closure process is considered non-technical and would not affect any design parameter, function or analysis. There would be no change to an existing design basis, design function, regulatory criterion, or analysis. No safety analysis or design basis acceptance limit/criterion is involved.

    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

    Attorney for licensee: M. Stanford Blanton, Balch & Bingham LLP, 1710 Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, AL 35203-2015.

    NRC Branch Chief: Jennifer Dixon-Herrity.

    Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Docket Nos. 52-025 and 52-026, Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 3 and 4, Burke County, Georgia

    Date of amendment request: February 22, 2017. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17053A425.

    Description of amendment request: The amendment request proposes to revise the licensing basis information to reflect changes to the locations of the hydrogen venting primary openings in the passive core cooling system (PXS) valve/accumulator rooms inside containment. Because, this proposed change requires a departure from Tier 1 information in the Westinghouse Electric Company's AP1000 Design Control Document (DCD), the licensee also requested an exemption from the requirements of the Generic DCD Tier 1 in accordance with 10 CFR 52.63(b)(1).

    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed revision to the hydrogen venting for the Passive Core Cooling System (PXS) Valve/Accumulator Room A (Room 11206) and clarification of the venting path definition for PXS Valve/Accumulator Room B (Room 11207) do not affect any safety-related equipment or function. The hydrogen ignition subsystem, including designed hydrogen venting features, is designed to mitigate beyond design basis hydrogen generation in the containment. The hydrogen venting changes do not involve any accident, initiating event or component failure; thus, the probabilities of the accidents previously evaluated are not affected. The modified venting locations and definitions will maintain the hydrogen ignition subsystem designed and analyzed beyond design basis function to maintain containment integrity. The maximum allowable containment leakage rate specified in the Technical Specifications is unchanged, and radiological material release source terms are not affected; thus, the radiological releases in the accident analyses are not affected.

    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed revision to the hydrogen venting for the PXS Valve/Accumulator Room A (Room 11206) and clarification of the venting path definition for PXS Valve/Accumulator Room B (Room 11207) will maintain the beyond design basis function of the hydrogen ignition subsystem. The hydrogen venting changes do not impact the hydrogen ignition subsystem's function to maintain containment integrity during beyond design basis accident conditions, and, thus does not introduce any new failure mode. The proposed changes do not create a new fault or sequence of events that could result in a radioactive release. The proposed changes would not affect any safety-related accident mitigating function.

    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident.

    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

    Response: No.

    The proposed revision to the hydrogen venting for the Passive Core Cooling System (PXS) Valve/Accumulator Room A (Room 11206) and clarification of the venting path definition for PXS Valve/Accumulator Room B (Room 11207) will maintain the beyond design basis function of the hydrogen ignition subsystem. The proposed changes do not have any effect on the ability of safety-related structures, systems, or components to perform their beyond design basis functions. The proposed changes are a result of a low probability, severe accident scenario being evaluated. The revision to this scenario does not result in an increase in the plant risk (frequency and/or consequences). The frequency is low and there is no increase to the consequences because containment integrity is maintained and there is no containment leakage. There is no change to the maximum allowed containment leakage rate (0.10% of containment air weight per day) for the containment vessel. The proposed changes do not affect the ability of the hydrogen igniter subsystem to maintain containment integrity following a beyond design basis accident. The hydrogen igniter subsystem continues to meet the requirements for which it was designed and continues to meet the regulations.

    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

    Attorney for licensee: Mr. M. Stanford Blanton, Balch & Bingham LLP, 1710 Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, AL 35203-2015.

    NRC Branch Chief: Jennifer Dixon-Herrity.

    Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), Docket No. 50-391, Watts Bar Nuclear Plant (WBN), Unit 2, Rhea County, Tennessee

    Date of amendment request: December 21, 2016. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML16356A673.

    Description of amendment request: The amendment would revise the containment ice mass limits in WBN, Unit 2, Technical Specification (TS) Surveillance Requirements (SRs) 3.6.11.2 and 3.6.11.3 to be identical to the ice mass limits in the WBN, Unit 1, TS SRs 3.6.11.2 and 3.6.11.3.

    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The primary purpose of the ice bed is to provide a large heat sink to limit peak containment pressure in the event of a release of energy from a design basis LOCA [loss-of-coolant accident] or high energy line break (HELB) in containment. The LOCA requires the greatest amount of ice compared to other accident scenarios; therefore, the reduction in ice weight is based on the LOCA analysis. The amount of ice in the bed has no impact on the initiation of an accident, but rather on the mitigation of the accident. The containment integrity analysis shows that the proposed reduced ice weight is sufficient to maintain the peak containment pressure below the containment design pressure, and that the containment heat removal systems function to rapidly reduce the containment pressure and temperature in the event of a LOCA. Therefore, containment integrity is maintained and the consequences of an accident previously evaluated in the WBN dual-unit Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) are not significantly increased. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The ice condenser serves to limit the peak pressure inside containment following a LOCA. TVA has evaluated the revised containment pressure analysis and determined that sufficient ice would be present to maintain the peak containment pressure below the containment design pressure. Therefore, the reduced ice weight does not create the possibility of an accident that is different than any already evaluated in the WBN dual-unit UFSAR. No new accident scenarios, failure mechanisms, or limiting single failures are introduced as a result of this proposed change.

    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

    Response: No.

    The proposed TS ice weight SR limit is based on the conservatism of the WBN Unit 1 WCOBRA/TRAC LOCA M&E [mass and energy] methodology in comparison to the WBN Unit 2 operating conditions. The WBN Unit 1 WCOBRA/TRAC LOCA M&E methodology is modeled on the WBN Unit 1 RSGs [replacement steam generators], which have a greater mass, volume, and stored metal energy than the WBN Unit 2 original model D3 SGs [steam generators]. Additionally, the containment pressure calculations in Section 6.2.1.3.3 of the WBN Unit 1 portion of the WBN dual-unit UFSAR state that the analytical limit for the mass of ice assumed in the WBN Unit 1 ice condenser, in order to limit the maximum containment peak pressure from a LOCA to below the containment design pressure, is 2,260,000 lb. The proposed revised TS SR ice mass limit of 2,404,500 lb [pound] includes additional ice mass to conservatively bound ice bed sublimation effects. Based on TVA's evaluation and the revised containment analysis, TVA considers the reduction of the ice mass limit to be acceptable for satisfying the safety function of the ice condenser for the current SR interval. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

    Attorney for licensee: General Counsel, Tennessee Valley Authority, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, 6A West Tower, Knoxville, TN 37902.

    NRC Branch Chief: Benjamin G. Beasley.

    III. Previously Published Notices of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing

    The following notices were previously published as separate individual notices. The notice content was the same as above. They were published as individual notices either because time did not allow the Commission to wait for this biweekly notice or because the action involved exigent circumstances. They are repeated here because the biweekly notice lists all amendments issued or proposed to be issued involving no significant hazards consideration.

    For details, see the individual notice in the Federal Register on the day and page cited. This notice does not extend the notice period of the original notice.

    Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket No. 50-391 Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit 2, Rhea County, Tennessee

    Date of amendment request: November 14, 2016. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML16320A161.

    Brief description of amendment request: The proposed amendment would revise the Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit 2, Cyber Security Plan Implementation Schedule for Milestone 8 and would revise the associated license condition in the Facility Operating License.

    Date of publication of individual notice in Federal Register: January 5, 2017 (82 FR 1370).

    Expiration date of individual notice: February 6, 2017 (public comments); March 6, 2017 (hearing requests).

    IV. Notice of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses

    During the period since publication of the last biweekly notice, the Commission has issued the following amendments. The Commission has determined for each of these amendments that the application complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations. The Commission has made appropriate findings as required by the Act and the Commission's rules and regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in the license amendment.

    A notice of consideration of issuance of amendment to facility operating license or combined license, as applicable, proposed no significant hazards consideration determination, and opportunity for a hearing in connection with these actions, was published in the Federal Register as indicated.

    Unless otherwise indicated, the Commission has determined that these amendments satisfy the criteria for categorical exclusion in accordance with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared for these amendments. If the Commission has prepared an environmental assessment under the special circumstances provision in 10 CFR 51.22(b) and has made a determination based on that assessment, it is so indicated.

    For further details with respect to the action see (1) the applications for amendment, (2) the amendment, and (3) the Commission's related letter, Safety Evaluation and/or Environmental Assessment as indicated. All of these items can be accessed as described in the “Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments” section of this document.

    DTE Electric Company, Docket No. 50-341, Fermi 2, Monroe County, Michigan

    Date of amendment request: March 22, 2016, as supplemented by letter dated August 11, 2016.

    Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised Technical Specification (TS) 5.5.12, “Primary Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program,” for the permanent extension of the Type A test interval up to one test in 15 years, as stipulated in Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 94-01, Revision 2-A, “Industry Guideline for Implementing Performance-Based Option of 10 CFR part 50, Appendix J,” October 2008 (ADAMS Accession No. ML100620847). The license amendment request also proposes to increase the containment isolation valves leakage test intervals (i.e., Type C tests) from their current 60 months to 75 months by replacing TS 5.5.12.a. reference to Regulatory Guide 1.163, “Performance-Based Containment Leak-Test Program” (ADAMS Accession No. ML003740058), with a reference to NEI 94-01, Revision 3-A (ADAMS Accession No. ML12221A202), and the conditions and limitations specified in NEI 94-01, Revision 2-A, to implement the performance-based leakage testing program in accordance with title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations part 50, Appendix J, Option B. The amendment also deletes from TS 5.5.12, text that authorized a one-time extension of the Type A test interval to 2007 and revised paragraph 2.D of the renewed facility operating license to reflect removal of a reference to an exemption from 10 CFR part 50, Appendix J, requirements for testing of containment air locks.

    Date of issuance: March 9, 2017.

    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 60 days of issuance.

    Amendment No.: 205. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML16351A460; documents related to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.

    Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-43: Amendment revised the renewed facility operating license and TSs.

    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: June 7, 2016 (81 FR 36616). The August 11, 2016 supplement provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the staff's original proposed no significant hazard consideration determination as published in the Federal Register.

    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated March 9, 2017.

    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

    Duke Energy Progress, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-325 and 50-324, Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2, Brunswick County, North Carolina

    Date of amendment request: September 26, 2016.

    Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised Technical Specification Section 2.1.1.2 to change the minimum critical power ratio safety limit.

    Date of issuance: March 10, 2017.

    Effective date: As of date of issuance and shall be implemented for Unit 1 prior to start-up from the 2018 refueling outage (March 2018) and for Unit 2 prior to start-up from the 2017 refueling outage.

    Amendment Nos.: 272 (Unit 1) and 300 (Unit 2). A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17059D146; documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.

    Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-71 and DPR-62: Amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and Technical Specifications.

    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: December 20, 2016 (81 FR 92866).

    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated March 10, 2017.

    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

    Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-369 and 50-370, McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina

    Date of application for amendments: May 5, 2016, as supplemented by letter dated June 16, 2016.

    Brief description of amendments: The amendments would modify the McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, Technical Specifications (TS) by removing footnote (c) from TS Table 3.3.2-1, “Engineered Safety Feature Actuation System Instrumentation,” which is no longer applicable, and by removing an expired footnote from TS 3.8.1, “AC Sources—Operating.”

    Date of issuance: March 8, 2017.

    Effective date: As of its date of issuance and shall be implemented within 30 days from the date of issuance.

    Amendment Nos.: 293 and 272. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17003A019; documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.

    Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-9 and NPF-17: Amendments revised the licenses and technical specifications.

    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: July 5, 2016 (81 FR 43649). The supplemental letter dated June 16, 2016, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the staff's original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as published in the Federal Register.

    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated March 8, 2017.

    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

    Energy Northwest, Docket No. 50-397, Columbia Generating Station, Benton County, Washington

    Date of application for amendment: May 10, 2016, as supplemented by letters dated May 18, 2016, and January 31, 2017.

    Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the safety function lift and lower setpoint tolerances of the safety/relief valves that are listed in Surveillance Requirements 3.4.3.1 and 3.4.4.1 of the Technical Specifications.

    Date of issuance: March 9, 2017.

    Effective date: As of its date of issuance and shall be implemented within 60 days from the date of issuance.

    Amendment No.: 240. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17052A125; documents related to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.

    Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-21: The amendment revised the Renewed Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications.

    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: July 19, 2016 (81 FR 46961). The supplemental letter January 31, 2017, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the NRC staff's original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as published in the Federal Register.

    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated March 9, 2017.

    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

    Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50-313, Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1, Pope County, Arkansas

    Date of amendment request: March 25, 2016.

    Brief description of amendment: The amendment deleted Technical Specification (TS) 5.5.8, “Inservice Testing Program.” A new defined term, “Inservice Testing Program,” is added to TS Section 1.1, “Definitions.” Also, existing uses of the term “Inservice Testing Program” in the TSs are capitalized throughout to indicate that it is now a defined term. The NRC staff has concluded that the amendment is consistent with Technical Specifications Task Force Traveler TSTF-545, Revision 3, which was made available to the TSTF via NRC letter dated December 11, 2015 (ADAMS Accession No. ML15317A071).

    Date of issuance: March 10, 2017.

    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 90 days from the date of issuance.

    Amendment No.: 257. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML16165A423; documents related to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.

    Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-51: The amendment revised the Renewed Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications.

    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: June 7, 2016 (81 FR 36619).

    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated March 10, 2017.

    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

    Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-352 and 50-353, Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania

    Date of amendment request: April 4, 2016.

    Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised the technical specification (TS) requirements for the high pressure coolant injection (HPCI) and reactor core isolation cooling (RCIC) system actuation instrumentation. Specifically, the amendments add a footnote to the TSs indicating that the injection functions of drywell pressure-high (HPCI only) and manual initiation (HPCI and RCIC) are not required to be operable under low reactor pressure conditions.

    Date of issuance: February 28, 2017.

    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 60 days of issuance.

    Amendment Nos.: 224 (Unit 1) and 185 (Unit 2). A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML16356A272; documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.

    Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-39 and NPF-85: Amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and TSs.

    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: June 7, 2016 (81 FR 36620).

    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated February 28, 2017.

    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

    Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-220, Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit 1, (NMP1), Oswego County, New York

    Date of amendment request: January 3, 2017.

    Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the NMP1 licensing basis related to alternative source term analysis in the updated final safety analysis report (UFSAR) to allow the use of the release fractions listed in Tables 1 and 3 of NRC Regulatory Guide 1.183, “Alternative Radiological Source Terms for Evaluating Design Basis Accidents at Nuclear Power Reactors,” July 2000 (ADAMS Accession No. ML003716792), for partial length fuel rods (PLRs) that are operating above the peak burnup limit for the remainder of the current operating cycle. In addition, the proposed change revised the NMP1 licensing basis to allow movement of irradiated fuel bundles containing PLRs that have been in operation above 62,000 megawatt days per metric tons of uranium (MWD/MTU).

    Date of issuance: March 9, 2017.

    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 30 days of issuance.

    Amendment No.: 226. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17055A451; documents related to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.

    Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-63: Amendment revised the licensing basis related to alternative source term analysis in the UFSAR.

    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: January 31, 2017 (82 FR 8871).

    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment and final no significant hazards consideration determination are contained in a Safety Evaluation dated March 9, 2017.

    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

    Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-219, Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Ocean County, New Jersey

    Date amendment request: May 17, 2016, as supplemented by letters dated November 2, 2016, and March 1, 2017.

    Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised and removed certain requirements from the Section 6, “Administrative Controls,” portions of the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Technical Specifications (TSs) that are not applicable to the facility in a permanently defueled condition. In addition, the amendment added definitions to TS Section 1, “Definitions.” Also, the amendment made additions to, deletions from, and conforming administrative changes to the TSs.

    Date of issuance: March 7, 2017.

    Effective date: Effective upon the licensee's submittal of the certifications required by 10 CFR 50.82(a)(1)(i) and 50.82(a)(1)(ii), and shall be implemented within 60 days of the effective date of the amendment, but may not exceed March 29, 2020.

    Amendment No.: 290. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML16235A413; documents related to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.

    Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-16: Amendment revised the Renewed Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications.

    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: July 19, 2016 (81 FR 46963). On July 19, 2016, the NRC staff published a proposed no significant hazards consideration (NSHC) determination regarding the amendment request in the Federal Register (81 FR 46963). Subsequently, by letter dated November 2, 2016, the licensee provided additional information that expanded the scope of the amendment request as originally noticed in the Federal Register. Accordingly, the NRC staff published a second proposed NSHC determination regarding the amendment request in the Federal Register on November 22, 2016 (81 FR 83876), which superseded the original Federal Register notice in its entirety. The supplemental letter dated March 1, 2017, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as noticed, and did not change the NRC staff's second proposed NSHC determination.

    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated March 7, 2017.

    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

    Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Docket Nos. 52-025 and 50-026, Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 3 and 4, Burke County, Georgia

    Date of amendment request: June 16, 2016.

    Brief description of amendments: The amendments changed Combined License Nos. NPF-91 and NPF-92 for the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant Units 3 and 4. The amendments authorized changes to the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) in the form of departures from the incorporated plant-specific Design Control Document Tier 2 information. Specifically, the changes to the Technical Specifications (TS) and information in the UFSAR revised the AP1000 protection and safety monitoring system functional logic to comply with the requirements on operating bypasses in Clause 6.6, “Operating Bypasses” of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Std. 603-1991, “IEEE Standard Criteria for Safety Systems for Nuclear Power Generating Stations.”

    Date of issuance: February 24, 2017.

    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 30 days of issuance.

    Amendment Nos.: 71/70. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML16320A097; documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.

    Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-91 and NPF-92: Amendment revised the Facility Combined License and TS.

    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: August 16, 2016 (81 FR 54610).

    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated February 24, 2017.

    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

    South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, South Carolina Public Service Authority, Docket No. 50-395, Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1 (VCSNS), Fairfield County, South Carolina

    Date of amendment request: June 30, 2016, as supplemented by letter dated August 4, 2016.

    Brief description of amendment: This amendment revised the date of the Cyber Security Plan implementation schedule for Milestone 8. Milestone 8 requires full implementation of the VCSNS Cyber Security Plan.

    Date of issuance: March 9, 2017.

    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 60 days of issuance.

    Amendment No.: 208. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17011A050; documents related to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.

    Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-12: Amendment revised the Renewed Facility Operating License.

    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 4, 2016 (81 FR 68472).

    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated March 9, 2017.

    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 16th day of March 2017.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    Kathryn M. Brock, Deputy Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
    [FR Doc. 2017-05990 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT Submission for Review: Court Orders Affecting Retirement Benefits AGENCY:

    U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

    ACTION:

    30-day notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Retirement Services, Office of Personnel Management (OPM) offers the general public and other Federal agencies the opportunity to comment on an extension, without change, of a currently approved information collection request (ICR), Court Orders Affecting Retirement Benefits.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted until April 27, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the proposed information collection to Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for the Office of Personnel Management or sent by email to [email protected] or faxed to (202) 395-6974.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    A copy of this ICR, with applicable supporting documentation, may be obtained by contacting the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for the Office of Personnel Management or sent by email to [email protected] or faxed to (202) 395-6974.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-13, 44 U.S.C. chapter 35) as amended by the Clinger-Cohen Act (Pub. L. 104-106), OPM is soliciting comments for this collection. The information collection (OMB No. 3206-0204) was previously published in the Federal Register on July 21, 2016 at 81 FR 47445 allowing for a 60-day public comment period. No comments were received for this information collection.

    Court Orders Affecting Retirement Benefits, 5 CFR 838.221, 838.421 and 838.721 describe how former spouses give us written notice of a court order requiring us to pay benefits to the former spouse. Specific information is needed before OPM can make court-ordered benefit payments. The regulations allow us to make a unique collection of only the information needed for a particular customer case and not over-burden our entire customer base by making a generic information collection request (ICR) that requires the former spouse (or their representative) to possibly review and complete information that we may already have access to.

    The purpose of this notice is to allow an additional 30 days for public comments. The Office of Management and Budget is particularly interested in comments that:

    1. Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of functions of OPM, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    2. Evaluate the accuracy of OPM's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of Information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

    3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    4. Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submissions of responses.

    Analysis

    Agency: Retirement Operations, Retirement Services, Office of Personnel Management.

    Title: Court Orders Affecting Retirement Benefits, 5 CFR Sections 838.221, Section 838.421 and Section 838.721.

    OMB: 3206-0204.

    Frequency: On occasion.

    Affected Public: Individuals or Households.

    Number of Respondents: 19,000.

    Estimated Time per Respondent: 30 minutes.

    Total Burden Hours: 9,500 hours.

    U.S. Office of Personnel Management. Kathy McGettigan, Acting Director.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06029 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6325-38-P
    OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT Civil Service Retirement System Board of Actuaries Meeting AGENCY:

    Office of Personnel Management.

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Civil Service Retirement System Board of Actuaries plans to meet on Thursday, June 1, 2017. The meeting will start at 10:00 a.m. EDT and will be held at the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM), 1900 E Street NW., Room 1350, Washington, DC 20415.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Gregory Kissel, Senior Actuary for Retirement Programs, U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E Street NW., Room 4316, Washington, DC 20415. Phone (202) 606-0722 or email at [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The purpose of the meeting is for the Board to review the actuarial methods and assumptions used in the valuations of the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund (CSRDF).

    The agenda is as follows:

    1. Summary of recent and proposed legislation and regulations 2. Review of actuarial assumptions: a. Demographic Assumptions b. Economic Assumptions 3. CSRDF Annual Report

    Persons desiring to attend this meeting of the Civil Service Retirement System Board of Actuaries, or to make a statement for consideration at the meeting, should contact OPM at least 5 business days in advance of the meeting date at the address shown below. The manner and time for any material presented to the Board may be limited.

    For the Board of Actuaries.

    Kathleen M. McGettigan, Acting Director.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06028 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6325-63-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities and Exchange Commission will hold a closed meeting on Thursday, March 30, 2017 at 11 a.m.

    Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the closed meeting. Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters also may be present.

    The General Counsel of the Commission, or her designee, has certified that, in her opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (7), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(3), (a)(5), (a)(7), (a)(9)(ii) and (a)(10), permit consideration of the scheduled matter at the closed meeting.

    Acting Chairman Piwowar, as duty officer, voted to consider the items listed for the closed meeting in closed session.

    The subject matter of the closed meeting will be:

    Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;

    Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings;

    Adjudicatory matters; and

    Other matters relating to enforcement proceedings.

    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in the scheduling of meeting items.

    For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed; please contact Brent J. Fields from the Office of the Secretary at (202) 551-5400.

    Dated: March 23, 2017. Brent J. Fields, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06152 Filed 3-24-17; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-80298; File No. SR-C2-2017-011] Self-Regulatory Organizations; C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Related to Rule 6.15 March 22, 2017.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”),1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on March 15, 2017, C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated (the “Exchange” or “C2”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange filed the proposal as a “non-controversial” proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.4 The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).

    4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange seeks to amend Rule 6.15. The text of the proposed rule change is provided below, (additions are in italics; deletions are [bracketed])

    C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated Rules Rule 6.15. Nullification and Adjustment of Options Transactions including Obvious Errors

    The Exchange may nullify a transaction or adjust the execution price of a transaction in accordance with this Rule. However, the determination as to whether a trade was executed at an erroneous price may be made by mutual agreement of the affected parties to a particular transaction. A trade may be nullified or adjusted on the terms that all parties to a particular transaction agree, provided, however, that such agreement to nullify or adjust must be conveyed to the Exchange in a manner prescribed by the Exchange prior to 7:30 a.m. Central Time on the first trading day following execution. It is considered conduct inconsistent with just and equitable principles of trade for any participant to use the mutual adjustment process to circumvent any applicable Exchange rule, the Act or any of the rules and regulations thereunder.

    (a)-(m) No change.

    . . . Interpretations and Policies:

    .01-.06 No change.

    .07 Complex Orders and Stock-Option Orders:

    (a) If a complex order executes against individual legs and at least one of the legs qualifies as an Obvious Error under paragraph (c)(1) or a Catastrophic Error under paragraph (d)(1), then the leg(s) that is an Obvious or Catastrophic Error will be adjusted in accordance with paragraphs (c)(4)(A) or (d)(3), respectively, regardless of whether one of the parties is a Customer. However, any Customer order subject to this paragraph (a) will be nullified if the adjustment would result in an execution price higher (for buy transactions) or lower (for sell transactions) than the Customer's limit price on the complex order or individual leg(s). If any leg of a complex order is nullified, the entire transaction is nullified.

    (b) If a complex order executes against another complex order and at least one of the legs qualifies as an Obvious Error under paragraph (c)(1) or a Catastrophic Error under paragraph (d)(1), then the leg(s) that is an Obvious or Catastrophic Error will be adjusted or busted in accordance with paragraph (c)(4) or (d)(3), respectively, so long as either: (i) the width of the National Spread Market for the complex order strategy just prior to the erroneous transaction was equal to or greater than the amount set forth in the wide quote table of paragraph (b)(3) or (ii) the net execution price of the complex order is higher (lower) than the offer (bid) of the National Spread Market for the complex order strategy just prior to the erroneous transaction by an amount equal to at least the amount shown in the table in paragraph (c)(1). If any leg of a complex order is nullified, the entire transaction is nullified. For purposes of Rule 6.15, the National Spread Market for a complex order strategy is determined by the National Best Bid/Offer of the individual legs of the strategy.

    (c) If the option leg of a stock-option order qualifies as an Obvious Error under paragraph (c)(1) or a Catastrophic Error under paragraph (d)(1), then the option leg that is an Obvious or Catastrophic Error will be adjusted in accordance with paragraph (c)(4)(A) or (d)(3), respectively, regardless of whether one of the parties is a Customer. However, the option leg of any Customer order subject to this paragraph (c) will be nullified if the adjustment would result in an execution price higher (for buy transactions) or lower (for sell transactions) than the Customer's limit price on the stock-option order, and the Exchange will attempt to nullify the stock leg. Whenever a stock trading venue nullifies the stock leg of a stock-option order or whenever the stock leg cannot be executed, the Exchange will nullify the option leg upon request of one of the parties to the transaction or in accordance with paragraph (c)(3).

    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the Exchange's Web site (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

    A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose

    The Exchange proposes to amend C2 Rule 6.15 to add Interpretation and Policy .07. This filing is based on a proposal recently submitted by Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (“CBOE”) and approved by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”).5

    5See Securities Exchange Act Release 80040 (February 14, 2017), 82 FR 11248 (February 21, 2017) (Order Approving SR-CBOE-2016-088).

    In 2015, the Exchange and other options exchanges adopted a new, harmonized rule related to the adjustment and nullification of erroneous options transactions, including a specific provision related to coordination in connection with large-scale events involving erroneous options transactions.6 The Exchange believes that the changes the options exchanges implemented with the new, harmonized rule have led to increased transparency and finality with respect to the adjustment and nullification of erroneous options transactions. However, as part of the initial initiative, the Exchange and other options exchanges deferred a few specific matters for further discussion.

    6See Securities Exchange Act Release 74900 (May 7, 2015), 80 FR 27392 (May 13, 2015) (SR-C2-2015-012) (the “Initial Filing”).

    Specifically, the options exchanges have been working together to identify ways to improve the process related to the adjustment and nullification of erroneous options transactions as it relates to complex orders 7 and stock-option orders. The goal of the process that the options exchanges have undertaken is to further harmonize rules related to the adjustment and nullification of erroneous options transactions. As described below, the Exchange believes that the changes the options exchanges and the Exchange have agreed to propose will provide transparency and finality with respect to the adjustment and nullification of erroneous complex order and stock-option order transactions. Particularly, the proposed changes seek to achieve consistent results for participants across U.S. options exchanges while maintaining a fair and orderly market, protecting investors and protecting the public interest.

    7See Rule 6.13(a) (defining complex orders and stock-option orders).

    The Proposed Rule is the culmination of this coordinated effort and reflects discussions by the options exchanges whereby the exchanges that offer complex orders and/or stock-option orders will universally adopt new provisions that the options exchanges collectively believe will improve the handling of erroneous options transactions that result from the execution of complex orders and stock-option orders.8

    8 An exchange that does not offer complex orders and/or stock-option orders will not adopt these new provisions until such time as the exchange offers complex orders and/or stock-option orders.

    The Exchange believes that the Proposed Rule supports an approach consistent with long-standing principles in the options industry under which the general policy is to adjust rather than nullify transactions. The Exchange acknowledges that adjustment of transactions is contrary to the operation of analogous rules applicable to the equities markets, where erroneous transactions are typically nullified rather than adjusted and where there is no distinction between the types of market participants involved in a transaction. For the reasons set forth below, the Exchange believes that the distinctions in market structure between equities and options markets continue to support these distinctions between the rules for handling obvious errors in the equities and options markets.

    Various general structural differences between the options and equities markets point toward the need for a different balancing of risks for options market participants and are reflected in this proposal. Option pricing is formulaic and is tied to the price of the underlying stock, the volatility of the underlying security and other factors. Because options market participants can generally create new open interest in response to trading demand, as new open interest is created, correlated trades in the underlying or related series are generally also executed to hedge a market participant's risk. This pairing of open interest with hedging interest differentiates the options market specifically (and the derivatives markets broadly) from the cash equities markets. In turn, the Exchange believes that the hedging transactions engaged in by market participants necessitates protection of transactions through adjustments rather than nullifications when possible and otherwise appropriate.

    The options markets are also quote driven markets dependent on liquidity providers to an even greater extent than equities markets. In contrast to the approximately 7,000 different securities traded in the U.S. equities markets each day, there are more than 500,000 unique, regularly quoted option series. Given this breadth in options series the options markets are more dependent on liquidity providers than equities markets; such liquidity is provided most commonly by registered market makers but also by other professional traders. With the number of instruments in which registered market makers must quote and the risk attendant with quoting so many products simultaneously, the Exchange believes that those liquidity providers should be afforded a greater level of protection. In particular, the Exchange believes that liquidity providers should be allowed protection of their trades given the fact that they typically engage in hedging activity to protect them from significant financial risk to encourage continued liquidity provision and maintenance of the quote-driven options markets.

    In addition to the factors described above, there are other fundamental differences between options and equities markets which lend themselves to different treatment of different classes of participants that are reflected in this proposal. For example, there is no trade reporting facility in the options markets. Thus, all transactions must occur on an options exchange. This leads to significantly greater retail customer participation directly on exchanges than in the equities markets, where a significant amount of retail customer participation never reaches the Exchange but is instead executed in off-exchange venues such as alternative trading systems, broker-dealer market making desks and internalizers. In turn, because of such direct retail customer participation, the exchanges have taken steps to afford those retail customers—generally Priority Customers—more favorable treatment in some circumstances.

    Complex Orders and Stock-Option Orders

    As more fully described below, the Proposed Rule applies much of the Current Rule to complex orders and stock-option orders.9 The Proposed Rule deviates from the Current Rule only to account for the unique qualities of complex orders and stock-option orders. The Proposed Rule reflects the fact that complex orders can execute against other complex orders or can execute against individual simple orders in the leg markets. When a complex order executes against the leg markets there may be different counterparties on each leg of the complex order, and not every leg will necessarily be executed at an erroneous price. With regards to stock-option orders, the Proposed Rule reflects the fact that stock-option orders contain a stock component that is executed on a stock trading venue, and the Exchange may not be able to ensure that the stock trading venue will adjust or nullify the stock execution in the event of an obvious or catastrophic error. In order to apply the Current Rule and account for the unique characteristics of complex orders and stock-option orders, proposed Interpretation and Policy .07 is split into three parts—paragraphs (a), (b), and (c).

    9 In order for a complex order or stock-option order to qualify as an obvious or catastrophic error at least one of the legs must itself qualify as an obvious or catastrophic error under the Current Rule. See Proposed Rule .07(a)-(c).

    First, proposed Interpretation and Policy .07(a) governs the review of complex orders that are executed against individual legs (as opposed to a complex order that executes against another complex order).10 Proposed Rule 6.15.07(a) provides:

    10 The leg market consists of quotes and/or orders in single options series. A complex order may be received by the Exchange electronically, and the legs of the complex order may have different counterparties. For example, Market-Maker 1 may be quoting in ABC calls and Market-Maker 2 may be quoting in ABC puts. A complex order to buy the ABC calls and puts may execute against the quotes of Market-Maker 1 and Market-Maker 2.

    If a complex order executes against individual legs and at least one of the legs qualifies as an Obvious Error under paragraph (c)(1) or a Catastrophic Error under paragraph (d)(1), then the leg(s) that is an Obvious or Catastrophic Error will be adjusted in accordance with paragraphs (c)(4)(A) or (d)(3), respectively, regardless of whether one of the parties is a Customer. However, any Customer order subject to this paragraph (a) will be nullified if the adjustment would result in an execution price higher (for buy transactions) or lower (for sell transactions) than the Customer's limit price on the complex order or individual leg(s). If any leg of a complex order is nullified, the entire transaction is nullified.

    As previously noted, at least one of the legs of the complex order must qualify as an obvious or catastrophic error under the Current Rule in order for the complex order to receive obvious or catastrophic error relief. Thus, when the Exchange is notified (within the timeframes set forth in paragraph (c)(2) or (d)(2)) of a complex order that is a possible obvious error or catastrophic error, the Exchange will first review the individual legs of the complex order to determine if one or more legs qualify as an obvious or catastrophic error.11 If no leg qualifies as an obvious or catastrophic error, the transaction stands—no adjustment and no nullification.

    11 Because a complex order can execute against the leg market, the Exchange may also be notified of a possible obvious or catastrophic error by a counterparty that received an execution in an individual options series. If upon review of a potential obvious error the Exchange determines an individual options series was executed against the leg of a complex order or stock-option order, proposed Rule 6.15.07 will govern.

    Reviewing the legs to determine whether one or more legs qualify as an obvious or catastrophic error requires the Exchange to follow the Current Rule. In accordance with paragraphs (c)(1) and (d)(1) of the Current Rule, the Exchange compares the execution price of each individual leg to the Theoretical Price of each leg (as determined by paragraph (b) of the Current Rule). If the execution price of an individual leg is higher or lower than the Theoretical Price for the series by an amount equal to at least the amount shown in the obvious error table in paragraph (c)(1) of the Current rule or the catastrophic error table in paragraph (d)(1) of the Current Rule, the individual leg qualifies as an obvious or catastrophic error, and the Exchange will take steps to adjust or nullify the transaction.12

    12 Only the execution price on the leg (or legs) that qualifies as an obvious or catastrophic error pursuant to any portion of Proposed Rule 6.15.07 will be adjusted. The execution price of a leg (or legs) that does not qualify as an obvious or catastrophic error will not be adjusted.

    To illustrate, consider a Customer submits a complex order to the Exchange consisting of leg 1 and leg 2—Leg 1 is to buy 100 ABC calls and leg 2 is to sell 100 ABC puts. Also, consider that Market-Maker 1 is quoting the ABC calls $1.00-1.20 and Market-Maker 2 is quoting the ABC puts $2.00-2.20. If the complex order executes against the quotes of Market-Makers 1 and 2, the Customer buys the ABC calls for $1.20 and sells the ABC puts for $2.00. As with the obvious/catastrophic error reviews for simple orders, the execution price of leg 1 is compared to the Theoretical Price 13 of Leg 1 in order to determine if Leg 1 is an obvious error under paragraph (c)(1) of the Current Rule or a catastrophic error under paragraph (d)(1) of the Current Rule. The same goes for Leg 2. The execution price of Leg 2 is compared to the Theoretical Price of Leg 2. If it is determined that one or both of the legs are an obvious or catastrophic error, then the leg (or legs) that is an obvious or catastrophic error will be adjusted in accordance with paragraphs (c)(4)(A) or (d)(3) of the Current Rule, regardless of whether one of the parties is a Customer.14 Although a single-legged execution that is deemed to be an obvious error under the Current Rule is nullified whenever a Customer is involved in the transaction, the Exchange believes adjusting execution prices is generally better for the marketplace than nullifying executions because liquidity providers often execute hedging transactions to offset options positions. When an options transaction is nullified the hedging position can adversely affect the liquidity provider. With regards to complex orders that execute against individual legs, the additional rationale for adjusting erroneous execution prices when possible is the fact that the counterparty on a leg that is not executed at an obvious or catastrophic error price cannot look at the execution price to determine whether the execution may later be nullified (as opposed to the counterparty on single-legged order that is executed at an obvious error or catastrophic error price).

    13See Rule 6.15(b) (defining the manner in which Theoretical Price is determined).

    14See Rule 6.15(a)(1) (defining Customer for purposes of Rule 6.15 as not including a broker-dealer, Professional Customer, or Voluntary Professional Customer).

    Paragraph (c)(4)(A) of the Current Rule mandates that if it is determined that an obvious error has occurred, the execution price of the transaction will be adjusted pursuant to the table set forth in (c)(4)(A). Although for simple orders paragraph (c)(4)(A) is only applicable when no party to the transaction is a Customer, for the purposes of complex orders paragraph (a) of Interpretation and Policy .07 will supersede that limitation; therefore, if it is determined that a leg (or legs) of a complex order is an obvious error, the leg (or legs) will be adjusted pursuant to (c)(4)(A), regardless of whether a party to the transaction is a Customer. The Size Adjustment Modifier defined in subparagraph (a)(4) will similarly apply (regardless of whether a Customer is on the transaction) by virtue of the application of paragraph (c)(4)(A).15 The Exchange notes that adjusting all market participants is not unique or novel. When the Exchange determines that a simple order execution is a Catastrophic Error pursuant to the Current Rule, paragraph (d)(3) already provides for adjusting the execution price for all market participants, including Customers.

    15See Rule 6.15(c)(4)(A) (stating that any non-Customer Obvious Error exceeding 50 contracts will be subject to the Size Adjustment Modifier defined in sub-paragraph (a)(4)). The Size Adjustment Modifier may also apply to the option leg of a stock-option order that is adjusted pursuant to Proposed Rule 6.15.07(c).

    Furthermore, as with the Current Rule, Proposed Rule 6.15.07(a) provides protection for Customer orders, stating that where at least one party to a complex order transaction is a Customer, the transaction will be nullified if adjustment would result in an execution price higher (for buy transactions) or lower (for sell transactions) than the Customer's limit price on the complex order or individual leg(s). For example, assume Customer enters a complex order to buy leg 1 and leg 2.

    • Assume the NBBO for leg 1 is $0.20-1.00 and the NBBO for leg 2 is $0.50-1.00 and that these have been the NBBOs since the market opened.

    • A split-second prior to the execution of the complex order a Customer enters a simple order to sell the leg 1 options series at $1.30, and the simple order enters the Exchange's book so that the BBO is $.20-$1.30. The limit price on the simple order is $1.30.

    • The complex order executes leg 1 against the Exchange's best offer of $1.30 and leg 2 at $1.00 for a net execution price of $2.30.

    • However, leg 1 executed on a wide quote (the NBBO for leg 1 was $0.20-1.00 at the time of execution, which is wider than $0.75).16 Leg 2 was not executed on a wide quote (the market for leg 2 was $0.50-1.00); thus, leg 2 execution price stands.

    16See Rule 6.15(b)(3).

    • The Exchange determines that the Theoretical Price for leg 1 is $1.00, which was the best offer prior to the execution. Leg 1 qualifies as an obvious error because the difference between the Theoretical Price ($1.00) and the execution price ($1.30) is larger than $0.25.17

    17See Rule 6.15(c)(1).

    • According to Proposed Rule 6.15.07(a) Customers will also be adjusted in accordance with Rule 6.15(c)(4)(A), which for a buy transaction under $3.00 calls for the Theoretical Price to by adjusted by adding $0.15 18 to the Theoretical Price of $1.00. Thus, adjust execution price for leg 1 would be $1.15.

    18See Rule 6.15(c)(4)(A).

    • However, adjusting the execution price of leg 1 to $1.15 violates the limit price of the Customer's sell order on the simple order book for leg 1, which was $1.30.

    • Thus, the entire complex order transaction will be nullified 19 because the limit price of a Customer's sell order would be violated by the adjustment.20

    19 If any leg of a complex order is nullified, the entire transaction is nullified. See Proposed Rule 6.15.07(a).

    20 The simple order in this example is not an erroneous sell transaction because the execution price was not erroneously low. See Rule 6.15(a)(2).

    As the above example demonstrates, incoming complex orders may execute against resting simple orders in the leg market. If a complex order leg is deemed to be an obvious error, adjusting the execution price of the leg may violate the limit price of the resting order, which will result in nullification if the resting order is for a Customer. In contrast, Interpretation and Policy .02 to Rule 6.15 provides that if an adjustment would result in an execution price that is higher than an erroneous buy transaction or lower than an erroneous sell transaction the execution will not be adjusted or nullified.21 If the adjustment of a complex order would violate the complex order Customer's limit price, the transaction will be nullified.

    21See Rule 6.15.02.

    As previously noted, paragraph (d)(3) of the Current Rule already mandates that if it is determined that a catastrophic error has occurred, the execution price of the transaction will be adjusted pursuant to the table set forth in (d)(3). For purposes of complex orders under Proposed Rule .07(a), if one of the legs of a complex orders is determined to be a Catastrophic Error under paragraph (d)(3), all market participants will be adjusted in accordance with the table set forth in (d)(3). Again, however, where at least one party to a complex order transaction is a Customer, the transaction will be nullified if adjustment would result in an execution price higher (for buy transactions) or lower (for sell transactions) than the Customer's limit price on the complex order or individual leg(s). Again, if any leg of a complex order is nullified, the entire transaction is nullified. Additionally, as is the case today, if an Official determines that a Catastrophic Error has not occurred, the Trading Permit Holder will be subject to a charge of $5,000.22

    22See Rule 6.15(d)(3).

    Other than honoring the limit prices established for Customer orders, the Exchange has proposed to treat Customers and non-Customers the same in the context of the complex orders that trade against the leg market. When complex orders trade against the leg market, it is possible that at least some of the legs will execute at prices that would not be deemed obvious or catastrophic errors, which gives the counterparty in such situations no indication that the execution will later by adjusted or nullified. The Exchange believes that treating Customers and non-Customers the same in this context will provide additional certainty to non-Customers (especially Market-Makers) with respect to their potential exposure and hedging activities, including comfort that even if a transaction is later adjusted, such transaction will not be fully nullified. However, as noted above, under the Proposed Rule where at least one party to the transaction is a Customer, the trade will be nullified if the adjustment would result in an execution price higher (for buy transactions) or lower (for sell transactions) than the Customer's limit price on the complex order or individual leg(s). The Exchange has retained the protection of a Customer's limit price in order to avoid a situation where the adjustment could be to a price that a Customer would not have expected, and market professionals such as non-Customers would be better prepared to recover in such situations. Therefore, adjustment for non-Customers is more appropriate.

    Second, proposed Interpretation and Policy .07(b) governs the review of complex orders that are executed against other complex orders. Proposed Rule 6.15.07(b) provides:

    If a complex order executes against another complex order and at least one of the legs qualifies as an Obvious Error under paragraph (c)(1) or a Catastrophic Error under paragraph (d)(1), then the leg(s) that is an Obvious or Catastrophic Error will be adjusted or busted in accordance with paragraph (c)(4) or (d)(3), respectively, so long as either: (i) The width of the National Spread Market for the complex order strategy just prior to the erroneous transaction was equal to or greater than the amount set forth in the wide quote table of paragraph (b)(3) or (ii) the net execution price of the complex order is higher (lower) than the offer (bid) of the National Spread Market for the complex order strategy just prior to the erroneous transaction by an amount equal to at least the amount shown in the table in paragraph (c)(1). If any leg of a complex order is nullified, the entire transaction is nullified. For purposes of Rule 6.15, the National Spread Market for a complex order strategy is determined by the National Best Bid/Offer of the individual legs of the strategy.

    As described above in relation to Proposed Rule 6.15.07(a), the first step is for the Exchange to review (upon receipt of a timely notification in accordance with paragraphs (c)(2) or (d)(2) of the Current Rule) the individual legs to determine whether a leg or legs qualifies as an obvious or catastrophic error. If no leg qualifies as an obvious or catastrophic error, the transaction stands—no adjustment and no nullification.

    Unlike Proposed Rule 6.15.07(a), the Exchange is also proposing to compare the net execution price of the entire complex order package to the National Spread Market (“NSM”) for the complex order strategy.23 Complex orders are exempt from the order protection rules of the options exchanges.24 Thus, depending on the manner in which the systems of an options exchange are calibrated, a complex order can execute without regard to the prices offered in the complex order books or the leg markets of other options exchanges. In certain situations, reviewing the execution prices of the legs in a vacuum would make the leg appear to be an obvious or catastrophic error, even though the net execution price on the complex order is not an erroneous price. For example, assume the Exchange receives a complex order to buy ABC calls and sell ABC puts.

    23 NSM is the derived net market for a complex order package. See e.g., Rule 6.13.02 (utilizing the term derived net market in the context of complex order strategies). For example, if the NBBO of Leg 1 is $1.00-2.00 and the NBBO of Leg 2 is $5.00-7.00, then the NSM for a complex order to buy Leg 1 and buy Leg 2 is $6.00-9.00.

    24See CBOE Rule 6.81(b)(7). All options exchanges have the same order protection rule. CBOE Rule 6.81 applies to C2 pursuant to Section E of C2 Chapter VI.

    • If the BBO for the ABC calls is $5.50-7.50 and the BBO for ABC puts is $3.00-4.50, then the Exchange's spread market is $1.00-4.50.25

    25 The complex order is to buy ABC calls and sell ABC puts. The Exchange's best offer for ABC puts is $7.50 and Exchange's best bid for is $3.00. If the Customer were to buy the complex order strategy, the Customer would receive a debit of $4.50 (buy ABC calls for $7.50 minus selling ABC puts for $3.00). If the Customer were to sell the complex order strategy the Customer would receive a credit of $1.00 (selling the ABC calls for $5.50 minus buying the ABC puts for $4.50). Thus, the Exchange's spread market is $1.00-4.50.

    • If the NBBO for the ABC calls is $6.00-6.50 and the NBBO for the ABC puts is $3.50-4.00, then the NSM is $2.00-3.00.

    • If the Customer buys the calls at $7.50 and sells the puts at $4.00, the complex order Customer receives a net execution price of $3.00 (debit), which is the expected net execution price as indicated by the NSM offer of $3.00.

    If the exchange were to solely focus on the $7.50 execution price of the ABC calls or the $4.00 execution price of the ABC puts, the execution would qualify as an obvious or catastrophic error because the execution price on the legs was outside the NBBO, even though the net execution price is accurate. Thus, the additional review of the NSM to determine if the complex order was executed at a truly erroneous price is necessary. The same concern is not present when a complex order executes against the leg market under Rule 6.15.07(a) because the Exchange is modifying its system in order to ensure the leg will execute at or within the NBBO of the leg markets.26

    26 The proposed rule change to modify Exchange systems to ensure the legs of a complex order will execute against legs in the simple order market within the NBBO of the simple order market will be in a separate filing.

    In order to incorporate NSM, Rule 6.15.07(b) provides that if the Exchange determines that a leg or legs does qualify as on obvious or catastrophic error, the leg or legs will be adjusted or busted in accordance with paragraph (c)(4) or (d)(3) of the Current Rule, so long as either: (i) The width of the NSM for the complex order strategy just prior to the erroneous transaction was equal to or greater than the amount set forth in the wide quote table of paragraph (b)(3) of the Current Rule or (ii) the net execution price of the complex order is higher (lower) than the offer (bid) of the NSM for the complex order strategy just prior to the erroneous transaction by an amount equal to at least the amount shown in the table in paragraph (c)(1) of the Current Rule.

    For example, assume an individual leg or legs qualifies as an obvious or catastrophic error and the width of the NSM of the complex order strategy just prior to the erroneous transaction is $6.00-9.00. The complex order will qualify to be adjusted or busted in accordance with paragraph (c)(4) of the Current Rule because the wide quote table of paragraph (b)(3) of the Current Rule indicates that the minimum amount is $1.50 for a bid price between $5.00 to $10.00. If the NSM were instead $6.00-7.00 the complex order strategy would not qualify to be adjusted or busted pursuant to .07(b)(i) because the width of the NSM is $1.00, which is less than the required $1.50. However, the execution may still qualify to be adjusted or busted in accordance with paragraph (c)(4) or (d)(3) of the Current Rule pursuant to .07(b)(ii). Focusing on the NSM in this manner will ensure that the obvious/catastrophic error review process focuses on the net execution price instead of the execution prices of the individual legs, which may have execution prices outside of the NBBO of the leg markets.

    Again, assume an individual leg or legs qualifies as an obvious or catastrophic error as described above. If the NSM is $6.00-7.00 (not a wide quote pursuant to the wide quote table in paragraph (b)(3) of the Current Rule) but the execution price of the entire complex order package (i.e., the net execution price) is higher (lower) than the offer (bid) of the NSM for the complex order strategy just prior to the erroneous transaction by an amount equal to at least the amount in the table in paragraph (c)(1) of the Current Rule, then the complex order qualifies to be adjusted or busted in accordance with paragraph (c)(4) or (d)(3) of the Current Rule. For example, if the NSM for the complex order strategy just prior to the erroneous transaction is $6.00-7.00 and the net execution price of the complex order transaction is $7.75, the complex order qualifies to be adjusted or busted in accordance with paragraph (c)(4) of the Current Rule because the execution price of $7.75 is more than $0.50 (i.e., the minimum amount according to the table in paragraph (c)(1) when the price is above $5.00 but less than $10.01) from the NSM offer of $7.00. Focusing on the NSM in this manner will ensure that the obvious/catastrophic error review process focuses on the net execution price instead of the execution prices of the individual legs, which may have execution prices outside of the NBBO of the leg markets.

    Although the Exchange believes adjusting execution prices is generally better for the marketplace than nullifying executions because liquidity providers often execute hedging transactions to offset options positions, the Exchange recognizes that complex orders executing against other complex orders is similar to simple orders executing against other simple orders because both parties are able to review the execution price to determine whether the transaction may have been executed at an erroneous price. Thus, for purposes of complex orders that meet the requirements of Rule 6.15.07(b), the Exchange proposes to apply the Current Rule and adjust or bust obvious errors in accordance with paragraph (c)(4) (as opposed to applying paragraph (c)(4)(A) as is the case under .07(a)) and catastrophic errors in accordance with (d)(3).

    Therefore, for purposes of complex orders under Proposed Rule 6.15.07(b), if one of the legs is determined to be an obvious error under paragraph (c)(1), all Customer transactions will be nullified, unless a Trading Permit Holder (“TPH”) submits 200 or more Customer transactions for review in accordance with (c)(4)(C).27 For purposes of complex orders under Proposed Rule 6.15.07(b), if one of the legs is determined to be a catastrophic error under paragraph (d)(3) and all of the other requirements of Rule 6.15.07(b) are met, all market participants will be adjusted in accordance with the table set forth in (d)(3). Again, however, pursuant to paragraph (d)(3) where at least one party to a complex order transaction is a Customer, the transaction will be nullified if adjustment would result in an execution price higher (for buy transactions) or lower (for sell transactions) than the Customer's limit price on the complex order or individual leg(s). Also, if any leg of a complex order is nullified, the entire transaction is nullified.

    27 Rule 6.15(c)(4)(C) also requires the orders resulting in 200 or more Customer transactions to have been submitted during the course of 2 minutes or less.

    Third, proposed Interpretation and Policy .07(c) governs stock-option orders. Proposed Rule 6.15.07(c) provides:

    If the option leg of a stock-option order qualifies as an Obvious Error under paragraph (c)(1) or a Catastrophic Error under paragraph (d)(1), then the option leg that is an Obvious or Catastrophic Error will be adjusted in accordance with paragraph (c)(4)(A) or (d)(3), respectively, regardless of whether one of the parties is a Customer. However, the option leg of any Customer order subject to this paragraph (c) will be nullified if the adjustment would result in an execution price higher (for buy transactions) or lower (for sell transactions) than the Customer's limit price on the stock-option order, and the Exchange will attempt to nullify the stock leg. Whenever a stock trading venue nullifies the stock leg of a stock-option order or whenever the stock leg cannot be executed, the Exchange will nullify the option leg upon request of one of the parties to the transaction or in accordance with paragraph (c)(3).

    Similar to proposed Interpretation and Policy .07(a), an options leg (or legs) of a stock-option order must qualify as an obvious or catastrophic error under the Current Rule in order for the stock-option order to qualify as an obvious or catastrophic error. Also similar to Proposed Rule 6.15.07(a), if an options leg (or legs) does qualify as an obvious or catastrophic error, the option leg (or legs) will be adjusted in accordance with paragraph (c)(4)(A) or (d)(3), respectively, regardless of whether one of the parties is a Customer. Again, as with Proposed Rule 6.15.07(a), where at least one party to a complex order transaction is a Customer, the Exchange will nullify the option leg and attempt to nullify the stock leg if adjustment would result in an execution price higher (for buy transactions) or lower (for sell transactions) than the Customer's limit price on the complex order or individual leg(s).

    The stock leg of a stock-option order is not executed on the Exchange; rather, the stock leg is sent to a stock trading venue for execution. The Exchange is unaware of a mechanism by which the Exchange can guarantee that the stock leg will be nullified by the stock trading venue in the event of an obvious or catastrophic error on the Exchange. Thus, in the event of the nullification of the option leg pursuant to Proposed Rule 6.15.07(c), the Exchange will attempt to have the stock leg nullified by the stock trading venue by either contacting the stock trading venue or notifying the parties to the transaction that the option leg is being nullified. The party or parties to the transaction may ultimately need to contact the stock trading venue to have the stock portion nullified.

    Finally, the Exchange proposes to provide guidance that whenever the stock trading venue nullifies the stock leg of a stock-option order, the option will be nullified upon request of one of the parties to the transaction or by an Official acting on their own motion in accordance with paragraph (c)(3). There are situations in which buyer and seller agree to trade a stock-option order, but the stock leg cannot be executed. The Exchange proposes to provide guidance that whenever the stock portion of a stock-option order cannot be executed, the Exchange will nullify the option leg upon request of one of the parties to the transaction or on an Official's own motion.

    Implementation Date

    In order to ensure that other options exchanges are able to adopt rules consistent with this proposal and to coordinate the effectiveness of such harmonized rules, the Exchange proposes to delay the operative date of this proposal to April 17, 2017.

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder that are applicable to a national securities exchange, and, in particular, with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.28 Specifically, the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 29 because it would promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of, a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, protect investors and the public interest.

    28 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    29 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    As described above, the Exchange and other options exchanges are seeking to adopt harmonized rules related to the adjustment and nullification of erroneous options transactions. The Exchange believes that the Proposed Rule will provide greater transparency and clarity with respect to the adjustment and nullification of erroneous options transactions. Particularly, the proposed changes seek to achieve consistent results for participants across U.S. options exchanges while maintaining a fair and orderly market, protecting investors and protecting the public interest. Based on the foregoing, the Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 30 in that the Proposed Rule will foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating and facilitating transactions.

    30 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    The Exchange believes the various provisions allowing or dictating adjustment rather than nullification of a trade are necessary given the benefits of adjusting a trade price rather than nullifying the trade completely. Because options trades are used to hedge, or are hedged by, transactions in other markets, including securities and futures, many TPHs, and their customers, would rather adjust prices of executions rather than nullify the transactions and, thus, lose a hedge altogether. As such, the Exchange believes it is in the best interest of investors to allow for price adjustments as well as nullifications.

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposal is unfairly discriminatory, even though it differentiates in many places between Customers and non-Customers. As with the Current Rule, Customers are treated differently, often affording them preferential treatment. This treatment is appropriate in light of the fact that Customers are not necessarily immersed in the day-to-day trading of the markets, are less likely to be watching trading activity in a particular option throughout the day, and may have limited funds in their trading accounts. At the same time, the Exchange reiterates that in the U.S. options markets generally there is significant retail customer participation that occurs directly on (and only on) options exchanges such as the Exchange. Accordingly, differentiating among market participants with respect to the adjustment and nullification of erroneous options transactions is not unfairly discriminatory because it is reasonable and fair to provide Customers with additional protections as compared to non-Customers.

    The Exchange believes that its proposal to adopt the ability to adjust a Customer's execution price when a complex order is deemed to be an Obvious or Catastrophic Error is consistent with the Act. A complex order that executes against individual leg markets may receive an execution price on an individual leg that is not an Obvious or Catastrophic error but another leg of the transaction is an Obvious or Catastrophic Error. In such situations where the complex order is executing against at least one individual or firm that is not aware of the fact that they have executed against a complex order or that the complex order has been executed at an erroneous price, the Exchange believes it is more appropriate to adjust execution prices if possible because the derivative transactions are often hedged with other securities. Allowing adjustments instead of nullifying transactions in these limited situations will help to ensure that market participants are not left with a hedge that has no position to hedge against.

    The Exchange also believes its proposal related to stock-option orders is consistent with the Act. Stock-option orders consist of an option component and a stock component. Due to the fact that the Exchange has no control over the venues on which the stock is executed the proposal focuses on the option component of the stock-option order by adjusting or nullifying the option in accordance with paragraph (c)(4)(A) or (d)(3). Also, nullifying the option component if the stock component cannot be executed ensures that market participants receive the execution for which they bargained. Stock-option orders are negotiated and agreed to as a package; thus, if for any reason the stock portion of a stock-option order cannot ultimately be executed, the parties should not be saddled with an options position sans stock.

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    C2 does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Importantly, the Exchange believes the proposal will not impose a burden on intermarket competition but will rather alleviate any burden on competition because it is the result of a collaborative effort by all options exchanges to harmonize and improve the process related to the adjustment and nullification of erroneous options transactions. The Exchange does not believe that the rules applicable to such process is an area where options exchanges should compete, but rather, that all options exchanges should have consistent rules to the extent possible. Particularly where a market participant trades on several different exchanges and an erroneous trade may occur on multiple markets nearly simultaneously, the Exchange believes that a participant should have a consistent experience with respect to the nullification or adjustment of transactions. The Exchange understands that all other options exchanges that trade complex orders and/or stock-option orders intend to file proposals that are substantially similar to this proposal.

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change imposes a burden on intramarket competition because the provisions apply to all market participants equally within each participant category (i.e., Customers and non-Customers). With respect to competition between Customer and non-Customer market participants, the Exchange believes that the Proposed Rule acknowledges competing concerns and tries to strike the appropriate balance between such concerns. For instance, the Exchange believes that protection of Customers is important due to their direct participation in the options markets as well as the fact that they are not, by definition, market professionals. At the same time, the Exchange believes due to the quote-driven nature of the options markets, the importance of liquidity provision in such markets and the risk that liquidity providers bear when quoting a large breadth of products that are derivative of underlying securities, that the protection of liquidity providers and the practice of adjusting transactions rather than nullifying them is of critical importance. As described above, the Exchange will apply specific and objective criteria to determine whether an erroneous transaction has occurred and, if so, how to adjust or nullify a transaction.

    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the proposed rule change.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 31 and subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.32

    31 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).

    32 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6) requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act 33 normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 34 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal may become operative immediately upon filing. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest as it will allow the Exchange to implement the proposed rule change by April 17, 2017 in coordination with the other options exchanges. Accordingly, the Commission hereby waives the operative delay and designates the proposal operative upon filing.35

    33 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

    34 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).

    35 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (i) Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

    IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Comments

    • Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

    • Send an email to [email protected] Please include File Number SR-C2-2017-011 on the subject line.

    Paper Comments

    • Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-C2-2017-011. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-C2-2017-011, and should be submitted on or before April 18, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.36

    36 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06055 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-80296; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2017-07] Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment Nos. 1, 3, and 4 Thereto, To List and Trade Shares of the ProShares UltraPro 3x Crude Oil ETF and ProShares UltraPro 3x Short Crude Oil ETF Under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.200 March 22, 2017. I. Introduction

    On January 26, 2017, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the “Exchange” or “NYSE Arca”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act” or “Exchange Act”) 2 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,3 a proposed rule change to list and trade shares (“Shares”) of the ProShares UltraPro 3x Crude Oil ETF and ProShares UltraPro 3x Short Crude Oil ETF (each a “Fund,” and collectively the “Funds”) under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.200. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register on February 7, 2017.4 On March 9, 2017, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change.5 On March 10, 2017, the Exchange filed and withdrew Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change,6 and filed Amendment No. 3 to the proposed rule change.7 On March 20, 2017, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 4 to the proposed rule change.8 The Commission received no comments on the proposed rule change. This order approves the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment Nos. 1, 3, and 4 thereto.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 15 U.S.C. 78a.

    3 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    4See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79917 (February 1, 2017), 82 FR 9620.

    5 In Amendment No. 1, which amended and replaced the proposed rule change in its entirety, the Exchange: (1) Supplemented its description of the Funds' investments in over-the-counter (“OTC”) transactions; (2) provided clarification and additional specificity regarding the holding and settlement of futures contracts and options on such futures; (3) provided additional details regarding the calculation of the Bloomberg WTI Crude Oil SubindexSM; (4) provided information regarding the calculation and dissemination of the Indicative Fund Value of the Funds; (5) provided additional clarification regarding the difference between the net asset value calculation time and the creation and redemption cut-off time for the Funds; (6) clarified the information that will be made available on the Funds' Web site regarding the Funds and their portfolio holdings; (7) supplemented its description of the Exchange's surveillance procedures; (8) represented that the applicability of Exchange listing rules specified in the proposed rule change shall constitute continued listing requirements for listing the Shares on the Exchange; (9) clarified the type of information that will be available in the Information Bulletin regarding the Funds' portfolio holdings; and (10) made other technical amendments. Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change is available at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nysearca-2017-07/nysearca201707-1630210-137426.pdf. Amendment No. 1 is not subject to notice and comment because it is a technical amendment that does not materially alter the substance of the proposed rule change or raise any novel regulatory issues.

    6 Notice of the Exchange's withdrawal of Amendment No. 2 is available at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nysearca-2017-07/nysearca201707-1644096-147899.pdf.

    7 In Amendment No. 3, which partially amended the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1 thereto, the Exchange added a representation regarding the dissemination of the value of the Bloomberg WTI Crude Oil SubindexSM. Amendment No. 3 to the proposed rule change is available at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nysearca-2017-07/nysearca201707-1644096-147899.pdf. Amendment No. 3 is not subject to notice and comment because it is a technical amendment that does not materially alter the substance of the proposed rule change or raise any novel regulatory issues.

    8 In Amendment No. 4, which partially amended the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment Nos. 1 and 3 thereto, the Exchange: (1) Clarified its use of the term “Futures Contracts” and (2) provided additional clarification regarding the calculation of the Indicative Fund Value. Amendment No. 4 to the proposed rule change is available at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nysearca-2017-07/nysearca201707-1657390-148729.pdf. Amendment No. 4 is not subject to notice and comment because it is a technical amendment that does not materially alter the substance of the proposed rule change or raise any novel regulatory issues.

    II. Exchange's Description of the Proposal  9

    9 A more detailed description of the Funds, the Shares, and the Benchmark, as well as investment risks, creation and redemption procedures, net asset value (“NAV”) calculation, availability of values and other information regarding the Funds' portfolio holdings, and fees, among other things, is included in the Registration Statement, as well as Amendment Nos. 1, 3, and 4, as applicable. See infra note 11, and supra notes 5, 7, and 8, respectively.

    The Exchange proposes to list and trade the Shares under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.200, Commentary .02, which governs the listing and trading of Trust Issued Receipts.10 Each Fund is a series of the ProShares Trust II (“Trust”), a Delaware statutory trust.11 The Trust and the Funds are managed and controlled by ProShare Capital Management LLC (“ProShare Capital”). ProShare Capital is registered as a commodity pool operator with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and is a member of the National Futures Association. Brown Brothers Harriman & Co. will be the custodian, registrar, and transfer agent, and administrator for the Funds. SEI Investments Distribution Co. serves as distributor for the Funds.

    10 Commentary .02 to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.200 applies to Trust Issued Receipts that invest in “Financial Instruments.” The term “Financial Instruments,” as defined in Commentary .02(b)(4) to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.200, means any combination of investments, including cash; securities; options on securities and indices; futures contracts; options on futures contracts; forward contracts; equity caps, collars, and floors; and swap agreements.

    11 The Trust is registered under the Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77a) (“Securities Act”). On December 9, 2016, the Trust filed with the Commission a registration statement on Form S-1 under the Securities Act relating to the Funds (File No. 333-214904) (“Registration Statement”). The description of the operation of the Trust and the Funds herein is based, in part, on the Registration Statement.

    Overview of the Funds

    The investment objective of the ProShares UltraPro 3x Crude Oil ETF is to seek, on a daily basis,12 investment results that correspond (before fees and expenses) to three times (3×) the performance of the Bloomberg WTI Crude Oil SubindexSM (“Benchmark”).13 The investment objective of the ProShares UltraPro 3x Short Crude Oil ETF is to seek, on a daily basis, investment results that correspond (before fees and expenses) to three times (3×) the inverse of the performance of the Benchmark. The Benchmark is intended to reflect the performance of crude oil as measured by the price of futures contracts of West Texas Intermediate sweet, light crude oil listed on the New York Mercantile Exchange (“NYMEX”), including the impact of rolling, without regard to income earned on cash positions.

    12 The Fund does not seek to achieve its investment objective over a period greater than a single trading day. The Exchange states that the return of a Fund for a period longer than a single trading day is the result of its return for each day compounded over the period and thus will usually differ from a Fund's multiple times the return of the Benchmark for the same period. See Amendment No. 1, supra note 5, at 5.

    13 According to the Exchange, the Bloomberg WTI Crude Oil SubindexSM is a “rolling index,” which means that the Index performance includes the impact of closing out futures contracts that are nearing expiration and replacing them with futures contracts with later expirations. The Exchange states that this process is commonly referred to as “rolling.” See id. at 5 n.6.

    In seeking to achieve the Funds' investment objectives, ProShare Capital will utilize a mathematical approach to determine the type, quantity and mix of investment positions that ProShare Capital believes, in combination, should produce daily returns consistent with the Funds' respective objectives. ProShare Capital will rely on a pre-determined model to generate orders that result in repositioning the Funds' investments in accordance with their respective investment objectives.

    Investments of the Funds

    Each Fund will seek to achieve its respective investment objective by investing, under normal market conditions,14 substantially all of its assets in futures contracts for West Texas Intermediate sweet, light crude oil listed on the NYMEX, ICE Futures U.S. or other U.S. exchanges (“Futures”) and listed options on such contracts (“Options” and, together with Futures, “Futures Contracts”). The Funds will not invest directly in oil. A Fund's investments in Futures Contracts will be used to produce economically “leveraged” or “inverse leveraged” investment in a manner consistent with the respective Fund's investment objective.

    14 The term “normal market conditions” includes, but is not limited to, the absence of trading halts in the applicable financial markets generally; operational issues (e.g., systems failure) causing dissemination of inaccurate market information; or force majeure type events such as natural or manmade disaster, act of God, armed conflict, act of terrorism, riot or labor disruption or any similar intervening circumstance. See id. at 6 n.9.

    In the event position, price or accountability limits are reached with respect to Futures Contracts,15 each Fund may obtain exposure to the Benchmark through investments in swap agreements and forward contracts referencing such Benchmark (“Financial Instruments”). To the extent that a Fund invests in Financial Instruments, it would first make use of exchange-traded Financial Instruments, if available. If an investment in exchange-traded Financial Instruments is unavailable, then a Fund would invest in Financial Instruments that clear through derivatives clearing organizations that satisfy the Trust's criteria, if available. If an investment in cleared Financial Instruments is unavailable, then a Fund would invest in other Financial Instruments, including uncleared Financial Instruments in the OTC market. The Funds may also invest in Financial Instruments if the market for a specific Futures Contract experiences emergencies (e.g., natural disaster, terrorist attack or an act of God) or disruptions (e.g., a trading halt) that prevent or make it impractical for a Fund to obtain the appropriate amount of investment exposure using Futures Contracts.

    15 Designated contract markets, such as the NYMEX and ICE Futures U.S., have established accountability levels and position limits on the maximum net long or net short Futures Contracts in commodity interests that any person or group of persons under common trading control (other than as a hedge, which an investment by a Fund is not) may hold, own or control. These levels and position limits apply to the Futures Contracts that each Fund would invest in to meet its investment objective. In addition to accountability levels and position limits, NYMEX and ICE Futures U.S. also set price fluctuation limits on Futures Contracts. The price fluctuation limit establishes the amount that the price of Futures may vary either up or down from the previous day's settlement price. Options do not have individual price limits but rather are linked to the price limit of Futures. See id. at 6 n.10.

    Although each Fund, under normal market conditions, will invest substantially all of its assets in Futures Contracts, each Fund will also hold cash or cash equivalents, such as U.S. Treasury securities or other high credit quality, short-term fixed-income or similar securities (such as shares of money market funds and collateralized repurchase agreements) pending investment in Futures Contracts or Financial Instruments or as collateral for the Funds' investments.

    The Exchange represents that, to the extent a Fund enters into swap agreements and other OTC transactions, it will do so only with large, established and well capitalized financial institutions that meet the Sponsor's credit quality standards and monitoring policies. The Exchange states that each Fund will use various techniques to minimize credit risk including early termination or reset and payment, using different counterparties and limiting the net amount due from any individual counterparty.16

    16See id. at 7.

    The Funds do not intend to hold Futures 17 through expiration, but instead intend to “roll” or close their respective positions before expiration. When the market for these contracts is such that the prices are higher in the more distant delivery months than in the nearer delivery months, the sale during the course of the “rolling process” of the more nearby contract would take place at a price that is lower than the price of the more distant contract.18

    17 The Exchange states that out-of-the-money Options will be held to expiration and will expire worthless. According to the Exchange, Funds intend to hold in-the-money options to expiration, which would occur before the expiration of Futures. In-the-money Options are settled through receipt or delivery of Futures. With respect to Futures positions established through the Options settlement procedure, the Funds intend to close such positions by entering into simultaneous offsetting Futures positions. The effects of contango and backwardation on the price of Futures will impact the price of Options to the same degree of any change in the price of the underlying Futures. See id. at 7 n.11.

    18 The Exchange states that this pattern of higher futures prices for longer expiration Futures is referred to as “contango.” Alternatively, when the market for these contracts is such that the prices are higher in the nearer months than in the more distant months, the sale during the course of the “rolling process” of the more nearby contract would take place at a price that is higher than the price of the more distant contract. This pattern of higher futures prices for shorter expiration Futures is referred to as “backwardation.” According to the Exchange, the presence of contango in certain Futures at the time of rolling could adversely affect a Fund with long positions, and positively affect a Fund with short positions. Similarly, the presence of backwardation in certain Futures at the time of rolling such contracts could adversely affect a Fund with short positions and positively affect a Fund with long positions. See id. at 7.

    The Exchange states that the Funds do not expect to have exposure to Futures Contracts and Financial Instruments greater than three times (3x) the Funds' net assets. Thus, the maximum margin held at a future commission merchant would not exceed three times the margin requirement for either Fund.19 The Exchange represents that not more than 10% of the net assets of a Fund in the aggregate invested in Futures Contracts shall consist of Futures Contracts whose principal market is not a member of the Intermarket Surveillance Group (“ISG”) or is a market with which the Exchange does not have a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement (“CSSA”).20

    19See id.

    20See id. at 14.

    III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the Exchange's proposal to list and trade the Shares is consistent with the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.21 In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment Nos. 1, 3, and 4 thereto, is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Exchange Act,22 which requires, among other things, that the Exchange's rules be designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.

    21 In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).

    22 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    The Commission finds that the proposal to list and trade the Shares on the Exchange is consistent with Section 11A(a)(1)(C)(iii) of the Exchange Act,23 which sets forth Congress' finding that it is in the public interest and appropriate for the protection of investors and the maintenance of fair and orderly markets to assure the availability to brokers, dealers and investors of information with respect to quotations for and transactions in securities. According to the Exchange, quotation and last-sale information regarding the Shares will be disseminated through the facilities of the Consolidated Tape Association (“CTA”). Quotation information for cash equivalents, OTC swaps and forward contracts may be obtained from brokers and dealers who make markets in such instruments. Quotation information for exchange-traded swaps will be available from the applicable exchange and major market vendors. The intraday, closing prices, and settlement prices of the Futures Contracts will be readily available from the applicable futures exchange Web sites, automated quotation systems, published or other public sources, or major market data vendors. Complete real-time data for the Futures Contracts is available by subscription through on-line information services. ICE Futures U.S. and NYMEX also provide delayed futures and options on futures information on current and past trading sessions and market news free of charge on their respective Web sites. The specific contract specifications for Futures Contracts are also available on such Web sites, as well as other financial informational sources. Intra-day price and closing price level information for the Benchmark will be available from major market data vendors.

    23 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1)(C)(iii).

    The Funds' Web site, www.ProShares.com, will display the applicable end of day closing NAV. Each Fund's total portfolio composition will be disclosed each business day that the NYSE Arca is open for trading, on the Funds' Web site. The Funds' Web site will also include a form of the prospectus for the Funds that may be downloaded. The Web site will include the Shares' ticker and CUSIP information, along with additional quantitative information updated on a daily basis for each Fund.24 The Web site disclosure of portfolio holdings will be made daily and will include, as applicable, (i) the name, quantity, value, expiration and strike price of Futures and Options, (ii) the counterparty to and value of swap agreements and forward contracts, and (ii) the aggregate net value of other assets (i.e., Treasury securities, cash equivalents and cash) held in each Fund's portfolio, if applicable.

    24 The Funds' Web site will include (1) daily trading volume, the prior business day's reported NAV and closing price, and a calculation of the premium and discount of the closing price or mid-point of the bid/ask spread at the time of NAV calculation (“Bid/Ask Price”) against the NAV; and (2) data in chart format displaying the frequency distribution of discounts and premiums of the daily closing price or Bid/Ask Price against the NAV, within appropriate ranges, for at least each of the four previous calendar quarters.

    The Benchmark will be disseminated by one or more major market data vendors every 15 seconds during the NYSE Arca Core Trading Session of 9:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time (“E.T.”). The Indicative Fund Value (“IFV”) 25 per Share will be widely disseminated by one or more major market data vendors every 15 seconds during the Exchange's Core Trading Session.26 The Funds will compute their NAVs at 2:30 p.m. E.T., which is the designated closing time of the crude oil futures listed on NYMEX,27 or an earlier time as set forth on www.ProShares.com, if necessitated by the New York Stock Exchange LLC, the Exchange, or other exchange material to the valuation or operation of such Fund closing early. The NAV for the Shares will be disseminated daily to all market participants at the same time.

    25 The IFV will be calculated by using the prior day's closing NAV per Share of a Fund as a base and will be updating throughout the Exchange's Core Trading Session to reflect changes in the approximate aggregate per Share value of the investments held by a Fund based on the most recently available prices for the Fund's investments. According to the Exchange, there may be times when trading in the Shares is occurring during the NYSE Arca Core Trading Session, but trading in Futures is not occurring. This may occur when, for example, a futures exchange and NYSE Arca have different holiday schedules, a futures exchange closes prior to the close of the NYSE Arca Core Trading Session, price fluctuation limits are reached in Futures, or a futures exchange imposes any other suspension or limitation on trading in Futures. In such instances, the IFV would be static or priced at the applicable early cut-off time of the exchange trading the applicable Futures. See Amendment No. 1, supra note 5, at 9; Amendment No. 4, supra note 8.

    26 The Exchange notes that several major market data vendors display and/or make widely available IFVs taken from the CTA or other data feeds. See Amendment No. 1, supra note 5, at 9 n.13.

    27 The Exchange states that the daily value of the Benchmark is calculated as of 2:30 p.m. E.T. to coincide with the designated closing time. Futures Contracts, however, continue to trade past 2:30 p.m. E.T. and through the end of the NYSE Arca Core Trading Session at 4:00 p.m. E.T. See id. at 8 n.12.

    The Commission further believes that the proposal to list and trade the Shares is reasonably designed to promote fair disclosure of information that may be necessary to price the Shares appropriately and to prevent trading when a reasonable degree of transparency cannot be assured. If the Exchange becomes aware that the NAV with respect to the Shares is not disseminated to all market participants at the same time, it will halt trading in the Shares until such time as the NAV is available to all market participants. Further, the Exchange may halt trading during the day in which an interruption to the dissemination of the IFV or the value of the Benchmark occurs. If the interruption to the dissemination of the IFV or the value of the Benchmark persists past the trading day in which it occurred, the Exchange will halt trading no later than the beginning of the trading day following the interruption. Trading in Shares of a Fund will be halted if the circuit breaker parameters in NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.12 have been reached. Trading also may be halted because of market conditions or for reasons that, in the view of the Exchange, make trading in the Shares inadvisable. The Exchange states that it has a general policy prohibiting the distribution of material, non-public information by its employees.28 Moreover, trading of the Shares will be subject to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.200, Commentary .02(e), which sets forth certain restrictions on Equity Trading Permit (“ETP”) Holders acting as registered Market Makers in Trust Issued Receipts to facilitate surveillance.

    28See id. at 14.

    The Commission notes that the Exchange or the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”), on behalf of the Exchange, or both, will communicate as needed regarding trading in the Shares and certain Futures Contracts with other markets and other entities that are members of the ISG, and the Exchange or FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, or both, may obtain trading information regarding trading in the Shares and certain Futures Contracts from such markets and other entities. In addition, the Exchange may obtain information regarding trading in the Shares and certain Futures Contracts from markets and other entities that are members of ISG or with which the Exchange has in place a CSSA.29 The Exchange is also able to obtain information regarding trading in the Shares, the physical commodities underlying Futures Contracts through ETP Holders, in connection with such ETP Holders' proprietary or customer trades which they effect through ETP Holders on any relevant market. The Exchange can obtain market surveillance information, including customer identity information, with respect to transactions (including transactions in Futures Contracts) occurring on US futures exchanges, which are members of the ISG.

    29 For a list of the current members of ISG, see www.isgportal.org. According to the Exchange, not all components of a Fund may trade on markets that are members of ISG or with which the Exchange has in place a CSSA. See id. at 13 n.18.

    The Exchange deems the Shares to be equity securities, thus rendering trading in the Shares subject to the Exchange's existing rules governing the trading of equity securities. In support of this proposal, the Exchange represented that:

    (1) The Shares will conform to the initial and continued listing criteria under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.200.

    (2) The Exchange has appropriate rules to facilitate transactions in the Shares during all trading sessions.

    (3) Trading in the Shares will be subject to the existing trading surveillances administered by the Exchange, as well as cross-market surveillances administered by FINRA on behalf of the Exchange, which are designed to detect violations of Exchange rules and applicable federal securities laws, and these procedures are adequate to properly monitor Exchange trading of the Shares in all trading sessions and to deter and detect violations of Exchange rules and federal securities laws applicable to trading on the Exchange.

    (4) Prior to the commencement of trading, the Exchange will inform its ETP Holders in an Information Bulletin of the special characteristics and risks associated with trading the Shares. Specifically, the Information Bulletin will discuss the following: (a) The risks involved in trading the Shares during the Early and Late Trading Sessions when an updated IFV will not be calculated or publicly disseminated; (b) the procedures for purchases and redemptions of Shares in Creation Units (and that Shares are not individually redeemable); (c) NYSE Arca Equities Rule 9.2(a), which imposes a duty of due diligence on its ETP Holders to learn the essential facts relating to every customer prior to trading the Shares; (d) how information regarding the IFV is disseminated; (e) how information regarding portfolio holdings is disseminated; (f) the requirement that ETP Holders deliver a prospectus to investors purchasing newly issued Shares prior to or concurrently with the confirmation of a transaction; and (g) trading information.

    (5) For initial and continued listing, each Fund will be in compliance with Rule 10A-3 under the Act,30 as provided by NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.3.

    30 17 CFR 240.10A-3.

    (6) Each Fund will seek to achieve its respective investment objective by investing, under normal market conditions, substantially all of its assets in Futures Contracts.” In the event position, price or accountability limits are reached with respect to Futures Contracts, each Fund may obtain exposure to the Benchmark through investments in Financial Instruments. To the extent that a Fund invests in Financial Instruments, it would first make use of exchange-traded Financial Instruments, if available. If an investment in exchange-traded Financial Instruments is unavailable, then a Fund would invest in Financial Instruments that clear through derivatives clearing organizations that satisfy the Trust's criteria, if available. If an investment in cleared Financial Instruments is unavailable, then a Fund would invest in other Financial Instruments, including uncleared Financial Instruments in the OTC market.

    (7) Not more than 10% of the net assets of a Fund in the aggregate invested in Futures Contracts shall consist of Futures Contracts whose principal market is not a member of the ISG or is a market with which the Exchange does not have a CSSA.

    (8) To the extent a Fund enters into swap agreements and other OTC transactions, it will do so only with large, established and well capitalized financial institutions that meet the Sponsor's credit quality standards and monitoring policies. Each Fund will use various techniques to minimize credit risk including early termination or reset and payment, using different counterparties and limiting the net amount due from any individual counterparty.

    (9) A minimum of 100,000 Shares of each Fund will be outstanding at the commencement of trading on the Exchange.

    The Exchange represents that all statements and representations made in this filing regarding (a) the description of the portfolios of the Funds or Benchmark, (b) limitations on portfolio holdings or the Benchmark, or (c) the applicability of Exchange listing rules specified in this rule filing shall constitute continued listing requirements for listing the Shares on the Exchange. The issuer has represented to the Exchange that it will advise the Exchange of any failure by the Funds to comply with the continued listing requirements, and, pursuant to its obligations under Section 19(g)(1) of the Act, the Exchange will monitor for compliance with the continued listing requirements.31 If a Fund is not in compliance with the applicable listing requirements, the Exchange will commence delisting procedures under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.5(m).

    31 The Commission notes that certain other proposals for the listing and trading of Managed Fund Shares include a representation that the exchange will “surveil” for compliance with the continued listing requirements. See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 77499 (April 1, 2016), 81 FR 20428 (April 7, 2016) (Notice of Filing of Amendment No. 2, and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 2, to List and Trade Shares of the SPDR DoubleLine Short Duration Total Return Tactical ETF of the SSgA Active Trust), available at: http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/bats/2016/34-77499.pdf. In the context of this representation, it is the Commission's view that “monitor” and “surveil” both mean ongoing oversight of the Fund's compliance with the continued listing requirements. Therefore, the Commission does not view “monitor” as a more or less stringent obligation than “surveil” with respect to the continued listing requirements.

    This approval order is based on all of the Exchange's representations and description of the Funds, including those set forth above and in Amendment Nos. 1, 3, and 4. The Commission notes that the Shares must comply with the requirements of NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.200 and Commentary .02 thereto to be listed and traded on the Exchange on an initial and continuing basis.

    For the foregoing reasons, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment Nos. 1, 3, and 4 thereto, is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 32 and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.

    32 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange Act,33 that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSEArca-2017-07), as modified by Amendment Nos. 1, 3, and 4 thereto, be, and it hereby is, approved.

    33 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.34

    34 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06053 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-80300; File No. SR-CTA/CQ-2017-02] Consolidated Tape Association; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of the Twenty-Second Charges Amendment to the Second Restatement of the CTA Plan and the Thirteenth Charges Amendment to the Restated CQ Plan March 23, 2017.

    Pursuant to Section 11A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),1 and Rule 608 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on March 2, 2017, the Consolidated Tape Association (“CTA”) Plan participants (“Participants”) 3 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) a proposal to amend the Second Restatement of the CTA Plan and the Restated Consolidated Quotation (“CQ”) Plan (“Plans”).4 These amendments represent the twenty-second Charges Amendment to the CTA Plan and the thirteenth Charges Amendment to the CQ Plan (“Amendments”). The Amendments seek to amend the Plans' fee schedule as well as the non-display use policy to clarify the applicability on the non-display fee, the device fee, and the access fee.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78k-1.

    2 17 CFR 242.608.

    3The Participants are: BATS Exchange, Inc., BATS-Y Exchange, Inc., Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc., Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc., EDGA Exchange, Inc., EDGX Exchange, Inc., Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc., International Securities Exchange, LLC, Investors' Exchange LLC, NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc., NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc., Nasdaq Stock Market LLC, National Stock Exchange, New York Stock Exchange LLC, NYSE MKT LLC, and NYSE Arca, Inc.

    4See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 10787 (May 10, 1974), 39 FR 17799 (May 20, 1974) (declaring the CTA Plan effective); 15009 (July 28, 1978), 43 FR 34851 (August 7, 1978) (temporarily authorizing the CQ Plan); and 16518 (January 22, 1980), 45 FR 6521 (January 28, 1980) (permanently authorizing the CQ Plan). The most recent restatement of both Plans was in 1995. The CTA Plan, pursuant to which markets collect and disseminate last sale price information for non-NASDAQ listed securities, is a “transaction reporting plan” under Rule 601 under the Act, 17 CFR 242.601, and a “national market system plan” under Rule 608 under the Act, 17 CFR 242.608. The CQ Plan, pursuant to which markets collect and disseminate bid/ask quotation information for listed securities, is a “national market system plan” under Rule 608 under the Act, 17 CFR 242.608.

    The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments from interested persons on the proposed Amendments.

    I. Rule 608(a) A. Purpose of the Amendments 1. Background

    In October 2014, the Participants amended the Plans' fee schedules to establish fees for non-display uses of data and to reduce the device fees assessed on professional subscribers.5 In so doing, the Participants determined that such a change provided an equitable allocation of fees to the industry that would reflect the value of non-display data usage (subject to the non-display fees) versus display data usage (subject to the lower device fees). At that time, non-display use was defined as consisting of accessing, processing, or consuming real-time Network A or Network B quotation information or last sale price information, whether delivered via direct and/or redistributor data feeds, for a purpose other than in support of a data recipient's display or further internal or external distribution. The Participants established three categories of non-display uses of market data:

    5See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73278 (October 1, 2014), 79 FR 60536 (October 7, 2014) (“October 2014 Non-Display Filing”).

    • Category 1 applies when a data recipient makes non-display uses of real-time market data on its own behalf.

    • Category 2 applies when a data recipient makes non-display uses of real-time market data on behalf of its clients.

    • Category 3 applies when a data recipient makes non-display uses of real-time market data for the purpose of internally matching buy and sell orders within an organization.

    Data recipients can be charged for each of the three categories of non-display uses. Category 3 is the only non-display fee that can be charged multiple times; a data recipient would be charged for each ATS, exchange, or ECN operated by the data recipient. In the October 2014 Non-Display Filing, the Participants also provided the following non-exhaustive list of examples of non-display use:

    • Any trading in any asset class;

    • Automated order or quote generation and/or order pegging;

    • Price referencing for algorithmic trading;

    • Price referencing for smart order routing;

    • Operations control programs;

    • Investment analysis;

    • Order verification;

    • Surveillance programs;

    • Risk management;

    • Compliance; and

    • Portfolio valuation.

    The Participants propose to clarify that any use of data that does not make the data visibly available to the data recipient on a device should be considered non-display use. When a data recipient is using data solely for display purposes, the data recipient will only be charged the device fee.6 As a result, the Participants believe it would be beneficial to provide additional clarification regarding the definition of non-display use to resolve any ambiguity.

    6 A data recipient can be charged both the non-display fee and the device fee. For instance, a data recipient may be displaying data on a device and also using data to operate an ATS. In such instances, the data recipient would be charged both a device fee and a non-display fee (the data recipient would also be charged an access fee due to its non-display use, as described below).

    The Participants further propose to clarify that a data recipient is subject to the access fee when the data it is receiving is used for non-display, or can be manipulated and disseminated to other devices even if the data is also displayed on a device. As described below, the Participants are amending the Plans' fee schedules to clarify the applicability of the access fee.

    2. Amended Definition of Non-Display Use

    The Participants are proposing to amend the definition of “Non-Display Use” in footnote eight of the Plans' fee schedules to explicitly state that any use of data that does not make data visibly available to a data recipient on a device is a Non-Display Use. The Participants are proposing to make a parallel amendment to footnote two of the Plans' fee schedules to state that the device fee will only be applicable where the data is visibly available to the data recipient; any other data use on a device will be considered Non-Display Use.7

    7 In addition to the amendments outlined in this transmittal letter, the Participants are making non-substantive edits to correct capitalization in the Plans' fee schedules.

    In the October 2014 Non-Display Filing, the Participants recognized the relative values of non-display versus display data usage. With the proliferation of automated and algorithmic trading, non-display devices consume large amounts of data and are critical to a firm's businesses. The black boxes and application programming interfaces utilized by these firms process data far more quickly, and as a result, the relative value between non-display and display data usage is pronounced. The disparity in value between non-display and display data usage led the Participants to decrease the professional subscriber device charges in the October 2014 Non-Display Filing while establishing the non-display fees. However, if data is used for non-display purposes, but is subject to the device fee and not the non-display fee, such interpretation would disrupt the balance struck by the Participants in setting the fees.

    The Participants believe that amending the language of the fee schedule will create a clear understanding of when the non-display fee is applicable and therefore effectuate the change originally contemplated by the October 2014 Non-Display Filing. To notify data recipients of the amended definition, the Participants will be updating the CTA Market Data Non-Display Use Policy. The CTA Market Data Non-Display Use Policy describes the applicability of the non-display fee to specific uses of real-time Network A and Network B last sale information and quotation information. The CTA Market Data Non-Display Use Policy currently reflects the applicability of the non-display fee as established by the October 2014 Non-Display Filing. The Participants are amending this policy to include the updated definition of Non-Display Use as reflected in the Plans' amended fee schedules. The CTA Market Data Non-Display Use Policy is also being updated to specify that Redistributors that provide market data to their customers and/or data recipients who use the data for Non-Display Use must submit a data feed request to the administrator, and must require that the customers and data recipients of such market data complete the necessary documentation for the data feed request.

    The Participants are also amending footnote two and footnote eight of the Plans' fee schedules to make clear that the Participants reserve the right to make the sole determination as to whether a data recipient's use is subject to the non-display fee or the device fee and, if subject to the non-display fee, the category of such Non-Display Use.

    3. Access Fee Applicability

    The Participants are amending footnote ten of the Plans' fee schedules to clarify when the access fee is applicable. Access fees are charged to those who obtain Network A and Network B data feeds. The Participants are not proposing to modify the current access fees. Instead, the Participants are proposing to clarify in the Plans' fee schedules that the access fee is applicable if: (1) The data recipient uses the data for non-display; or (2) the data recipient receives the data in such a manner that the data can be manipulated and disseminated to one or more devices, display or otherwise, regardless of encryption or instructions from the redistribution vendor regarding who has authorized access to the data.

    As discussed above, the device fee is applicable when data is displayed only. However, if the data is also used for non-display or can be manipulated and disseminated, the data recipient is subject to the access fee. For example, a data recipient may be receiving data to display on a device. In addition to being displayed on the device, if the data recipient is also able to manipulate the data via a calculation to create additional data and distribute the end result data to other users in a display format or for non-display use, that data recipient should also be subject to the access fee. In such case, even if the data recipient is reporting use for display purposes and is subject to the device fee, if the data is being manipulated and disseminated, that data recipient should also be subject to an access fee and any applicable additional device fees or non-display use fee, as may be applicable for that data recipient's use of the data. As with the proposed amendments to the fee schedule described above, this proposed clarification to the access fee is designed to address that the manner by which a data recipient uses the data drives which fees apply.

    B. Governing or Constituent Documents

    Not applicable.

    C. Implementation of the Amendments

    Pursuant to Rule 608(b)(3)(i) under Regulation NMS, the Participants have designated the proposed clarification as establishing or changing fees and are submitting the amendment for immediate effectiveness.

    D. Development and Implementation Phases

    See Item C above.

    E. Analysis of Impact on Competition

    The Amendments proposed herein do not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Additionally, the Participants do not believe that the proposed amendments introduce terms that are unreasonably discriminatory for the purposes of Section 11A(c)(1)(D) of the Act. The Participants have submitted this amendment to simply clarify the applicability of the non-display fees established in the October 2014 Non-Display Filing. The Amendments proposed herein will allow data recipients to understand whether a given use will be subject to the non-display fee, the device fee, or the access fee, or a combination of these fees.

    As explained in the October 2014 Non-Display Filing, the non-display fees were established to comport with the proliferation of the use of data for dark pools and other non-display trading applications. In conjunction with the establishment of non-display fees, the Participants reduced the rates for professional subscriber devices in hopes of fostering the widespread availability of real-time market data. At the same time, the non-display fees allowed those who make non-display uses of data to make appropriate contributions to the costs of collecting, processing, and redistributing the data. The clarification proposed herein maintains the balance struck by the Participants in reducing the device fee while establishing the non-display fees.

    Additionally, the Participants believe that the Amendments will have a positive effect on competition because the Amendments will ensure that different vendors are classifying their customer's usage in the same manner. A vendor would gain a competitive advantage if they were willing to incorrectly classify a customer's use as subject to the lower device fee rather than the non-display fee. By eliminating the ambiguity in the Plans' fee schedules, the Participants believe that all vendors will be subjected to and subject their customers to the similar fees for similar uses of data.

    F. Written Understanding or Agreements Relating to Interpretation of, or Participation in, Plan

    As previously stated, the Participants have amended the CTA Market Data Non-Display Use Policy to implement the proposed Amendments. A copy of the changes to the Non-Display Use Policy is attached to the Amendment.

    G. Approval by Sponsors in Accordance With Plan

    Section XII (b)(iii) of the CTA Plan provides that “[a]ny addition of any charge to . . . the charges set forth in Exhibit E . . . shall be effected by an amendment to this CTA Plan . . . that is approved by affirmative vote of not less than two-thirds of all of the then voting members of CTA. Any such amendment shall be executed on behalf of each Participant that appointed a voting member of CTA who approves such amendment and shall be filed with the SEC.” Further, Section IX(b)(iii) of the CQ Plan provides that “additions, deletions, or modifications to any charges under this CQ Plan shall be effected by an amendment . . . that is approved by affirmative vote of two-thirds of all the members of the Operating Committee.”

    The Participants have executed this Amendment and represent not less than two-thirds of all of the parties to the Plan. That satisfies the Plans' Participant-approval requirements

    H. Description of Operation of Facility Contemplated by the Proposed Amendments

    Not applicable.

    I. Terms and Conditions of Access

    Not applicable.

    J. Method of Determination and Imposition, and Amount of, Fees and Charges

    The Participants believe that the proposed fee is fair and reasonable and provides for an equitable allocation of dues, fees, and other charges among vendors, data recipients and other persons. As previously stated, the Amendments proposed herein simply clarify the amendments to fees set forth in the October 2014 Non-Display Filing and ensure that the relative value of non-display versus display data usage is reflected in the fees charged for such uses.

    The Participants have consulted with members of the industry regarding the proposed fee amendments contained herein.

    K. Method and Frequency of Processor Evaluation

    Not applicable.

    L. Dispute Resolution

    Not applicable.

    II. Rule 601(a) A. Equity Securities for Which Transaction Reports Shall Be Required by the Plan

    Not applicable.

    B. Reporting Requirements

    Not applicable.

    C. Manner of Collecting, Processing, Sequencing, Making Available and Disseminating Last Sale Information

    Not applicable.

    D. Manner of Consolidation

    Not applicable.

    E. Standards and Methods Ensuring Promptness, Accuracy and Completeness of Transaction Reports

    Not applicable

    F. Rules and Procedures Addressed to Fraudulent or Manipulative Dissemination

    Not applicable.

    G. Terms of Access to Transaction Reports

    Not applicable.

    H. Identification of Marketplace of Execution

    Not applicable.

    III. Solicitation of Comments

    The Commission seeks general comments on the Amendments. Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed Amendments are consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Comments

    • Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

    • Send an email to [email protected] Please include File Number SR-CTA/CQ-2017-02 on the subject line.

    Paper Comments

    • Send paper comments in triplicate to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CTA/CQ-2017-02. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the Amendments that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the Amendments between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the Amendments also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the CTA.

    All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CTA/CQ-2017-02 and should be submitted on or before April 18, 2017.

    By the Commission.

    Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06083 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Investment Company Act Release No. 32540; File No. 812-14677] AB Bond Fund, Inc., et al. March 22, 2017. AGENCY:

    Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    Notice of an application for an order pursuant to: (a) Section 6(c) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Act”) granting an exemption from sections 18(f) and 21(b) of the Act; (b) section 12(d)(1)(J) of the Act granting an exemption from section 12(d)(1) of the Act; (c) sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act granting an exemption from sections 17(a)(1), 17(a)(2) and 17(a)(3) of the Act; and (d) section 17(d) of the Act and rule 17d-1 under the Act to permit certain joint arrangements and transactions. Applicants request an order that would permit certain registered open-end management investment companies to participate in a joint lending and borrowing facility.

    Applicants:

    AB Bond Fund, Inc., AB Cap Fund, Inc., AB Core Opportunities Fund, Inc., AB Corporate Shares, AB Discovery Growth Fund, Inc., AB Equity Income Fund, Inc., AB Government Exchange Reserves, AB Fixed-Income Shares, Inc., AB Global Bond Fund, Inc., AB Global Real Estate Investment Fund, Inc., AB Global Risk Allocation Fund, Inc., AB Sustainable Global Thematic, Inc., AB Relative Value Fund, Inc., AB High Income Fund, Inc., AB Institutional Funds, Inc., AB International Growth Fund, Inc., AB Large Cap Growth Fund, Inc., AB Municipal Income Fund, Inc., AB Municipal Income Fund II, AB Trust, AB Unconstrained Bond Fund, Inc., AB Variable Products Series Fund, Inc., Sanford C. Bernstein Fund, Inc., Sanford C. Bernstein Fund II, Inc., Bernstein Fund, Inc., The AB Pooling Portfolios, The AB Portfolios, Alliance California Municipal Income Fund, Inc., Alliance Bernstein Global High Income Fund, Inc., AllianceBernstein National Municipal Income Fund, Inc. and AB Multi-Manager Alternative Fund, each an investment company organized as a Maryland corporation or a Massachusetts business trust and registered under the Act as an open-end or closed-end management investment company,1 and AllianceBernstein L.P. (the “Adviser”), a Delaware limited partnership registered as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940.

    1 The Funds (as defined below) that are closed-end management investment companies will not participate as borrowers in the interfund lending facility.

    Filing Dates:

    The application was filed on July 22, 2016 and amended on January 11, 2017.

    Hearing or Notification of Hearing:

    An order granting the requested relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's Secretary and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on April 17, 2017 and should be accompanied by proof of service on the applicants, in the form of an affidavit, or, for lawyers, a certificate of service. Pursuant to Rule 0-5 under the Act, hearing requests should state the nature of the writer's interest, any facts bearing upon the desirability of a hearing on the matter, the reason for the request, and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request notification by writing to the Commission's Secretary.

    ADDRESSES:

    Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC, 20549-1090; Applicants: Emile D. Wrapp, AllianceBernstein L.P., 1345 Avenue of the Americas, New York, New York 10105 and Paul M. Miller, Seward & Kissel LLP, 901 K Street NW., Suite 800, Washington, DC 20001.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Emerson S. Davis, Senior Counsel, at (202) 551-6868 or Nadya Roytblat, Assistant Chief Counsel, at (202) 551-6823 (Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The following is a summary of the application. The complete application may be obtained via the Commission's Web site by searching for the file number, or an applicant using the Company name box, at http://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or by calling (202) 551-8090.

    Summary of the Application

    1. Applicants request an order that would permit the applicants to participate in an interfund lending facility where each Fund could lend money directly to and borrow money directly from other Funds to cover unanticipated cash shortfalls, such as unanticipated redemptions or trade fails.2 The Funds will not borrow under the facility for leverage purposes and the loans' duration will be no more than 7 days.3

    2 Applicants request that the order apply to the applicants and to any existing or future registered open-end or closed-end management investment company or series thereof for which the Adviser or any successor thereto or an investment adviser controlling, controlled by, or under common control with the Adviser or any successor thereto serves as investment adviser (each a “Fund” and collectively the “Funds” and each such investment adviser an “Adviser”). For purposes of the requested order, “successor” is limited to any entity that results from a reorganization into another jurisdiction or a change in the type of a business organization.

    3 Any Fund, however, will be able to call a loan on one business day's notice.

    2. Applicants anticipate that the proposed facility would provide a borrowing Fund with a source of liquidity at a rate lower than the bank borrowing rate at times when the cash position of the Fund is insufficient to meet temporary cash requirements. In addition, Funds making short-term cash loans directly to other Funds would earn interest at a rate higher than they otherwise could obtain from investing their cash in repurchase agreements or certain other short term money market instruments. Thus, applicants assert that the facility would benefit both borrowing and lending Funds.

    3. Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief will be subject to the terms and conditions stated in the application. Among others, the Adviser, through a designated committee, would administer the facility as a disinterested fiduciary as part of its duties under the investment management and administrative agreements with the Funds and would receive no additional fee as compensation for its services in connection with the administration of the facility. The facility would be subject to oversight and certain approvals by the Funds' Board, including, among others, approval of the interest rate formula and of the method for allocating loans across Funds, as well as review of the process in place to evaluate the liquidity implications for the Funds. A Fund's aggregate outstanding interfund loans will not exceed 15% of its net assets, and the Fund's loans to any one Fund will not exceed 5% of the lending Fund's net assets.4

    4 Under certain circumstances, a borrowing Fund will be required to pledge collateral to secure the loan.

    4. Applicants assert that the facility does not raise the concerns underlying section 12(d)(1) of the Act given that the Funds are part of the same group of investment companies and there will be no duplicative costs or fees to the Funds.5 Applicants also assert that the proposed transactions do not raise the concerns underlying sections 17(a)(1), 17(a)(3), 17(d) and 21(b) of the Act as the Funds would not engage in lending transactions that unfairly benefit insiders or are detrimental to the Funds. Applicants state that the facility will offer both reduced borrowing costs and enhanced returns on loaned funds to all participating Funds and each Fund would have an equal opportunity to borrow and lend on equal terms based on an interest rate formula that is objective and verifiable. With respect to the relief from section 17(a)(2) of the Act, applicants note that any collateral pledged to secure an interfund loan would be subject to the same conditions imposed by any other lender to a Fund that imposes conditions on the quality of or access to collateral for a borrowing (if the lender is another Fund) or the same or better conditions (in any other circumstance).6

    5 Applicants state that the obligation to repay an interfund loan could be deemed to constitute a security for the purposes of sections 17(a)(1) and 12(d)(1) of the Act.

    6 Applicants state that any pledge of securities to secure an interfund loan could constitute a purchase of securities for purposes of section 17(a)(2) of the Act.

    5. Applicants also believe that the limited relief from section 18(f)(1) of the Act that is necessary to implement the facility (because the lending Funds are not banks) is appropriate in light of the conditions and safeguards described in the application and because the open-end Funds would remain subject to the requirement of section 18(f)(1) that all borrowings of the open-end Fund, including combined interfund loans and bank borrowings, have at least 300% asset coverage.

    6. Section 6(c) of the Act permits the Commission to exempt any persons or transactions from any provision of the Act if such exemption is necessary or appropriate in the public interest and consistent with the protection of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the Act. Section 12(d)(1)(J) of the Act provides that the Commission may exempt any person, security, or transaction, or any class or classes of persons, securities, or transactions, from any provision of section 12(d)(1) if the exemption is consistent with the public interest and the protection of investors. Section 17(b) of the Act authorizes the Commission to grant an order permitting a transaction otherwise prohibited by section 17(a) if it finds that (a) the terms of the proposed transaction are fair and reasonable and do not involve overreaching on the part of any person concerned; (b) the proposed transaction is consistent with the policies of each registered investment company involved; and (c) the proposed transaction is consistent with the general purposes of the Act. Rule 17d-1(b) under the Act provides that in passing upon an application filed under the rule, the Commission will consider whether the participation of the registered investment company in a joint enterprise, joint arrangement or profit sharing plan on the basis proposed is consistent with the provisions, policies and purposes of the Act and the extent to which such participation is on a basis different from or less advantageous than that of the other participants.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management, under delegated authority.

    Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06084 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-80297; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2017-06] Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on a Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Listing and Trading of Shares of the Bitcoin Investment Trust Under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.201 March 22, 2017.

    On January 25, 2017, NYSE Arca, Inc. filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 a proposed rule change to list and trade shares of Bitcoin Investment Trust under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.201. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register on February 9, 2017.3 The Commission has received three comment letters on the proposed rule change.4

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    3See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79955 (Jan. 3, 2017), 82 FR 7891.

    4 All comments on the proposed rule change as of March 15, 2017 are available on the Commission's Web site at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nysearca-2017-06/nysearca201706.htm.

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act 5 provides that within 45 days of the publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding, or as to which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change, disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The 45th day after publication of the notice for this proposed rule change is March 26, 2017. The Commission is extending this 45-day time period.

    5 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    The Commission finds it appropriate to designate a longer period within which to take action on the proposed rule change so that it has sufficient time to consider the proposed rule change. Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,6 designates May 10, 2017, as the date by which the Commission shall either approve or disapprove, or institute proceedings to determine whether to disapprove, the proposed rule change (File No. SR-NYSEArca-2017-06).

    6Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.7

    7 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).

    Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-06054 Filed 3-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Investment Company Act Release No. 32568; File No. 812-14397] Spinnaker ETF Trust, et al. March 22, 2017. AGENCY:

    Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    Notice of an application for an order under section 6(c) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “Act”) for an exemption from sections 2(a)(32), 5(a)(1), 22(d), and 22(e) of the Act and rule 22c-1 under the Act, under sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act for an exemption from sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(2) of the Act, and under section 12(d)(1)(J) for an exemption from sections 12(d)(1)(A) and 12(d)(1)(B) of the Act. The requested order would permit (a) actively-managed series of certain open-end management investment companies (“Funds”) to issue shares redeemable in large aggregations only (“Creation Units”); (b) secondary market transactions in Fund shares to occur at negotiated market prices rather than at net asset value (“NAV”); (c) certain Funds to pay redemption proceeds, under certain circumstances, more than seven days after the tender of shares for redemption; (d) certain affiliated persons of a Fund to deposit securities into, and receive securities from, the Fund in connection with the purchase and redemption of Creation Units; (e) certain registered management investment companies and unit investment trusts outside of the same group of investment companies as the Funds (“Funds of Funds”) to acquire shares of the Funds; and (f) certain Funds (“Feeder Funds”) to create and redeem Creation Units in-kind in a master-feeder structure.

    APPLICANTS:

    OBP Capital, LLC (the “Initial Adviser”), a Delaware limited liability company registered as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, Spinnaker ETF Trust (the “Trust”), a Delaware statutory trust that is registered under the Act as an open-end management investment company with multiple series, and Capital Investment Group, Inc. (the “Initial Distributor”), a North Carolina corporation and broker-dealer registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”).

    FILING DATES:

    The application was filed on December 5, 2014, and amended on April 6, 2015, April 10, 2015, January 13, 2017, and February 14, 2017.

    HEARING OR NOTIFICATION OF HEARING:

    An order granting the requested relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's Secretary and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on April 17, 2017, and should be accompanied by proof of service on applicants, in the form of an affidavit, or for lawyers, a certificate of service. Pursuant to rule 0-5 under the Act, hearing requests should state the nature of the writer's interest, any facts bearing upon the desirability of a hearing on the matter, the reason for the request, and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request notification by writing to the Commission's Secretary.

    ADDRESSES:

    Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090; Applicants: the Initial Adviser and the Trust, 116 South Franklin Street, Rocky Mount, NC 27804; and the Initial Distributor, 100 E. Forks Road, Suite 200, Raleigh, NC 27609.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Courtney S. Thornton, Senior Counsel, at (202) 551-6812, or Robert H. Shapiro at (202) 551-6821 (Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The following is a summary of the application. The complete application may be obtained via the Commission's Web site by searching for the file number, or for an applicant using the Company name box, at http://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or by calling (202) 551-8090.

    Summary of the Application

    1. Applicants request an order that would allow Funds to operate as actively-managed exchange traded funds (“ETFs”).1 Fund shares will be purchased and redeemed at their NAV in Creation Units only. All orders to purchase Creation Units and all redemption requests will be placed by or through an “Authorized Participant”, which will have signed a participant agreement with the Distributor. Shares will be listed and traded individually on a national securities exchange, where share prices will be based on the current bid/offer market. Certain Funds may operate as Feeder Funds in a master-feeder structure. Any order granting the requested relief would be subject to the terms and conditions stated in the application.

    1 Applicants request that the order apply to the initial series of the Trust and any future series of the Trust offering exchange-traded shares, as well as other existing or future open-end management companies or existing or future series thereof offering exchange-traded shares (and their respective existing or future Master Funds, as defined below), that will utilize active management investment strategies (collectively, “Future Funds”). Any Future Fund will (a) be advised by the Initial Adviser or an entity controlling, controlled by, or under common control with the Initial Adviser (each, an “Adviser”) and (b) comply with the terms and conditions of the application.

    2. Each Fund will consist of a portfolio of securities and other assets and investment positions (“Portfolio Holdings”). Each Fund will disclose on its Web site the identities and quantities of the Portfolio Holdings that will form the basis for the Fund's calculation of NAV at the end of the day.

    3. Shares will be purchased and redeemed in Creation Units and generally on an in-kind basis. Except where the purchase or redemption will include cash under the limited circumstances specified in the application, purchasers will be required to purchase Creation Units by depositing specified instruments (“Deposit Instruments”), and shareholders redeeming their shares will receive specified instruments (“Redemption Instruments”). The Deposit Instruments and the Redemption Instruments will each correspond pro rata to the positions in the Fund's portfolio (including cash positions) except as specified in the application.

    4. Because shares will not be individually redeemable, applicants request an exemption from section 5(a)(1) and section 2(a)(32) of the Act that would permit the Funds to register as open-end management investment companies and issue shares that are redeemable in Creation Units only.

    5. Applicants also request an exemption from section 22(d) of the Act and rule 22c-1 under the Act as secondary market trading in shares will take place at negotiated prices, not at a current offering price described in a Fund's prospectus, and not at a price based on NAV. Applicants state that (a) secondary market trading in shares does not involve a Fund as a party and will not result in dilution of an investment in shares, and (b) to the extent different prices exist during a given trading day, or from day to day, such variances occur as a result of third-party market forces, such as supply and demand. Therefore, applicants assert that secondary market transactions in shares will not lead to discrimination or preferential treatment among purchasers. Finally, applicants represent that share market prices will be disciplined by arbitrage opportunities, which should prevent shares from trading at a material discount or premium from NAV.

    6. With respect to Funds that hold non-U.S. Portfolio Holdings and that effect creations and redemptions of Creation Units in kind, applicants request relief from the requirement imposed by section 22(e) in order to allow such Funds to pay redemption proceeds within fifteen calendar days following the tender of Creation Units for redemption. Applicants assert that the requested relief would not be inconsistent with the spirit and intent of section 22(e) to prevent unreasonable, undisclosed or unforeseen delays in the actual payment of redemption proceeds.

    7. Applicants request an exemption to permit Funds of Funds to acquire Fund shares beyond the limits of section 12(d)(1)(A) of the Act; and the Funds, and any principal underwriter for the Funds, and/or any broker or dealer registered under the Exchange Act, to sell shares to Funds of Funds beyond the limits of section 12(d)(1)(B) of the Act. The application's terms and conditions are designed to, among other things, help prevent any potential (i) undue influence over a Fund through control or voting power, or in connection with certain services, transactions, and underwritings, (ii) excessive layering of fees, and (iii) overly complex fund structures, which are the concerns underlying the limits in sections 12(d)(1)(A) and (B) of the Act.

    8. Applicants request an exemption from sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(2) of the Act to permit persons that are Affiliated Persons, or Second Tier Affiliates, of the Funds, solely by virtue of certain ownership interests, to effectuate purchases and redemptions in-kind. The deposit procedures for in-kind purchases of Creation Units and the redemption procedures for in-kind redemptions of Creation Units will be the same for all purchases and redemptions and Deposit Instruments and Redemption Instruments will be valued in the same manner as those Portfolio Holdings currently held by the Funds. Applicants also seek relief from the prohibitions on affiliated transactions in section 17(a) to permit a Fund to sell its shares to and redeem its shares from a Fund of Funds, and to engage in the accompanying in-kind transactions with the Fund of Funds.2 The purchase of Creation Units by a Fund of Funds directly from a Fund will be accomplished in accordance with the policies of the Fund of Funds and will be based on the NAVs of the Funds.

    2 The requested relief would apply to direct sales of shares in Creation Units by a Fund to a Fund of Funds and redemptions of those shares. Applicants, moreover, are not seeking relief from section 17(a) for, and the requested relief will not apply to, transactions where a Fund could be deemed an Affiliated Person, or a Second-Tier Affiliate, of a Fund of Funds because an Adviser or an entity controlling, controlled by or under common control with an Adviser provides investment advisory services to that Fund of Funds.

    9. Applicants also request relief to permit a Feeder Fund to acquire shares of another registered investment company managed by the Adviser having substantially the same investment objectives as the Feeder Fund (“Master Fund”) beyond the limitations in section 12(d)(1)(A) and permit the Master Fund, and any principal underwriter for the Master Fund, to sell shares of the Master Fund to the Feeder Fund beyond the limitations in section 12(d)(1)(B).

    10. Section 6(c) of the Act permits the Commission to exem