Federal Register Vol. 82, No.59,

Title: Customer Data Worksheet Request for Business Partner Record Changes.

OMB Control Number: 0560-0265.

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

Abstract: The information collection is necessary to effectively monitor critical producer data changes made in BP at the request of the producer to correct or update their information. The form AD-2047, Customer Data Worksheet Request for Business Partner Record Change, is used to collect the information from the producer to make changes to the information in BP. The necessity to monitor critical producer data changes in the BP database is a direct result of the OMB Circular A-123 Remediation/Corrective Action Plan for County Office Operations which requires effective internal controls to be in place for Federal programs. FSA team was established and reviewed and documented key controls related to all material producer accounts. FSA also included the analysis on a review of BP.

The number of respondents increased by 5,179 to account for additional customers because of new programs that have been implemented since the last OMB approval.

For the following estimated total annual burden on respondents, the formula used to calculate the total burden hours is the estimated average time per response multiplied by the estimated total annual of responses.

Estimated Average Time to Respond: Public reporting burden for collection of this information is estimated to average 0.17 hours per response.

Type of Respondents: FSA, NRCS, and RD customers currently residing in BP.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 56,926.

Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 1.

Estimated Annual Number of Responses: 56,926.

Estimated Average Time per Response: 0.17.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 9,677.

We are requesting comments on all aspects of this information collection to help us to:

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

(2) Evaluate the accuracy of FSA's estimate of burden 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.

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

Description of Information Collection

Title: Disaster Assistance Program (General).

OMB Number: 0560-0170.

Expiration Date of Approval: 07/31/2017.

Type of Request: Extension with a revision.

Abstract: The information collection is necessary for FSA to effectively administer the regulations related to identifying disaster areas for the purpose of making emergency loans. This program is available to qualified and eligible farmers and ranchers who have suffered weather-related physical or production losses or both in such areas. Before emergency loans can become available, the information needs to be collected to determine if the disaster areas meet the criteria of having a qualifying loss in order to be considered as an eligible County.

The total burden hours have been revised to reflect the number of Secretarial requests for natural disaster assistance during the 2016 crop year.

For the following estimated total annual burden on respondents, the formula used to calculate the total burden hours is the estimated average time per response multiplied by the estimated total annual responses.

Estimate of Average Time To Respond: Public reporting burden for collecting information under this notice is estimated to average 0.435 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information.

Respondents: Farmers and ranchers.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 401.

Estimated Average Number of Responses per Respondent: 1.2.

Estimated Total Annual Responses: 492.

Estimated Average Time per Response: 0.435.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 214 hours.

We are requesting comments on all aspects of this information collection to help us to:

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

(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden of the collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

(3) Evaluate the quality, utility and clarity of the information technology; and

(4) Minimize the burden of the information collection on those who respond through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

All comments received in response to this notice, including names and addresses where provided, will be made a matter of public record. Comments will be summarized and included in the request for Office of Management and Budget approval.

The purpose of the meeting is to:

1. Attend a field visit to the Hoosier National Forest to see some fee proposal sites including the Saddle Lake Recreation Area and German Ridge Campground.

2. Review the following fee proposals:

a. Monongahela National Forest fee proposals which include the Lake Sherwood Recreation Area;

b. Hoosier National Forest fee proposals at Saddle Lake Recreation Area and German Ridge Campground;

c. Ottawa National Forest fee proposals Camp Nesbit Organizational Camp, seasonal personal watercraft docking at Black River Harbor, Lake Ottawa Pavilion, Clark Lake Day-Use Buildings, Sylvania Backcountry Campsites, and a day-use pass that covers Black River Harbor Recreation, Lake Ottawa Recreation Area, and the Sylvania Recreation Area; and the

d. White Mountain National Forest fee proposals include the elimination of fees at nine trailheads including, 19—Mile Brook Trailhead, East Pond Trailhead, Greeley Pond Trailhead, Hale Brook Trailhead, Hancock Notch Trailhead, Sugarloaf Trailhead, Downes Brook Trailhead, Oliverian Brook Trailhead and Sawyer Pond Trailhead; increase the cost of a daily recreation pass to $5, an annual pass to $30, and eliminating the weekly and household passes; adding Zealand Picnic Area to the Forest Fee Program; increasing the fees Dolly Copp Pavilion; Russell Colbath Barn; Crocker Pond Campground; 4th Iron Campsites; Black Mountain Cabin; Doublehead Cabin; and Radeke Cabin.

The meeting is open to the public. The agenda will include time for people to make oral statements of three minutes or less at the Friday portion of the meeting starting at 3:00 p.m. Individuals wishing to make an oral statement should request in writing by April 15, 2017, to be scheduled on the agenda. Anyone who would like to bring related matters to the attention of the Recreation RAC may file written statements with the Committee's staff before or after the meeting. Written comments and time requests for time to make oral comments must be sent to Joanna Wilson, Eastern Region Recreation RAC Coordinator, 855 South Skylake Drive, Woodland Hills, Utah 84653; or by email to [email protected].

Meeting Accommodations: If you require reasonable accommodation, please make requests in advance for sign language interpreting, assistive listening devices, or other reasonable accommodation. For access to the facility or proceedings, please contact the person listed in the section titled For Further Information Contact. All reasonable accommodation requests are managed on a case by case basis.

The purpose of the meeting is to:

1. Discuss the broad topic of forest restoration,

2. Discuss how the PAC can develop strategies for continuing restoration work, including in the more specific areas:

a. Prescribed fire/smoke regulations, and

b. habitat restoration and enhancement for big game, and

c. Implementation of the sustainable road system;

3. Engage in specific issues surrounding sustainable recreation, and

4. Discuss the business of the PAC, such as:

a. The Re-chartering process and

b. Membership.

The meeting is open to the public. The agenda will include time for people to make oral statements of three minutes or less. Individuals wishing to make an oral statement should request in writing by April 7, 2017, to be scheduled on the agenda. Anyone who would like to bring related matters to the attention of the committee may file written statements with the committee staff before or after the meeting. Written comments and requests for time to make oral comments must be sent to Beth Peer, Deschutes PAC Coordinator, 63095 Deschutes Market Road, Bend, Oregon, 97701; or by email to [email protected], or via facsimile to 541-383-4755.

Meeting Accommodations: If you are a person requiring reasonable accommodation, please make requests in advance for sign language interpreting, assistive listening devices, or other reasonable accommodation, For access to the facility or proceedings, please contact the person listed in the section titled FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. All reasonable accommodation requests are managed on a case by case basis.

The purpose of the meeting is to update members on the:

1. Forest Plan Revision Science Synthesis,

2. Travel Management Plan status,

3. North Cascades Smokejumper base capital investment, and

4. Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration: Tapash Program update.

The meeting is open to the public. The agenda will include time for people to make oral statements of three minutes or less. Individuals wishing to make an oral statement should request in writing by April 10, 2017, to be scheduled on the agenda. Anyone who would like to bring related matters to the attention of the committee may file written statements with the committee staff before or after the meeting. Written comments and requests for time to make oral comments must be sent to Robin DeMario, PAC Coordinator, 215 Melody Lane, Wenatchee, Washington 98801; by email to [email protected], or via facsimile to 509-664-9286.

Meeting Accommodations: If you are a person requiring reasonable accommodation, please make requests in advance for sign language interpreting, assistive listening devices, or other reasonable accommodation. For access to the facility or proceedings, please contact the person listed in the section titled FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. All reasonable accommodation requests are managed on a case by case basis.

The purpose of the meeting is to discuss the:

1. Secure Rural Schools Program,

2. Title II of the Act, and

3. Project proposal submittals.

The meeting is open to the public. The agenda will include time for people to make oral statements of three minutes or less. Individuals wishing to make an oral statement should request in writing by April 13, 2017, to be scheduled on the agenda. Anyone who would like to bring related matters to the attention of the committee may file written statements with the committee staff before or after the meeting. Written comments and requests for time to make oral comments must be sent to Lisa Hirsch, RAC Coordinator, 2108 Halibut Point Road, Sitka, Alaska 99835; by email to [email protected] or via facsimile to 907-747-4253.

Meeting Accommodations: If you are a person requiring reasonable accommodation, please make requests in advance for sign language interpreting, assistive listening devices, or other reasonable accommodation. For access to the facility or proceedings, please contact the person listed in the section titled FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. All reasonable accommodation requests are managed on a case by case basis.

The purpose of the meeting is to:

1. Report out from Committee work groups,

2. Deliver educational presentations, and

3. Perform administrative tasks.

The teleconference is open to the public. However, the public is strongly encouraged to RSVP prior to the teleconference to ensure all related documents are shared with public meeting participants. The agenda will include time for people to make oral statements of three minutes or less. Individuals wishing to make an oral statement should submit a request in writing by April 9, 2017, to be scheduled on the agenda. Anyone who would like to bring related matters to the attention of the Committee may file written statements with the Committee staff before or after the meeting. Written comments and time requests for oral comments must be sent to Scott Stewart, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Mailstop 1123, Washington, DC 20250; or by email to [email protected]. A summary of the meeting will be posted on the Web site listed above within 21 days after the meeting.

Meeting Accommodations: If you are a person requiring reasonable accommodation, please make requests in advance for sign language interpreting, assistive listening devices or other reasonable accommodation for access to the facility or proceedings by contacting the person listed in the section titled FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. All reasonable accommodation requests are managed on a case by case basis.

The purpose of the meeting is to:

(1) Review Panel Bylaws, Charter, and what it means to be a Federal Advisory Committee,

(2) Evaluate and score the 2017 CFRP grant applications to determine which ones best meet the program objectives,

(3) Develop prioritized 2017 CFRP project funding recommendations for the Secretary,

(4) Develop an agenda and identify members for the 2017 CFRP Sub-Committee for the review of multi-party monitoring reports from completed projects, and

(5) Discuss the proposal review process used by the Panel to identify what went well and what could be improved.

The meeting is open to the public. Panel discussion is limited to Panel members and Forest Service staff. Project proponents may make brief presentations to the Panel summarizing their grant application and respond to questions of clarification from Panel members or Forest Service staff. However, the agenda will include time for people to make oral statements of three minutes or less. Individuals wishing to make an oral statement should submit a request in writing by April 6, 2017, to be scheduled on the agenda. Anyone who would like to bring CFRP grant application review related matters to the attention of the Panel may file written statements with the Panel staff before or after each day of the meeting. Written comments and time requests for oral comments must be sent to the person listed under For Further Information Contact.

A summary of the meeting will be posted on the Web site listed above within 45 days after the meeting.

Meeting Accommodations: If you are a person requiring reasonable accommodation, please make requests in advance for sign language interpreting, assistive listening devices or other reasonable accommodation for access to the facility or proceedings by contacting the person listed in the section titled For Further Information Contact. All reasonable accommodation requests are managed on a case by case basis.

The purpose of the meeting is to:

1. Review project proposals, and

2. Make project recommendations for Title II Funds.

The meeting is open to the public. The agenda will include time for people to make oral statements of three minutes or less. Individuals wishing to make an oral statement should request in writing by April 7, 2017, to be scheduled on the agenda. Anyone who would like to bring related matters to the attention of the committee may file written statements with the committee staff before or after the meeting. Written comments and requests for time to make oral comments must be sent to Virginia Gibbons, RAC Coordinator, Rogue River-Siskiyou NF Supervisor's Office, 3040 Biddle Road, Medford, Oregon 97525; by email to [email protected], or via facsimile to 541-618-2144.

Meeting Accommodations: If you are a person requiring reasonable accommodation, please make requests in advance for sign language interpreting, assistive listening devices, or other reasonable accommodation. For access to the facility or proceedings, please contact the person listed in the section titled FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. All reasonable accommodation requests are managed on a case by case basis.

I. Abstract

During the years preceding the 2020 Census, the Census Bureau will pursue its commitment to reduce the costs of conducting a decennial census while maintaining our commitment to quality. In 2018, the Census Bureau will be performing the 2018 End-to-End Census Test. This last major test before the 2020 Census is designed to (1) test and validate 2020 Census operations, procedures, systems, and field infrastructure to ensure proper integration and conformance with requirements, and (2) produce prototypes of geographic and data products.

The 2018 End-to-End Census Test will encompass operations and systems related to (1) Address Canvassing; (2) Optimizing Self-Response, including contact strategies, questionnaire content, and language support; (3) Update Enumerate, including technical and operational testing; (4) Nonresponse Followup, including technological and operational improvements; and (5) Group Quarters, including technological and operational testing. The operations other than Address Canvassing are referred to collectively as Peak Operations, because they are the enumeration data collection operations of the census. These operations are the focus of this package.

The Address Canvassing operation ((1) from the above), beginning in the summer of 2017, is the first operation in the 2018 End-to-End Census Test and was included in a separate Address Canvassing Operation package due to timing considerations.

New approaches to the design of the 2020 Census are classified into four key innovation areas. These areas have been the subject of Census Bureau testing this decade to identify methodological improvements, technological advances, and possibilities for cost savings over repeating the design of the 2010 Census. One of these innovation areas is Optimizing Self-Response, which is focused on improving methods for increasing the number of people who take advantage of self-response options.

The 2018 End-to-End Census Test is designed to evaluate several strategies to optimize the rate at which the public self-responds to the census, which would reduce costs of the census by decreasing the workload for following up at nonresponding units. Previous Census Bureau tests have resulted in the design of contact strategies, two of which will be in use during this test for the purpose of gathering additional metrics and making comparisons on a number of indicators. Either or both of these strategies may be included in the design of the 2020 Census, depending on a variety of factors.

Internet First is the primary mail contact strategy proposed for the 2020 Census and has been used in Census Bureau research and testing efforts since 2012. (In prior tests, this strategy was called Internet Push.) This strategy includes the mailing of a letter inviting respondents to complete the questionnaire online, two follow-up reminders, and then if necessary, a mailed paper questionnaire.

Internet Choice includes a paper questionnaire in the first mailing, along with an invitation to complete the questionnaire online, providing a choice of Internet or paper response from the beginning of the contact strategy.

In addition, the 2018 End-to-End Census Test provides the Census Bureau with an opportunity to enhance the user experience, performance, and functionality of the Internet self-response instrument compared to prior Census Tests this decade. Improvements including expanded language capabilities will support the goal of optimizing self-response by providing an easy, quick, and safe experience for respondents, and ensure that the resulting response data and paradata provide required information to follow-up and data processing operations.

The Census Bureau plans to study the following in the 2018 End-to-End Census Test:

• Comparing the self-response rates between the Internet First and the Internet Choice panels.

• Comparing item-level response by panel and by mode, including in the Update Enumerate and Group Quarters enumeration operations, both of which will be fielded for the first time this decade.

• Measuring the effects of incorporating additional household contact strategies to encourage self-response, including letter and postcard reminders.

The 2018 End-to-End Census Test will allow the Census Bureau to continue to refine, optimize, and assess the operational procedures and technical design of the Nonresponse Followup (NRFU) operation. The NRFU operation is a field operation for determining housing unit status (occupied, vacant, or delete) and for gathering the enumeration data at addresses for which no self-response was received. This test will build upon the results of previous field tests this decade where the NRFU operation has been conducted. In particular, NRFU is now a fully-automated operation, whereas it was performed using paper materials in the 2010 Census. For this test, the Census Bureau will examine:

• Operational procedures.

○ Testing continued refinements to the field data collection instrument for enumeration, particularly where previous testing has shown potential problems in our question branching or issues with the interview software user interface. The Census Bureau will critically assess navigation within the instrument via debriefing sessions for field enumerators after operations complete.

○ Continuing refinement of our methods for enumerating multi-unit structures, particularly identifying vacant households in multi-units with a minimal number of contact attempts, thereby minimizing respondent burden.

○ Continuing refinement of procedures for interviewing proxy respondents to gather information from hard-to-enumerate households.

○ Continuing refinement of processes used to detect and deter falsification by field enumerators.

○ Continuing evaluation of enumerator training procedures and materials, including both online training modules and classroom training.

○ Integrating a Field Verification assignment into the NRFU workload. The Field Verification cases are intended to verify the existence and location of certain types of self-responses that were received without a preassigned census identification code, called a User ID.

○ Integrating into NRFU the ability to designate an area for an earlier NRFU operation in order to enumerate college and university students living in off-campus housing before the end of the spring semester.

• Technical design.

○ Continuing refinement of the management alerts to identify potentially problematic field behavior in real time.

○ Continuing refinement of the optimization and routing algorithms used to make daily NRFU field assignments.

○ Continuing work to integrate into the Census Bureau's enterprise data collection systems.

The Update Enumerate (UE) operation as planned for the 2020 Census is significantly changed from the UE operation that was used in the 2010 Census at about one percent of all addresses. At root, the UE methodology is designed for areas that require an enumeration methodology other than self-response followed by NRFU. The current design capitalizes on 2020 Census methodological improvements such as Internet Self-Response, automated field operations, and an approach to collect responses without a User ID that is greatly expanded in scale. The 2020 Census UE operation combines address listing methodologies with person enumeration methodologies. UE is conducted mostly in geographic areas that have one or more of the following characteristics:

• Do not have city-style addresses like 123 Main Street.

• Do not receive mail through city-style addresses.

• Receive mail at post office boxes rather than at their physical address.

• Have unique challenges associated with accessibility, such as dirt roads or seasonal access.

• Have recently been affected by natural disasters.

• Have high concentrations of seasonally vacant housing.

The following objectives are being tested for Update Enumerate:

• Integrating listing and enumeration operations and systems.

• Evaluating the impact on cost and quality of the UE contact strategy on enumerator productivity and efficiency.

• Testing refinements to the field data collection instrument for enumeration, especially for atypical situations, such as movers.

• Testing field supervisor to enumerator ratios.

The 2018 End-to-End Census Test will inform Census Bureau technological and operational planning and design for the enumeration of the population residing in Group Quarters (GQs). GQs are living quarters where people who are typically unrelated have group living arrangements and frequently are receiving some type of service. College dormitories and nursing homes are examples of GQs. To date, some small-scale testing has been done to test electronic transmission of GQ's enumeration responses. The 2018 End-to-End Census Test expands on these results to allow the opportunity to evaluate procedures and technologies for conducting GQ enumeration operations. The set of operations planned for GQ enumeration is GQ Advance Contact, Service-Based Enumeration, and, finally, GQ Enumeration. These operations have been used in previous censuses. The GQ Advance Contact is an operation where facility contact and planning data are collected, including the ability of the GQ facility to provide electronic records for the enumeration. Service-Based Enumeration has the objective of counting individuals who will not be enumerated at a living quarter but are receiving some type of service. The GQ Enumeration is the final stage of enumerating individuals residing at the GQ.

• Operational procedures.

○ Testing updated procedures for handling newly discovered GQs during field operations.

○ Continuing testing of the various GQ operations, process flows, estimated staffing levels, supporting processes, and workload estimates.

○ Continuing refinement of procedures for linking paper questionnaire response records collected by multiple enumerators during enumeration at a single GQ.

○ Continuing evaluation and refinement of the optimal enumerator to GQ ratios for multiple GQ types.

○ Testing multiple modes of enumeration.

• Technical design.

○ Testing the use of electronic methodologies to:

Create the initial universe for the GQ Advance Contact.

Conduct In-Office GQ Advance Contact.

Update the GQ frame prior to GQ enumeration.

Accept electronically transmitted response data in multiple formats.

○ Integrating GQ operations with listing and enumeration operations and systems.

The Census Bureau recognizes that OMB is continuing to lead the discussion among federal agencies and other stakeholders on race/ethnicity from the perspective of data collection and dissemination guidance and standards, and that the final determination has not been made on the format of the race/ethnicity question for the 2020 Census. If it is determined that the combined race/ethnicity question format may be used for the 2020 Census (versus the separate race and Hispanic Origin questions used for the 2010 Census), it will be crucial for the Census Bureau to ensure that critical operations are fully prepared to go into production for the 2020 Census using the combined question. Therefore, the 2018 End-to-End Census Test data collection operations will utilize the combined race/ethnicity question version (that includes a Middle Eastern or North African category) to further its analysis and understanding of mode differences for the race/ethnicity responses before deploying the 2020 Census questionnaire.

• Internet Self-Response: Continue testing the combined race/ethnicity question under the further enhancements of the Internet Self-Response instrument for the 2018 End-to-End Census Test in regards to user experience, performance, and functionality; ensure that the resulting response data and paradata meet the requirements of follow-up and data processing operations; and test expanded language capabilities on the instrument, as the introduction of additional language options contributes to additional paths to analyze the paradata and response data.

• Nonresponse Followup: Continue testing the combined race/ethnicity question under the further enhancements of the field enumeration instrument; assess enumerators' experience with the field enumeration instrument and their navigation of the race/ethnicity question within the instrument. Input will be gathered during the post-operation field enumerator debriefing sessions.

• Update Enumerate and Group Quarters: Examine the 2018 End-to-End Census Test results by mode, including Update Enumerate and Group Quarters operations, which will be fielded for the first time this decade.

The 2018 End-to-End Census Test will take place in three sites within the continental United States: Pierce County, Washington; Providence County, Rhode Island; and the Bluefield-Beckley-Oak Hill, West Virginia area. These locations offer particular characteristics that support the Census Bureau's testing goals, including: various types of addresses (such as city-style, rural, and location description-only); population with varying demographics (such as age, race, and language spoken at home); variety of housing types (such as single-units, multi-units, vacant units, GQs, and mobile homes); varied levels of Internet access and usage; various time zones; and challenging environmental conditions (such as weather extremes, rough terrain).

The housing units in the areas selected for inclusion in the 2018 End-to-End Census Test will be contacted by mail and invited to complete their questionnaire via the Internet. Optimizing Self-Response contact methods include follow-on letter and postcard reminders. The Census Bureau will also test strategies for delivering paper questionnaires to households that do not or cannot respond online, as measured by low Internet connectivity or low Internet usage rates.

The Census Bureau will continue to test Non-ID Processing methodology as another strategy for Optimizing Self-Response. A User ID that links to a unique housing unit is on many of the mailed materials, but respondents can also submit a response without using the ID, particularly on the Internet or telephone. Non-ID Processing refers to address matching and geocoding for census responses that lack this preassigned census ID. This processing allows such responses to be linked up with the associated census enumeration data and can occur through automated or clerical procedures. Additionally, the 2018 End-to-End Census Test will allow the Census Bureau to continue to develop the capability to conduct real-time Non-ID Processing, where a respondent is prompted interactively (while they are still online filling out the form) for additional address and location information if the provided address cannot be matched through automation to an address with a User ID.

This test will allow the Census Bureau to understand better the requirements related to scalability of planned systems and to determine metrics for each of the Non-ID Processing steps. If the address match is not resolved during the initial automated or real-time processing, Census Bureau staff will attempt manually to match or geocode the address. It is estimated that about two percent of the overall non-ID respondents will be contacted via telephone as part of the manual matching process. Non-ID Processing also includes an office-based address verification (OBAV) component. OBAV uses available geographic reference materials to verify the existence and location of an address. OBAV is performed in an effort to avoid the more costly fieldwork. However, any address that is worked in OBAV but cannot be verified in OBAV will be sent to Field Verification (discussed in more detail below as a suboperation of NRFU).

Additionally, with the Re-collect component, a sample of self-response cases are selected for re-contact, which may occur through centralized phone contract or in-field enumeration. Re-collect is intended to validate the information from a respondent, confirming the existence of the address and the people enumerated at that address. Re-collect is also one aspect of fraud detection.

Decades of research on different race/ethnicity question designs have shown that individual identities can be impacted by societal changes, attitudes, and perceptions. The 2018 End-to-End Census Test design can help us understand whether respondent reporting of racial/ethnic identities is impacted by the types of data that the Census Bureau is collecting (e.g., detailed race/ethnic responses and new categories), as well as whether or not respondent privacy concerns and expectations for data protection are addressed and the process is trusted by the general public.

It will be crucial for the Census Bureau to ensure that critical operations are fully prepared to go into production for the 2020 Census using the combined question, if it is determined that the combined race/ethnicity question format may be used for the 2020 Census. The Census Bureau plans to deploy the combined race/ethnicity question version (that includes a Middle Eastern or North African category) during the 2018 End-to-End Census Test to further examine:

• Item nonresponse to the combined race and ethnicity question (with detailed checkboxes, with respect to the reporting of major race/ethnic categories (e.g., White, Black, Asian, etc.) that is similar to the question the Census Bureau used in the 2015 National Content Test and is based on results from the 2010 Census Race and Hispanic Origin Alternative Questionnaire Experiment (Compton, et al., 2012).

Research has found that, over time, there have been a growing number of people who do not identify with any of the race categories, and this means that an increasing number of respondents have been classified as “Some Other Race.” The combined question format with detailed checkboxes attempts to help improve the accuracy of these data.

• Levels of overall race/ethnicity reporting (e.g., White, Hispanic, Black, etc.), as well as detailed reporting levels for these groups (e.g., German, Mexican, Jamaican, etc.).

• Levels of overall race/ethnicity reporting within the new category Middle Eastern or North African (MENA), as well as levels of detailed MENA reporting for respondents of Middle Eastern and North African heritage.

• Match rates between individual racial/ethnic responses in the 2018 End-to-End Census Test and responses in previous census records (e.g., 2010 Census Hispanic origin/race data; ACS ancestry, race, Hispanic origin data). This exploration aims to focus on the comparison of race/ethnicity reporting in different social environments to understand what people have reported in the past compared to what they are reporting in the present. A growing number of people find the current race and ethnicity categories confusing.

The 2018 End-to-End Census Test will be an important opportunity to experiment with different imputation procedures to ascertain which approach yields the best overall imputation results for missing data with a combined race/ethnicity question. The 2018 End-to-End Census Test will enable researchers to ascertain which records to utilize (e.g., Ancestry, Hispanic origin, Race), and in what hierarchy they should be used for imputation. With the expanded language options for the 2018 End-to-End Census Test, response data from detailed write-in fields (such as those on the combined race/ethnicity question) will also need to be output, processed, coded, edited, and tabulated, as well as translated if provided in non-English languages.

Additionally, data products and dissemination is a critical objective of the 2018 End-to-End Census Test. The question format used in data collection and processing is also the source of the redistricting tabulation, and the Census Bureau must be prepared to meet the needs of the states as well as 2020 Census data users, if it is determined that the combined race/ethnicity question format will be used for the 2020 Census. The Census Bureau believes that the results of the 2018 End-to-End Census Test will help inform our growing body of knowledge regarding the combined race/ethnicity question and the collection of major group responses and detailed race/ethnicity responses.

As previously stated, the Census Bureau recognizes that OMB is continuing to lead the discussion among federal agencies and other stakeholders on race/ethnicity from the perspective of data collection and dissemination guidance and standards, and that the final determination has not been made on the format of the race/ethnicity question for the 2020 Census. In the event that the 2020 Census does not proceed with the combined race/ethnicity question, the Census Bureau is prepared to make necessary adjustments to deploy the separate Race and Hispanic Origin questions by consulting the various versions of the separate Race and Hispanic Origin questions that were tested during the 2015 National Content Test. The Census Bureau will properly configure all downstream operations—such as response processing and data tabulation, imputation, analysis, and data dissemination—to ensure a successful deployment of the race/ethnicity question(s) regardless of the question format.

Individuals of Limited English Proficiency (LEP) require language assistance in order to complete their census questionnaires. The Census Bureau has identified the largest LEP populations in the United States using American Community Survey data and has established a program for providing non-English materials for census tests and the decennial census. For the 2018 End-to-End Census Test, Internet self-response and telephone assistance will be available in English, Spanish, Chinese, Vietnamese, Korean, Russian, Arabic, and Tagalog. Paper questionnaires, mailing materials, field data collection instruments and field data collection materials will be available in English and Spanish.

For all housing unit addresses included in the test universe, if no response is received by a specified date, the address will be included in the universe for the NRFU portion of the test. In NRFU, enumerators will attempt to follow up at addresses for which no self-response was received to determine their status and to collect their data for addresses determined to be occupied.

To allow sufficient time for self-response, the NRFU operation begins in mid-May. However, some students who reside in off-campus housing units will have left the campus area by the time NRFU begins. Early NRFU is conducted starting in April in blocks near colleges and universities with a high percentage of off-campus housing to enumerate at these units while students are still in town.

The Census Bureau will conduct NRFU with mobile devices. The devices will utilize a secure Census Bureau-provided enumeration application solution for conducting the NRFU field data collection.

A sample of the cases enumerated via NRFU will be selected for reinterview (RI). This NRFU-RI operation is intended to help pinpoint possible cases of enumerator falsification. The Census Bureau will test centralized phone contacts of the NRFU-RI cases before sending them to an enumerator in the field, providing potential cost avoidance opportunities. Enumerators working NRFU-RI cases will use the same mobile devices and software as for the NRFU cases.

Households that self-respond to the Census without a User ID with addresses that cannot be either matched to our address frame or verified in Non-ID Processing may be sent to a Field Verification operation, performed by NRFU enumerators. This suboperation is designed for verification that the housing unit exists, confirmation of the census block location for the address, and if possible, collection of Global Positioning System coordinates to facilitate accurate determination of the census block.

Update Enumerate for the 2018 End-to-End Census Test will test the four planned components of the operation: Update Enumerate Production, Update Enumerate Listing Quality Control (QC), Update Enumerate Followup, and Update Enumerate Reinterview. In addition to the field operation, the Census Bureau will test mailing out an invitation package to those housing units with a mailable address to generate self-response before the operation begins. Mailable addresses will constitute only a small percentage of the addresses in these areas. If a household self-responds, the UE fieldworker (enumerator) will not need to enumerate that house while listing the geographic area. This is a cost savings to Update Enumerate since the enumerator will not have to spend time collecting these data.

Enumerators will visit specific geographic areas to identify every place where people could live or stay, comparing what they see on the ground to the existing census address list. The enumerator will update the address list, either verify or correct the address and location information, and classify each living quarter (LQ) as a housing unit (HU) or group quarter (GQ). If the LQ is classified as a GQ, it will be designated for enumeration within the GQ operations.

Enumerators will attempt to conduct an interview for each housing unit that has not yet self-responded. If someone answers the door, the enumerator will provide a Confidentiality Notice and ask questions to verify or update the address. The enumerator will then ask if there are any additional LQs in the structure or on the property. If there are additional LQs, the enumerators will collect/update that information. The enumerator will then interview the respondent for the household using the questionnaire on the mobile device.

If no one is home at a housing unit that has not self-responded, the enumerator will leave a Notice of Visit inviting a respondent for each household to go online with a User ID to complete the 2018 End-to-End Census Test. The Notice of Visit will also include the phone number for Census Questionnaire Assistance (CQA) if the respondent has any questions or would prefer to respond to the survey on the telephone. In the 2018 End-to-End Census Test, a paper questionnaire rather than a Notice of Visit will be left with a random set of addresses in order to test the impact on self-response rates. This operation has never been tested for the census before, and this data will help determine the best strategies to use in the 2020 Census.

A sample of addresses listed via UE production will be selected for UE Listing QC. The intention of this operation is to help us pinpoint possible cases of enumerator falsification or error in address listing. UE Listing QC will use the Census Bureau's listing software on mobile devices to recollect listing data to be used for a comparison.

The UE operation will have a UE Followup component for those households that were not enumerated on the first visit and have not yet self-responded. UE enumerators will conduct the operation using the NRFU enumeration application on a Census Bureau provided mobile device.

A sample of cases enumerated via UE production or UE Followup will be selected for reinterview. The intention of this operation is to help us pinpoint possible cases of enumerator falsification of enumeration data. The Census Bureau will test centralized phone contacts of the UE RI cases before sending them to an enumerator in the field, providing potential cost avoidance opportunities. Enumerators working UE RI cases will use the same mobile devices and software as for the UE and NRFU cases.

The GQ Advance Contact operation will contact Group Quarters prior to enumeration. In an in-office Advance Contact, GQs will be contacted to verify information such as: Preferred modes of enumeration, expected population on Census Day, and whether there are available electronic response data records the Census Bureau could use for the enumeration. Census Bureau staff at local Census offices will follow-up with GQs by phone, email, and in-person to obtain the necessary pre-enumeration information.

Enumerators will conduct SBE at selected shelters, soup kitchens, and nonsheltered outdoor locations, providing an opportunity to test new response collection procedures on a larger scale than has been tested so far this decade.

GQE will involve multiple modes of enumeration. During the 2018 End-to-End Census Test, electronic response for GQs will be tested on a broad scale to determine if there are gains in efficiency through self-response. Use of the automated enumeration device is an additional technology to be tested in GQE. For GQs that request paper-based enumeration, enumerators will perform drop off and pickup of paper forms, which are completed by self-enumeration.

A sample of cases that have been enumerated via GQE will be selected for reinterview. This operation is intended to help us pinpoint possible cases of enumerator falsification.

Coverage Improvement is conducted to resolve potential erroneous enumerations and omissions from the initial self-response data collection and from all field enumeration data collections. Coverage questions are included in both the self-response and NRFU instruments to aid in the identification of coverage follow-up cases. In-office follow-up includes evaluating usual-home-elsewhere address data from GQ enumerations, and assessing the potential person duplication, as identified through person matching on collected data. For cases where in-office processes do not yield a resolution, field and/or telephone follow-up with the respondent will occur.

With the addition of expanded language options, response data from detailed write-in fields, such as those on the combined race/ethnicity question, will need to be translated, output, processed, coded, edited, and tabulated. In addition, a prototype of the Redistricting Data Program output will be delivered. Ensuring these interfaces meet the requirements for data tabulation will be a crucial step in preparing to tabulate the test data.

The design of this data product and its dissemination is a critical final objective of the 2018 End-to-End Census Test, as the Census Bureau must be prepared to meet the needs of various stakeholders for 2020 Census data.

OMB Control Number: 0607-XXXX.

Form Number(s): Paper and electronic questionnaires; numbers to be determined.

Type of Review: Regular submission.

Affected Public: Households/Individuals.

Estimated Number of Respondents:

Self-Response by Internet/Telephone/Paper: 337,000 respondents.

Nonresponse Followup: 323,000 respondents.

Nonresponse Followup Reinterview: 30,685 respondents.

Update Enumerate Production: 96,000 respondents.

Update Enumerate Listing QC: 9,600 respondents.

Update Enumerate Followup: 48,000 respondents.

Update Enumerate Reinterview: 9,600 respondents.

Group Quarters Advance Contact (facility): 1,200 respondents.

Group Quarters Service-Based Enumeration—facility contact: 100 respondents.

Group Quarters Service-Based Enumeration—person contact: 4,000 respondents.

Group Quarters Enumeration—facility contact: 1,100 respondents.

Group Quarters Enumeration—person contact: 55,000 respondents.

Group Quarters QC: 110 respondents.

Non-ID Processing Phone Followup: 337 respondents.

Re-collect: 16,000 respondents.

Field Verification: 421 respondents.

Coverage Improvement: 15,420 respondents.

Total: 947,573 Contacts.

Estimated Time per Response:

Self-Response by Internet/Telephone/Paper: 10 minutes per response.

Nonresponse Followup: 10 minutes per response.

Nonresponse Followup Reinterview: 10 minutes per response.

Update Enumerate Production: 12 minutes per response.

Update Enumerate Listing QC: 5 minutes per response.

Update Enumerate Followup: 10 minutes per response.

Update Enumerate Reinterview: 10 minutes per response.

Group Quarters Advance Contact: 10 minutes per response.

Group Quarters Service-based Enumeration: 10 minutes per response.

Group Quarters Enumeration: 10 minutes per response.

Group Quarters QC: 5 minutes per response.

Non-ID Processing Phone Followup: 5 minutes per response.

Re-collect: 10 minutes per response.

Field Verification: 2 minutes per response.

Coverage Improvement: 10 minutes per response.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 160,236 hours.

Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: There are no costs to respondents other than their time to participate in this data collection.

Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.

Legal Authority: Title 13 U.S.C. Sections 141, 191 and 193.

Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record.

The Committee was established September 2, 1999. The Committee advises the Director of BEA on matters related to the development and improvement of BEA's national, regional, industry, and international economic accounts, especially in areas of new and rapidly growing economic activities arising from innovative and advancing technologies, and provides recommendations from the perspectives of the economics profession, business, and government. This will be the Committee's twenty-ninth meeting.

Background

On February 15, 2013, the Department published its amended final determination and antidumping duty order in this proceeding.1 The CS Wind Group appealed the Wind Towers Final Determination to the CIT, and on March 27, 2014, the CIT remanded the Wind Towers Final Determination to the Department.2 On July 29, 2014, the Department filed its results of redetermination pursuant to remand in accordance with the CIT's order.3

On November 3, 2014, the CIT affirmed, in part, and remanded in part, the Department's Final First Redetermination, which resulted in a weighted-average dumping margin of 17.07 percent for the CS Wind Group.4 In the Final Second Redetermination, the Department revised its calculation of certain surrogate financial ratios.5 The Court affirmed the Department's second remand in its entirety on May 11, 2015, which resulted in a weighted-average dumping margin of 17.02 percent for the CS Wind Group.6

The CS Wind Group challenged the CIT's affirmance of the Department's Final Second Redetermination. On August 12, 2016, the CAFC directed the CIT to remand the matter to the Department, and in so doing: (1) reversed the CIT's affirmance of the Department's use of packing weights rather than the factors of production (FOP) weights in its calculation of surrogate value; and, (2) vacated and remanded the CIT's overhead determination with respect to jobwork charges, erection expenses, and civil expenses.7 The Department issued its Final Third Redetermination  8 on December 9, 2016. On March 16, 2017, the Court affirmed the Department's Final Third Redetermination in its entirety.9

In its decision in Timken, 10 as clarified by Diamond Sawblades, 11 the CAFC held that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department must publish a notice of a court decision that is not “in harmony” with a Department determination and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a “conclusive” court decision. The CIT's March 16, 2017, judgment affirming the Final Third Redetermination constitutes a final decision of that court that is not in harmony with the Wind Towers Final Determination. This notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken.

Because there is now a final court decision with respect to this litigation, the Department is amending the Wind Towers Final Determination with respect to the CS Wind Group's dumping margin and cash deposit rate. The revised dumping margin and cash deposit rate for this exporter/producer combination is 0.00 percent.12

Pursuant to sections 735(c)(2) of the Act, “the investigation shall be terminated upon publication of that negative determination” and the Department shall “terminate the suspension of liquidation” and “release any bond or other security, and refund any cash deposit.” See Sections 735(c)(2)(A) and (B) of the Act. As a result of this amended final determination, in which the Department calculated a weighted-average dumping margin of 0.00 percent for CS Wind Group, the Department is hereby excluding merchandise from the following producer/exporter chain from the antidumping duty order:

Producer: CS Wind Group.

Exporter: CS Wind Group.

Accordingly, the Department will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to release any bonds or other security and refund cash deposits. This exclusion does not apply to merchandise produced by CS Wind Group and exported by any other company. Therefore, resellers of merchandise produced, or produced and exported by CS Wind Group, are not entitled to the exclusion. Similarly, the exclusion does not apply to merchandise produced by any other company and exported by CS Wind Group.

We note, however, that pursuant to Timken, the suspension of liquidation must continue during the pendency of the appeals process. Thus, at this time we will instruct CBP to continue the suspension of liquidation at a cash deposit rate of 0.00 percent for entries produced and exported by CS Wind Group until otherwise instructed and to release any bond or other security that CS Wind Group made pursuant to the Final Third Redetermination. If the CIT's ruling is not appealed, or if appealed and upheld, the Department will instruct CBP to terminate the suspension of liquidation and to liquidate entries produced and exported by CS Wind Group without regard to antidumping duties. As a result of the exclusion, the Department will not initiate any new administrative reviews of the antidumping duty order with respect to merchandise produced and exported by CS Wind Group. The review will continue with regard to merchandise produced by CS Wind Group and exported by another company or produced by any other company and exported by CS Wind Group.

Finally, we note that, at this time, the Department remains enjoined by Court order from liquidating entries produced and/or exported by CS Wind Group during the period February 13, 2013, through January 31, 2014. These entries will remain enjoined pursuant to the terms of the injunction during the pendency of any appeals process.

This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 516A(e)(1), 751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

Background

For a complete description of the events that followed the publication of the Preliminary Intent to Rescind, 1 see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.2 The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at http://access.trade.gov and to all users in the Department's Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

The merchandise covered by the order is calcium hypochlorite, regardless of form (e.g., powder, tablet (compressed), crystalline (granular), or in liquid solution), whether or not blended with other materials, containing at least 10% available chlorine measured by actual weight. Calcium hypochlorite is currently classifiable under the subheading 2828.10.0000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States.3

All issues raised in the case briefs by parties are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum.4 A list of the issues which parties raised is attached to this notice as an Appendix.

In the Preliminary Intent to Rescind, we preliminarily determined to rescind this review because we requested, but were not provided, sufficient information to determine whether, and conclude that, Jingmei's sale of subject merchandise to the United States was bona fide. Based on the Department's complete analysis of all the information and comments on the record of this review, we make no changes to the Preliminary Intent to Rescind. Accordingly, we have determined to rescind this NSR. For a complete discussion, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum and the Preliminary Bona Fides Memo.5

As the Department is rescinding this NSR, we have not calculated a company-specific subsidy rate for Jingmei.

Effective upon publication of this notice of the final rescission of the NSR of Jingmei, the Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to discontinue the option of posting a bond or security in lieu of a cash deposit for entries of subject merchandise from Jingmei. Because we did not calculate a subsidy rate for Jingmei, Jingmei continues to be subject to the all-others rate. The all-others rate is 65.85 percent.6 The current cash deposit requirements shall remain in effect until further notice.

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

The Department is issuing and publishing these results in accordance with sections 751(a)(2)(B) and 777(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and 19 CFR 351.214 and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5).

The Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery Management Councils, in conjunction with NOAA Fisheries and the Atlantic and Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commissions, have implemented the Southeast Data, Assessment and Review (SEDAR) process, a multi-step method for determining the status of fish stocks in the Southeast Region. The product of the SEDAR webinar series will be a report which compiles and evaluates potential datasets and recommends which datasets are appropriate for assessment analyses, and describes the fisheries, evaluates the status of the stock, estimates biological benchmarks, projects future population conditions, and recommends research and monitoring needs. Participants for SEDAR Workshops are appointed by the Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery Management Councils and NOAA Fisheries Southeast Regional Office, Highly Migratory Species Management Division, and Southeast Fisheries Science Center. Participants include: Data collectors and database managers; stock assessment scientists, biologists, and researchers; constituency representatives including fishermen, environmentalists, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs); international experts; and staff of Councils, Commissions, and state and federal agencies.

The items of discussion in the Assessment webinars are as follows:

1. Participants will continue discussions to develop population models to evaluate stock status, estimate population benchmarks, and project future conditions, as specified in the Terms of Reference.

2. Participants will recommend the most appropriate methods and configurations for determining stock status and estimating population parameters.

3. Participants will prepare a workshop report and determine whether the assessment(s) are adequate for submission for review.

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

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

The Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery Management Councils, in conjunction with NOAA Fisheries and the Atlantic and Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commissions, have implemented the Southeast Data, Assessment and Review (SEDAR) process, a multi-step method for determining the status of fish stocks in the Southeast Region. The product of the SEDAR webinar series will be a report which compiles and evaluates potential datasets and recommends which datasets are appropriate for assessment analyses, and describes the fisheries, evaluates the status of the stock, estimates biological benchmarks, projects future population conditions, and recommends research and monitoring needs. Participants for SEDAR Workshops are appointed by the Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery Management Councils and NOAA Fisheries Southeast Regional Office, Highly Migratory Species Management Division, and Southeast Fisheries Science Center. Participants include: data collectors and database managers; stock assessment scientists, biologists, and researchers; constituency representatives including fishermen, environmentalists, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs); international experts; and staff of Councils, Commissions, and state and federal agencies.

The items of discussion in the Assessment Scoping webinar are as follows:

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

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

The National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS) was established by Public Law 109-430 on December 20, 2006, and reauthorized by Public Law 113-86 on March 6, 2014, with a mandate to provide an effective drought early warning system for the United States; coordinate, and integrate as practicable, Federal research in support of a drought early warning system; and build upon existing forecasting and assessment programs and partnerships. See 15 U.S.C. 313d. The Public Law also calls for consultation with “relevant Federal, regional, State, tribal, and local government agencies, research institutions, and the private sector” in the development of NIDIS. 15 U.S.C. 313d(c). The NIDIS Executive Council provides the NIDIS Program Office with an opportunity to engage in individual consultation with senior resource officials from NIDIS's Federal partners, as well as leaders from state and local government, academia, nongovernmental organizations, and the private sector.

Status: This meeting will be open to public participation. Individuals interested in attending should register at https://cpaess.ucar.edu/meetings/2017/nidis-executive-council-meeting-april-2017. Please refer to this Web page for the most up-to-date meeting times and agenda. Seating at the meeting will be available on a first-come, first-served basis.

Special Accommodations: This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for special accommodations may be directed no later than 12:00 p.m. on April 18, 2016, to Elizabeth Ossowski, Program Coordinator, David Skaggs Research Center, Room GD102, 325 Broadway, Boulder CO 80305; Email: [email protected].

Matters To Be Considered: The meeting will include the following topics: (1) NIDIS implementation updates and 2017 priorities, (2) Council member updates and 2017 priorities, (3) cross-agency Federal priorities as well as state government priorities in 2017, (4) drought resilience efforts at the Federal level, (5) quantifying the socio-economic impact of drought and the cost of inaction as well as the benefits of action, (6) partnership between the National Water Center and NIDIS, and (7) open discussion on advancing the goals of the NIDIS Public Law.

Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified area, the incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers of marine mammals, provided that certain findings are made and the necessary prescriptions are established.

The incidental taking of small numbers of marine mammals shall be allowed if NMFS (through authority delegated by the Secretary) finds that the total taking by the specified activity during the specified time period will (i) have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s) and (ii) not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where relevant). Further, the permissible methods of taking, as well as the other means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact on the species or stock and its habitat (i.e., mitigation) must be prescribed. Last, requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of such taking must be set forth.

Where there is the potential for serious injury or death, the allowance of incidental taking requires promulgation of regulations under MMPA section 101(a)(5)(A). Subsequently, a Letter (or Letters) of Authorization may be issued as governed by the prescriptions established in such regulations, provided that the level of taking will be consistent with the findings made for the total taking allowable under the specific regulations. Under MMPA section 101(a)(5)(D), NMFS may authorize incidental taking by harassment only (i.e., no serious injury or mortality), for periods of not more than one year, pursuant to requirements and conditions contained within an Incidental Harassment Authorization (IHA). The promulgation of regulations or issuance of IHAs (with their associated prescribed mitigation, monitoring, and reporting) requires notice and opportunity for public comment.

NMFS has defined “negligible impact” in 50 CFR 216.103 as an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival.

Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines “harassment” as: Any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment); or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering (Level B harassment).

Issuance of an MMPA 101(a)(5) authorization requires compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act.

NMFS preliminary determined the issuance of the proposed IHA is consistent with categories of activities identified in CE B4 (issuance of incidental harassment authorizations under section 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA for which no serious injury or mortality is anticipated) of the Companion Manual for NAO 216-6A and we have not identified any extraordinary circumstances listed in Chapter 4 of the Companion Manual for NAO 216-6A that would preclude this categorical exclusion.

We will review all comments submitted in response to this notice prior to making a final decision on the IHA request.

On July 28, 2016, WSDOT submitted a request to NMFS requesting an IHA for the harassment of small numbers of 11 marine mammal species incidental to construction associated with the Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock, Seattle, Washington, between August 1, 2017 and July 31, 2018. NMFS initially determined the IHA application was complete on September 1, 2016. However, WSDOT notified NMFS in November 2016 that the scope of its activities had changed. WSDOT stated that instead of using vibratory hammers for the majority of in-water pile driving and using impact hammer for proofing, it would be required to use impact hammers to drive a large number of piles completely due to sediment conditions at Colman Dock. On March 2, 2017, WSDOT submitted a revised IHA application with updated project description. NMFS determined that the revised IHA application was complete on March 3, 2017.

NMFS is proposing to authorize the Level A and Level B harassment of the following eight marine mammal species/stocks: Harbor seal (Phoca vitulina), California sea lion (Zalophus californianus), Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus), killer whale (Orcinus orca), gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus), humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae), harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), and Dall's porpoise (P. dalli).

WSDOT is proposing to preserve the Seattle Ferry Terminal at Colman Dock. The project will reconfigure the dock while maintaining approximately the same vehicle holding capacity as current conditions. The reconfiguration would increase total permanent overwater coverage (OWC) by about 5,400 square feet (f2) (about 1.7 percent more than existing overwater coverage at the site), due to the new walkway from the King County Passenger Only Ferry (POF) facility to Alaskan Way and new stairways and elevators from the POF to the upper level of the terminal. The additional 5,400 f2 will be mitigated by removing a portion of Pier 48, a condemned timber structure.

The project will remove the northern timber trestle and replace a portion of it with a new concrete trestle. The area from Marion Street to the north edge of the property will not be rebuilt and will become, after demolition, a new area of open water. A section of fill contained behind a bulkhead underneath the northeast section of the dock will also be removed.

WSDOT will construct a new steel and concrete trestle from Columbia Street northward to Marion Street. Construction of the reconfigured dock will narrow (reduce) the OWC along the shoreline (at the landward edge) by 180 linear feet at the north end of the site, while 30 linear feet of new trestle would be constructed along the shoreline at the south end of the site. The net reduction of OWC in the nearshore zone is 150 linear feet.

The purpose of the Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock is to preserve the transportation function of an aging, deteriorating and seismically-deficient facility to continue providing safe and reliable service. The project will also address existing safety concerns related to conflicts between vehicles and pedestrian traffic and operational inefficiencies. Key project elements include:

• Replacing and re-configuring the timber trestle portion of the dock;

• Replacing the main terminal building;

• Reconfiguring the dock layout to provide safer and more efficient operations;

• Replacing the vehicle transfer span and the overhead loading structures of Slip 3;

• Replacing vessel landing aids;

• Maintaining a connection to the Marion Street pedestrian overpass;

• Moving the current POF slip temporarily to the north to make way for south trestle construction, and then constructing a new POF slip in the south trestle area;

• Mitigating for the additional 5,400 f2 of overwater coverage;

• Capping existing contaminated sediments.

The proposed Seattle Multimodal Project would involve in-water impact and vibratory pile driving and vibratory pile removal. Details of the proposed construction project that have the potential to affect marine mammals are provided below.

Due to NMFS and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in-water work timing restrictions to protect Endangered Species Act (ESA) listed salmonids, planned WSDOT in-water construction at this location is limited each year to July 16 through February 15. For this project, in-water construction is planned to take place between August 1, 2017 and February 15, 2018.

The total worst-case time for pile installation and removal is expected to be 83 working days (Table 1).

• Vibratory driving of each of the 101 24-inch steel pile will take approximately 20 minutes, with a maximum of 16 piles installed per day over 7 days.

• Vibratory removal of 103 temporary 24-inch diameter steel piles will take approximately 20 minutes per pile, with maximum 16 piles removed per day over 8 days.

• Impact driving (3000 strikes per pile) of 14 30-inch and 201 36-inch diameter steel piles will take approximately 45 minutes per pile, with maximum 8 piles per day for a total of 28 days.

• Vibratory driving of 17 30- and 205 36-inch diameter steel piles will take 20 minutes per pile, with maximum 8 piles per day over a total of 29 days.

• Vibratory removal of 215 14-inch timber piles will take approximately 15 minutes per pile, with approximately 20 piles removed per day for 11 days.

The proposed activities will occur at the Seattle Ferry Terminal at Colman Dock, located in the City of Seattle, Washington (see Figure 1-2 of the IHA application).

The proposed project has two elements involving noise production that may affect marine mammals: Vibratory hammer driving and removal, and impact hammer driving.

Details of pile driving activities are provided below:

• The 14-inch timber piles will be removed with a vibratory hammer (Table 1).

• The 24-inch temporary piles will be installed and removed with a vibratory hammer (no proofing) (Table 1).

• Some of the permanent 30- and 36-inch steel piles would be installed with a vibratory hammer, and some would be installed with impact hammer (Table 1).

Vibratory hammers are commonly used in steel pile driving where sediments allow and involve the same vibratory hammer used in pile removal. The pile is placed into position using a choker and crane, and then vibrated between 1,200 and 2,400 vibrations per minute. The anticipated time required (based on WSDOT prior experience) to install a 14″ timber pile is up to 900 seconds; for a 24″ steel pile 1200 seconds; and for a 30″ or 36″ steel pile 2700 seconds. The vibrations liquefy the sediment surrounding the pile allowing it to penetrate to the required seating depth, or to be removed. The type of vibratory hammer that will be used for the project will likely be an APE 400 King Kong (or equivalent) with a drive force of 361 tons.

Impact hammers are used to install plastic/steel core, wood, concrete, or steel piles. An impact hammer is a steel device that works like a piston. Impact hammers are usually large, though small impact hammers are used to install small diameter plastic/steel core piles.

Impact hammers have guides (called a lead) that hold the hammer in alignment with the pile while a heavy piston moves up and down, striking the top of the pile, and drives it into the substrate from the downward force of the hammer on the top of the pile.

To drive the pile, the pile is first moved into position and set in the proper location using a choker cable. Once the pile is set in place, pile installation with an impact hammer is expected to require approximately 45 minutes. It is expected that for each 30 inch and 36 inch steel pile, a maximum of 3,000 strikes would be needed to install a pile.

It is possible that more than 1 vibratory pile driving, up to 3 hammers, could be conducted concurrently for the 24-, 30-, and 36-inch piles.

Proposed mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures are described in in detail later in the document (Mitigation section and Monitoring and Reporting section).

The marine mammal species under NMFS jurisdiction that have the potential to occur in the proposed construction area include Pacific harbor seal (Phoca vitulina), California sea lion (Zalophus californianus), northern elephant seal (Mirounga angustirostris), Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus), killer whale (Orcinus orca), long-beaked common dolphin (Delphis capensis), gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus), humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae), minke whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata), harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), and Dall's porpoise (P. dalli). A list of marine mammals that have the potential to occur in the vicinity of the action and their legal status under the MMPA and ESA are provided in Table 2. Among these species, northern elephant seal, minke whale, and long-beaked common dolphin are extralimital in the proposed project area. NMFS does not consider take is likely to occur for these species. Therefore, these species are not discussed further in this document.

General information on the marine mammal species found in Washington coastal waters can be found in Caretta et al. (2016), which is available online at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/pdf/pacific2015_final.pdf. Refer to that document for information on these species. Specific information concerning these species in the vicinity of the proposed action area is provided in detail in the WSDOT's IHA application.

There are three stocks in Washington's inland waters, the Hood Canal, Northern Inland Waters, and Southern Puget Sound stocks. Seals belonging to the Northern Inland Waters Stock are present at the project site. Pupping seasons vary by geographic region. For the northern Puget Sound region, pups are born from late June through August (WDFW 2012). After October 1, all pups in the inland waters of Washington are weaned. Of the pinniped species that commonly occur within the region of activity, harbor seals are the most common and the only pinniped that breeds and remains in the inland marine waters of Washington year-round (Calambokidis and Baird 1994).

In 1999, Jeffries et al. (2003) recorded a mean count of 9,550 harbor seals in Washington's inland marine waters, and estimated the total population to be approximately 14,612 animals (including the Strait of Juan de Fuca). According to the 1999 Stock Assessment Report (SAR), the most recent estimate for the Washington Northern Inland Waters Stock is 11,036 (NMFS 1999). No minimum population estimate is available. However, there are an estimated 32,000 harbor seals in Washington today, and their population appears to have stabilized (Jeffries 2013), so the estimate of 11,036 may be low.

The nearest documented harbor seal haulout to the Seattle Ferry Terminal is 10.6 kilometers (km)/6.6 miles (mi) west on Blakely Rocks, though harbor seals also make use of docks, buoys and beaches in the area. The level of use of this haulout during the fall and winter is unknown, but is expected to be much less as air temperatures become colder than water temperatures resulting in seals in general hauling out less. None of the harbor seals have been spotted using Colman Dock as a haulout. Harbor seals are known to haulout opportunistically on docks and beaches throughout the project area.

During the 2012 Seattle Slip 2 Batter Pile project, 6 harbor seals were observed during this one day project in the area that corresponds to the upcoming project zones of influence (ZOIs) where received sound levels are above 160 decibel (dB) re 1 micropascal (µPa) and Level B harassment is anticipated to occur (WSF 2012). During the 2016 Seattle Test Pile project, 56 harbor seals were observed over 10 days in the area that corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs. The maximum number sighted during 1day was 13 (WSF 2016).

The Navy Marine Species Density Database (U.S. Navy 2015) estimates the density of harbor seals in the Seattle area as a range of 0.550001 and 1.219000 animals per square kilometer.

Washington California sea lions are part of the U.S. stock, which begins at the U.S./Mexico border and extends northward into Canada. The minimum population size of the U.S. stock was estimated at 296,750 in 2011. More recent pup counts made in 2011 totaled 61,943, the highest recorded to date. Estimates of total population size based on these counts are currently being developed (NMFS 2015d). Some 3,000 to 5,000 animals are estimated to move into northwest waters (both Washington and British Columbia) during the fall (September) and remain until the late spring (May) when most return to breeding rookeries in California and Mexico (Jeffries et al., 2000). Peak counts of over 1,000 animals have been made in Puget Sound (Jeffries et al., 2000).

The nearest documented California sea lion haulout sites are 3 km/2 mi southwest of the Seattle Ferry Terminal, although sea lions also make use of docks and other buoys in the area.

During the 2012 Seattle Slip 2 Batter Pile project, 15 California sea lions were observed during this 1 day project in the area that corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2012). During the 2016 Seattle Test Pile project, 12 California sea lions were observed over 10 days in the area that corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs. The maximum number sighted during one day was 4 (WSF 2016).

The Navy Marine Species Density Database (U.S. Navy 2015) estimates the density of California sea lions in the Seattle area as a range of 0.067601 and 0.12660 animals per square kilometer.

The Eastern U.S. stock of Steller sea lion may be present near the project site. The eastern U.S. stock of Steller sea lions is estimated to be 71,562 based on pup and non-pup counts. In Washington waters, Steller sea lion abundances vary seasonally with a minimum estimate of 1,000 to 2,000 individuals present or passing through the Strait of Juan de Fuca in fall and winter months.

Steller sea lion numbers in Washington State decline during the summer months, which correspond to the breeding season at Oregon and British Columbia rookeries (approximately late May to early June) and peak during the fall and winter months (WDFW 2000). According to NMFS Marine Mammal Stock Assessment Report, a new rookery has become established on the outer Washington coast with over 100 pups born there in 2015 (NMFS 2016). A few Steller sea lions can be observed year-round in Puget Sound although most of the breeding age animals return to rookeries in the spring and summer.

The nearest documented Steller sea lion haulout sites are 15 km/9 mi southwest of the Seattle Ferry Terminal (WSDOT 2016a).

During the 2012 Seattle Slip 2 Batter Pile project, 0 Steller sea lions were observed during this one day project in the area that corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2012). During the 2016 Seattle Test Pile project, 0 Steller sea lions were observed over 10 days in the area that corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2016).

The Navy Marine Species Density Database (U.S. Navy 2015) estimates the density of Steller sea lions in the Seattle area as a range of 0.025101 and 0.036800 animals per square kilometer.

The Eastern North Pacific Southern Resident (SRKW) and West Coast Transient (Transient) stocks of killer whale may be found near the project site. The Southern Resident killer whales live in three family groups known as the J, K and L pods. As of December 31, 2015, the stock collectively numbers 78 individuals (CWR 2016). Transient killer whales generally occur in smaller (less than 10 individuals), less structured pods (NMFS 2013c). According to the Center for Whale Research (CWR 2015), they tend to travel in small groups of one to five individuals, staying close to shorelines, often near seal rookeries when pups are being weaned. The West Coast Transient stock, which includes individuals from California to southeastern Alaska, is has a minimum population estimate of 243, which does not include an estimate of the number of whales in California (NMFS 2013b).

The SRKW and West Coast Transient stocks are both found within Washington inland waters. Individuals of both stocks have long-ranging movements and regularly leave the inland waters (Calambokidis and Baird 1994).

During the 2012 Seattle Slip 2 Batter Pile project, 0 SRKW were observed during this one day project in the area that corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2012). During the 2016 Seattle Test Pile project, 0 SRKW were observed over 10 days in the area that corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2016).

The Navy Marine Species Density Database (U.S. Navy 2014) estimates the density of Southern Resident killer whales in the Seattle area as a range of 0.001461 and 0.020240 animals per square kilometer.

According to the NMFS National Stranding Database, there were no killer whale strandings in the Seattle and Island County areas between 2010 and 2014 (NMFS 2016).

The West Coast Transient killer whale sightings have become more common since mid-2000. Unlike the SRKW pods, transients may be present in an area for hours or days as they hunt pinnipeds.

During the 2012 Seattle Slip 2 Batter Pile project, 0 transients were observed during this one day project in the area that corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2012). During the 2016 Seattle Test Pile project, 0 transients were observed over 10 days in the area that corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2016). However, on February 5, 2016, a pod of up to 7 transients were reported in the area that corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs (Orca Network Archive Report 2016).

The Navy Marine Species Density Database (U.S. Navy 2015) estimates the density of west coast transient killer whales in the Seattle area as a range of 0.000575 and 0.002373 animals per square kilometer.

The Eastern North Pacific gray whale may be found near the project site. The most recent population estimate for the Eastern North Pacific stock is 20,990 individuals (NMFS 2015e). Within Washington waters, gray whale sightings reported to Cascadia Research and the Whale Museum between 1990 and 1993 totaled over 1,100 (Calambokidis et al., 1994). Abundance estimates calculated for the small regional area between Oregon and southern Vancouver Island, including the San Juan Area and Puget Sound, suggest there were 137 to 153 individual gray whales from 2001 through 2003 (Calambokidis et al. 2004a). Forty-eight individual gray whales were observed in Puget Sound and Hood Canal in 2004 and 2005.

During the 2012 Seattle Slip 2 Batter Pile project, 0 gray whales were observed during this one day project in the area that corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2012). During the 2016 Seattle Test Pile project, 0 gray whales were observed over 10 days in the area that corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2016).

The Navy Marine Species Density Database (U.S. Navy 2014) estimates the density of gray whales in the Seattle area as a range of 0.000002 to 0.000510 animals per square kilometer.

The California-Oregon-Washington (CA-OR-WA) stock of humpback whale may be found near the project site. In 2016, NMFS has identified three Distinct Population Segments (DPSs) of humpback whales off the coast of Washington, Oregon, and California. These are: The Hawaii DPS (found predominately off Washington and southern British Columbia), which is not listed under the ESA; the Mexico DPS (found all along the coast), which is listed as threatened under the ESA; and the Central America DPS (found all along the coast), which is listed as endangered under the ESA.

From August to November 2015, WSDOT conducted marine mammal monitoring during tank farm pier removal at the Seattle Multimodal Project. During 51 days of monitoring, one humpback whale was observed within the ZOI on November 4, 2015.

During the 2012 Seattle Slip 2 Batter Pile project, 0 humpback whales were observed during this one day project in the area that corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2012). During the 2016 Seattle Test Pile project, 0 humpback whales were observed over 10 days in the area that corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2016).

The Navy Marine Species Density Database (U.S. Navy 2015) estimates the density of humpback whales in the Seattle area as a range between 0.000010 and 0.00070 animals per square kilometer.

The Washington Inland Waters Stock of harbor porpoise may be found near the project site. The Washington Inland Waters Stock occurs in waters east of Cape Flattery (Strait of Juan de Fuca, San Juan Island Region, and Puget Sound).

Aerial surveys of the Washington and southern British Columbia were conducted from 2013 to 2015 (Smultea et al. 2015). These aerial surveys included the Strait of Juan de Fuca, San Juan Islands, Gulf Island, Strait of Georgia, Puget Sound, and Hood Canal. The surveys showed that for U.S. waters, the current estimate for Washington inland water stock harbor porpoise is 11,233 (NMFS 2016).

During the 2012 Seattle Slip 2 Batter Pile project, 0 harbor porpoise were observed during this one day project in the area that corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2012). During the 2016 Seattle Test Pile project, 0 harbor porpoise were observed over 10 days in the area that corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2016).

The Navy Marine Species Density Database (U.S. Navy 2014) estimates the density of harbor porpoise during the timeframe scheduled for this project in the Seattle area as a range between 0.061701 and 0.156000 animals/km2 (U.S. Navy 2014).

The California, Oregon, and Washington Stock of Dall's porpoise may be found near the project site. The most recent estimate of Dall's porpoise stock abundance is 25,750, based on 2005 and 2008 summer/autumn vessel-based line transect surveys of California, Oregon, and Washington waters (NMFS 2011d). Within the inland waters of Washington and British Columbia, this species is most abundant in the Strait of Juan de Fuca east to the San Juan Islands. The most recent Washington's inland waters estimate is 900 animals (Calambokidis et al. 1997), though sightings have become rarer since then. Prior to the 1940s, Dall's porpoises were not reported in Puget Sound.

During the 2012 Seattle Slip 2 Batter Pile project, 0 Dall's porpoise were observed during this one day project in the area that corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2012). During the 2016 Seattle Test Pile project, 0 Dall's porpoise were observed over 10 days in the area that corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2016).

The Navy Marine Species Density Database (U.S. Navy 2014) estimates the density of Dall's porpoises in the Seattle area as a range between 0.018858 and 0.047976 animals per square kilometer.

This section includes a summary and discussion of the ways that components of the specified activity may impact marine mammals and their habitat. The “Estimated Take” section later in this document will include a quantitative analysis of the number of individuals that are expected to be taken by this activity. The “Negligible Impact Analyses and Determination” section will consider the content of this section, the “Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment” section, and the “Mitigation” section, to draw conclusions regarding the likely impacts of these activities on the reproductive success or survivorship of individuals and how those impacts on individuals are likely to impact marine mammal species or stocks.

When considering the influence of various kinds of sound on the marine environment, it is necessary to understand that different kinds of marine life are sensitive to different frequencies of sound. Based on available behavioral data, audiograms derived using auditory evoked potentials, anatomical modeling, and other data, NMFS (2016) to designate “marine mammal hearing groups” for marine mammals and estimate the lower and upper frequencies of hearing of the groups. The marine mammal groups and the associated frequencies are indicated below (though animals are less sensitive to sounds at the outer edge of their functional range and most sensitive to sounds of frequencies within a smaller range somewhere in the middle of their hearing range):

• Low frequency cetaceans (13 species of mysticetes): Functional hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 7 hertz (Hz) and 35 kilohertz (kHz);

• Mid-frequency cetaceans (32 species of dolphins, seven species of larger toothed whales, and 19 species of beaked and bottlenose whales): Functional hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 150 Hz and 160 kHz;

• High frequency cetaceans (eight species of true porpoises, seven species of river dolphins, Kogia, the franciscana, and four species of cephalorhynchids): Functional hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 275 Hz and 160 kHz;

• Phocid pinnipeds in Water: Functional hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 50 Hz and 86 kHz; and

• Otariid pinnipeds in Water: Functional hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 60 Hz and 39 kHz.

As mentioned previously in this document, eight marine mammal species (five cetacean and four pinniped species) are likely to occur in the vicinity of the Seattle pile driving/removal area. Of the five cetacean species, three belong to the low-frequency cetacean group (gray and humpback whales), one is a mid-frequency cetacean (killer whale), and two high-frequency cetacean (harbor and Dall's porpoises). One species of pinniped is phocid (harbor seal), and two species of pinniped are otariid (California and Steller sea lions). A species' functional hearing group is a consideration when we analyze the effects of exposure to sound on marine mammals.

The WSDOT's Seattle Colman ferry terminal construction work using in-water pile driving and pile removal could adversely affect marine mammal species and stocks by exposing them to elevated noise levels in the vicinity of the activity area.

Exposure to high intensity sound for a sufficient duration may result in auditory effects such as a noise-induced threshold shift—an increase in the auditory threshold after exposure to noise (Finneran et al., 2005). Factors that influence the amount of threshold shift include the amplitude, duration, frequency content, temporal pattern, and energy distribution of noise exposure. The magnitude of hearing threshold shift normally decreases over time following cessation of the noise exposure. The amount of threshold shift just after exposure is the initial threshold shift. If the threshold shift eventually returns to zero (i.e., the threshold returns to the pre-exposure value), it is a temporary threshold shift (Southall et al., 2007).

Threshold Shift (noise-induced loss of hearing)—When animals exhibit reduced hearing sensitivity (i.e., sounds must be louder for an animal to detect them) following exposure to an intense sound or sound for long duration, it is referred to as a noise-induced threshold shift (TS). An animal can experience temporary threshold shift (TTS) or permanent threshold shift (PTS). TTS can last from minutes or hours to days (i.e., there is complete recovery), can occur in specific frequency ranges (i.e., an animal might only have a temporary loss of hearing sensitivity between the frequencies of 1 and 10 kHz), and can be of varying amounts (for example, an animal's hearing sensitivity might be reduced initially by only 6 dB or reduced by 30 dB). PTS is permanent, but some recovery is possible. PTS can also occur in a specific frequency range and amount as mentioned above for TTS.

For marine mammals, published data are limited to the captive bottlenose dolphin, beluga, harbor porpoise, and Yangtze finless porpoise (Finneran et al., 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2010a, 2010b; Finneran and Schlundt, 2010; Lucke et al., 2009; Mooney et al., 2009a, 2009b; Popov et al., 2011a, 2011b; Kastelein et al., 2012a; Schlundt et al., 2000; Nachtigall et al., 2003, 2004). For pinnipeds in water, data are limited to measurements of TTS in harbor seals, an elephant seal, and California sea lions (Kastak et al., 1999, 2005; Kastelein et al., 2012b).

Lucke et al. (2009) found a TS of a harbor porpoise after exposing it to airgun noise with a received sound pressure level (SPL) at 200.2 dB (peak-to-peak) re: 1 μPa, which corresponds to a sound exposure level of 164.5 dB re: 1 μPa2 s after integrating exposure. NMFS currently uses the root-mean-square (rms) of received SPL at 180 dB and 190 dB re: 1 μPa as the threshold above which PTS could occur for cetaceans and pinnipeds, respectively. Because the airgun noise is a broadband impulse, one cannot directly determine the equivalent of rms SPL from the reported peak-to-peak SPLs. However, applying a conservative conversion factor of 16 dB for broadband signals from seismic surveys (McCauley et al., 2000) to correct for the difference between peak-to-peak levels reported in Lucke et al. (2009) and rms SPLs, the rms SPL for TTS would be approximately 184 dB re: 1 μPa, and the received levels associated with PTS (Level A harassment) would be higher. However, NMFS recognizes that TTS of harbor porpoises is lower than other cetacean species empirically tested (Finneran & Schlundt, 2010; Finneran et al., 2002; Kastelein and Jennings, 2012).

Marine mammal hearing plays a critical role in communication with conspecifics, and interpretation of environmental cues for purposes such as predator avoidance and prey capture. Depending on the degree (elevation of threshold in dB), duration (i.e., recovery time), and frequency range of TTS, and the context in which it is experienced, TTS can have effects on marine mammals ranging from discountable to serious (similar to those discussed in auditory masking, below). For example, a marine mammal may be able to readily compensate for a brief, relatively small amount of TTS in a non-critical frequency range that occurs during a time where ambient noise is lower and there are not as many competing sounds present. Alternatively, a larger amount and longer duration of TTS sustained during time when communication is critical for successful mother/calf interactions could have more serious impacts. Also, depending on the degree and frequency range, the effects of PTS on an animal could range in severity, although it is considered generally more serious because it is a permanent condition. Of note, reduced hearing sensitivity as a simple function of aging has been observed in marine mammals, as well as humans and other taxa (Southall et al., 2007), so one can infer that strategies exist for coping with this condition to some degree, though likely not without cost.

In addition, chronic exposure to excessive, though not high-intensity, noise could cause masking at particular frequencies for marine mammals that utilize sound for vital biological functions (Clark et al., 2009). Acoustic masking is when other noises such as from human sources interfere with animal detection of acoustic signals such as communication calls, echolocation sounds, and environmental sounds important to marine mammals. Therefore, under certain circumstances, marine mammals whose acoustical sensors or environment are being severely masked could also be impaired from maximizing their performance fitness in survival and reproduction.

Masking occurs at the frequency band that the animals utilize. Therefore, since noise generated from vibratory pile driving activity is mostly concentrated at low frequency ranges, it may have less effect on high frequency echolocation sounds by odontocetes (toothed whales). However, lower frequency man-made noises are more likely to affect detection of communication calls and other potentially important natural sounds such as surf and prey noise. It may also affect communication signals when they occur near the noise band and thus reduce the communication space of animals (e.g., Clark et al., 2009) and cause increased stress levels (e.g., Foote et al., 2004; Holt et al., 2009).

Unlike TS, masking, which can occur over large temporal and spatial scales, can potentially affect the species at population, community, or even ecosystem levels, as well as individual levels. Masking affects both senders and receivers of the signals and could have long-term chronic effects on marine mammal species and populations. Recent science suggests that low frequency ambient sound levels have increased by as much as 20 dB (more than three times in terms of SPL) in the world's ocean from pre-industrial periods, and most of these increases are from distant shipping (Hildebrand, 2009). For WSDOT's Seattle Colman Ferry Terminal construction activities, noises from vibratory pile driving and pile removal contribute to the elevated ambient noise levels in the project area, thus increasing potential for or severity of masking. Baseline ambient noise levels in the vicinity of project area are high due to ongoing shipping, construction and other activities in the Puget Sound.

Finally, marine mammals' exposure to certain sounds could lead to behavioral disturbance (Richardson et al., 1995), such as: Changing durations of surfacing and dives, number of blows per surfacing, or moving direction and/or speed; reduced/increased vocal activities; changing/cessation of certain behavioral activities (such as socializing or feeding); visible startle response or aggressive behavior (such as tail/fluke slapping or jaw clapping); avoidance of areas where noise sources are located; and/or flight responses (e.g., pinnipeds flushing into water from haulouts or rookeries).

The onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic noise depends on both external factors (characteristics of noise sources and their paths) and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation, experience, demography) and is also difficult to predict (Southall et al., 2007). Currently NMFS uses a received level of 160 dB re 1 μPa (rms) to predict the onset of behavioral harassment from impulse noises (such as impact pile driving), and 120 dB re 1 μPa (rms) for continuous noises (such as vibratory pile driving). For the WSDOT's Seattle Colman Ferry Terminal construction activities, both of these noise levels are considered for effects analysis because WSDOT plans to use both impact and vibratory pile driving, as well as vibratory pile removal.

The biological significance of many of these behavioral disturbances is difficult to predict, especially if the detected disturbances appear minor. However, the consequences of behavioral modification could be biologically significant if the change affects growth, survival, and/or reproduction, which depends on the severity, duration, and context of the effects.

The primary potential impacts to marine mammal habitat are associated with elevated sound levels produced by pile driving and removal associated with marine mammal prey species. However, other potential impacts to the surrounding habitat from physical disturbance are also possible. These potential effects are discussed below.

SPLs from impact pile driving has the potential to injure or kill fish in the immediate area. These few isolated fish mortality events are not anticipated to have a substantial effect on prey species population or their availability as a food resource for marine mammals.

Studies also suggest that larger fish are generally less susceptible to death or injury than small fish. Moreover, elongated forms that are round in cross section are less at risk than deep-bodied forms. Orientation of fish relative to the shock wave may also affect the extent of injury. Open water pelagic fish (e.g., mackerel) seem to be less affected than reef fishes. The results of most studies are dependent upon specific biological, environmental, explosive, and data recording factors.

The huge variation in fish populations, including numbers, species, sizes, and orientation and range from the detonation point, makes it very difficult to accurately predict mortalities at any specific site of detonation. Most fish species experience a large number of natural mortalities, especially during early life-stages, and any small level of mortality caused by the WSDOT's impact pile driving will likely be insignificant to the population as a whole.

For non-impulsive sound such as that of vibratory pile driving, experiments have shown that fish can sense both the strength and direction of sound (Hawkins, 1981). Primary factors determining whether a fish can sense a sound signal, and potentially react to it, are the frequency of the signal and the strength of the signal in relation to the natural background noise level.

The level of sound at which a fish will react or alter its behavior is usually well above the detection level. Fish have been found to react to sounds when the sound level increased to about 20 dB above the detection level of 120 dB (Ona, 1988); however, the response threshold can depend on the time of year and the fish's physiological condition (Engas et al., 1993).

During construction activity at Colman Dock, only a small fraction of the available habitat would be ensonified at any given time. Disturbance to fish species would be short-term and fish would return to their pre-disturbance behavior once the pile driving activity ceases. Thus, the proposed construction would have little, if any, impact on the abilities of marine mammals to feed in the area where construction work is planned.

Finally, the time of the proposed construction activity would avoid the spawning season of the ESA-listed salmonid species between March and July.

Short-term turbidity is a water quality effect of most in-water work, including pile driving.

Cetaceans are not expected to be close enough to the Colman terminal to experience turbidity, and any pinnipeds will be transiting the terminal area and could avoid localized areas of turbidity. Therefore, the impact from increased turbidity levels is expected to be discountable to marine mammals.

For these reasons, WSDOT's proposed Seattle Multimodal construction at Colman Dock is not expected to have adverse effects to marine mammal habitat in the area.

This section includes an estimate of the number of incidental “takes” likely to occur pursuant to this IHA, which will inform both NMFS' consideration of whether the number of takes is “small” and the negligible impact determination.

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

As described previously in the section Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and their Habitat, no incidental take is anticipated to result from effects on prey species or as a result of turbidity. Level B Harassment is expected to occur as discussed below and is proposed to be authorized in the numbers identified below.

As described below, a small number of takes by Level A Harassment are being proposed to be authorized.

The death of a marine mammal is also a type of incidental take. However, as described previously, no mortality is anticipated or proposed to be authorized to result from this activity.

Take estimates are based on average marine mammal density in the project area multiplied by the area size of ensonified zones within which received noise levels exceed certain thresholds (i.e., Level A and/or Level B harassment) from specific activities, then multiplied by the total number of days such activities would occur. Certain adjustments were made for marine mammals whose local abundance are known through long-term monitoring efforts. Therefore, their local abundance data are used for take calculation instead of general animal density (see below).

As discussed above, in-water pile removal and pile driving (vibratory and impact) generate loud noises that could potentially harass marine mammals in the vicinity of WSDOT's proposed Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock.

Under the NMFS' Technical Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing (Guidance), dual criteria are used to assess marine mammal auditory injury (Level A harassment) as a result of noise exposure (NMFS 2016). The dual criteria under the Guidance provide onset thresholds in instantaneous peak SPLs (Lpk) as well as 24-hr cumulative sound exposure levels (SELcum or L E) that could cause PTS to marine mammals of different hearing groups. The peak SPL is the highest positive value of the noise field, log transformed to dB in reference to 1 μPa.

The cumulative SEL is the total sound exposure over the entire duration of a given day's pile driving activity, specifically, pile driving occurring within a 24-hr period.

Notice is hereby given of a meeting of MAFAC's CBP Task Force. The MAFAC was established by the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) and since 1971, advises the Secretary on all living marine resource matters that are the responsibility of the Department of Commerce. The complete MAFAC charter and summaries of prior MAFAC meetings are located online at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ocs/mafac/. The CBP Task Force reports to MAFAC and is being convened to discuss and develop recommendations for long-term goals to meet Columbia Basin salmon recovery, conservation needs, and harvest opportunities. These goals will be developed in the context of habitat capacity and other factors that affect salmon mortality. More information is available at the CBP Task Force Web page: http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/columbia_river/index.html

This meeting time and agenda are subject to change. Updated information will be available on the CBP Task Force Web page above.

The meeting is convened to conduct the work of the CBP Task Force. Meeting topics include a discussion of the final Operating Principles, discussion of a shared vision, and work plan for goal setting, including a proposed analytical framework. The meeting is open to the public as observers, and a public comment period will be provided on April 19, 2017, from 11:30-12:00 p.m. to accept public input, limited to the time available.

The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Katherine Cheney; 503-231-6730 by April 4, 2017.

The subject permit is requested under the authority of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and the regulations governing the taking, importing, and exporting of endangered and threatened species (50 CFR parts 222-226).

The objective of the permitted activity is to conduct research and monitoring of endangered smalltooth sawfish to develop conservation and protective measures ensuring the species' recovery. Other listed species potentially encountered and incidentally collected include green (Chelonia mydas), hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata), Kemp's ridley (Lepidocheyls kempii), leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea), and loggerhead (Caretta caretta) sea turtles. Researchers are requesting to capture smalltooth sawfish in Florida waters, and then measure, weigh, tag, genetic tissue sample, draw blood, and photograph animals prior to release. The applicant also requests to have access to salvaged animals and parts taken at other parts within the species range.

Under the PRA, 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 and includes agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A), requires a Federal agency to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension of an existing collection of information before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with these requirements, the CFTC is publishing notice of the proposed collection of information listed below.

Title: Procedural Requirements for Requests for Interpretative, No-Action and Exemptive Letters (OMB Control No. 3038-0049). This is a request for an extension of a currently approved information collection.

Abstract: This collection covers the information requirements for voluntary requests for, and the issuance of, interpretative, no-action, and exemptive letters submitted to Commission staff pursuant to the provisions of section 140.99 of the Commission's regulations,1 and related requests for confidential treatment pursuant to section 140.98(b) 2 of the Commission's regulations. It includes reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

The collection requirements described herein are voluntary. They apply to parties that choose to request a benefit from Commission staff in the form of the regulatory action described in section 140.99. Such benefits may include, for example, relief from some or all of the burdens associated with other collections of information, relief from regulatory obligations that do not constitute collections of information collections, interpretations, or extensions of time for compliance with certain Commission regulations. It is likely that persons who would opt to request action under section 140.99 will have determined that the information collection burdens that they would assume by doing so will be outweighed substantially by the relief that they seek to receive.

The information collection associated with section 140.99 of the Commission's regulations is necessary, and would be used, to assist Commission staff in understanding the type of relief that is being requested and the basis for the request. It is also necessary, and would be used, to provide staff with a sufficient basis for determining whether: (1) Granting the relief would be necessary or appropriate under the facts and circumstances presented by the requestor; (2) the relief provided should be conditional and/or time-limited; and (3) granting the relief would be consistent with staff responses to requests that have been presented under similar facts and circumstances. In some cases, the requested relief might be granted upon the condition that those who seek the benefits of that relief fulfill certain notice and other reporting obligations that serve as substituted compliance for regulatory requirements that would otherwise be imposed. In other cases, the conditions might include reporting or recordkeeping requirements that are necessary to ensure that the relief granted by Commission staff is appropriate. Once again, it is likely that those who would comply with these conditions will have determined that the burden of complying with the conditions is outweighed by the relief that they seek to receive. The information collection associated with section 140.98(b) of the Commission's regulations is necessary to provide a mechanism whereby persons requesting no-action, interpretative and exemption letters may seek temporary confidential treatment of their request and the Commission staff response thereto and the grounds upon which such confidential treatment is sought.

With respect to the collection of information, the CFTC invites comments on:

• Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information will have a practical use;

• The accuracy of the Commission's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; and

• Ways to enhance the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

• 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; e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. If you wish the Commission to consider information that you believe is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, a petition for confidential treatment of the exempt information may be submitted according to the procedures established in section 145.9 of the Commission's regulations.3 The Commission reserves the right, but shall have no obligation to, review, pre-screen, filter, redact, refuse or remove any or all of your submission from http://www.cftc.gov that it may deem inappropriate for publication, such as obscene language. All submissions that have been redacted or removed that contain comments on the merits of the Information Collection Requirement will be retained in the public comment file and will be considered as required under the Administrative Procedure Act and other applicable laws, and may be accessible under the Freedom of Information Act.

Burden Statement: In order to establish estimates of the annual information collection burdens associated with the exemptive, no-action and interpretative letters that may be issued by Commission staff during the three year renewal period, Commission staff reviewed the letters of this type that were issued by Commission staff during 2016. This timeframe was chosen because it is believed that such recent experience is indicative of both the quantity of requests that Commission staff expects to receive and the quantity of letters that Commission staff expects to issue on an annual basis during the renewal period and the information collection burdens that may be associated with them. In some cases, the relief granted in 2016 is unlikely to be requested again as it has been superseded by a Commission rulemaking. The projected burden estimates for the renewal period were not reduced accordingly in order to account for the possibility that new issues may arise. It is also possible that certain relief granted in 2016 may be superseded by a future Commission rulemaking. As future rulemakings and their effective dates are speculative, the estimates for the renewal period have not been reduced to account for potential rulemakings.

The annual respondent burden for this collection during the renewal period is estimated to be as follows:

Estimated Number of Respondents: 284.

Estimated Average Annual Burden Hours per Respondent: 9.5.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 2,704.

Frequency of Collection: Occasional.

Type of Respondents: Respondents include persons registered with the Commission (such as commodity pool operators, commodity trading advisors, derivatives clearing organizations, designated contract markets, futures commission merchants, introducing brokers, swap dealers, and swap execution facilities), persons seeking an exemption from registration, persons whose registration with the Commission is pending, trade associations and their members, eligible contract participants, and other persons seeking relief from discrete regulatory requirements.

There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection.

These estimates, as set forth in greater detail below, include the burden hours for complying with the information requirements for exemptive, no-action and interpretative letters contained in section 140.99(c) of the Commission's regulations; effecting the filing of such letters pursuant to section 140.99(d); providing notice to Commission staff of materially changed facts and circumstances pursuant to section 140.99(c)(3)(ii); complying with any conditions that may be contained in a grant of no-action or exemptive relief; complying with requirements to make disclosures to third parties; and preparing and submitting withdrawals of requests for exemptive, no-action and interpretative letters, as provided in section 140.99(f). The estimates also include burden hours related to a request for confidential treatment made pursuant to section 140.98(b) of the Commission's regulations.4

The burden hours associated with requests for exemptive, no-action and interpretative letters include both the drafting and filing of the request itself as well as performing the underlying factual or legal analysis generally to comply with the information collection. The burden hours associated with individual requests will vary widely, depending upon the type and complexity of relief requested, whether the request presents novel or complex issues, the relevant facts and circumstances, and the number of requestors or other affected entities. The Commission provides estimates of the amount of time that any requestor spends on any particular request as each request is unique, based upon the preceding factors.

The Department of the Air Force is withdrawing the meeting notice of the Board of Visitors that published on the 23rd since this meeting has been amended.

The Air Force proposes to implement three actions at Eielson AFB. They are independent of each other and have standalone value for improving facility and infrastructure development in support of the F-35A beddown at Eielson AFB. The three are to provide additional stormwater runoff control; develop equipment and material laydown areas; and provide additional heat, water, and power to the South Loop. While full implementation of all of the proposed actions is desired, and results in the greatest benefit for the beddown, each of the proposals if implemented alone would have a positive effect on facility and infrastructure development on the base. The no-action alternatives will be addressed in the SEIS as well.

The additional stormwater runoff control measures would include up to 20 acres to accommodate additional conveyance and infiltration areas. The Air Force identified several areas, adjacent to F-35A facilities, to allow flexibility in conveyance and infiltration system designs. Stormwater control measures can include, but are not limited to, sloping paved areas so that water flows to adjacent vegetated areas and using rocks to fill in low areas so that ponds would not be created. Wildlife in an active airfield poses a real bird/wildlife aircraft strike hazard; therefore, minimizing standing water is a primary consideration when designing stormwater runoff control systems.

The equipment and material laydown areas would entail up to 60 acres, adjacent to F-35A facilities already identified in the original EIS. Because of the remote location, material would need to be stockpiled and stored for use when they are needed. Additionally, the areas would accommodate the construction contractors' equipment and construction worker vehicles involved in this large infrastructure development.

Because of the severe arctic environment and extreme temperature differences (exceeding 150 degrees Fahrenheit), Eielson AFB maintains an underground utility distribution system. Under this proposed action, a utility corridor, both underground for steam, water, and condensate, and above ground for power, would be established to connect from the existing Central Heat and Power Plant and to the South Loop where F-35A facilities identified in the original EIS are being constructed. Depending on the route, the utiliduct could extend up to 2 miles.

The proposed actions at Eielson AFB have the potential to be located in a floodplain and/or wetland. Consistent with the requirements and objectives of Executive Order (EO) 11990, “Protection of Wetlands,” and EO 1988, “Floodplain Management,” as amended by EO 13690, “Establishing a Federal Flood Risk Management Standard and a Process for Further Soliciting and Considering Stakeholder Input,” state and federal regulatory agencies with special expertise in wetlands and floodplains will be contacted to request comment. Consistent with EO 11988, EO 13690, and EO 11990, this Notice of Intent initiates early public review of the proposed actions and alternatives, which have the potential to be located in a floodplain and/or wetland.

Title, Associated Form, and OMB Number: Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) Appendix I, DoD Pilot Mentor-Protege Program; OMB Control Number 0704-0332.

Type of Request: Reinstatement with change.

Number of Respondents: 112.

Responses Per Respondent: Approximately 2.

Annual Responses: 240.

Average Burden per Response: 1 hour.

Annual Response Burden Hours: 240.

Reporting Frequency: Two times per year for mentor firms; one time per year for protege firms.

Needs and Uses: DoD needs this information to ensure that participants in the Mentor-Protege Program (“the Program”) are fulfilling their obligations under the mentor-protege agreements and that the Government is receiving value for the benefits it provides through the Program. DoD uses the information as source data for reports to Congress required by section 811(d) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Pub. L. 106-65). Participation in the Program is voluntary.

Affected Public: Businesses and other for-profit entities and not-for-profit institutions.

Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain or retain benefits.

OMB Desk Officer: Ms. Jasmeet Seehra.

Written comments and recommendations on the proposed information collection should be sent to Ms. Seehra at the Office of Management and Budget, Desk Officer for DoD, Room 10236, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503. You may also submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by the following method:

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

Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name, docket number, and title for the Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other public 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 provided. To confirm receipt of your comment(s), please check http://www.regulations.gov approximately two to three days after submission to verify posting (except allow 30 days for posting of comments submitted by mail).

DoD Clearance Officer: Mr. Frederick C. Licari.

Written requests for copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Mr. Licari at: Information Collections Program, WHS/ESD Office of Information Management, 4800 Mark Center Drive, 3rd Floor, East Tower, Suite 03F09, Alexandria, VA 22350-3100.

Title, Associated Form and OMB Number: Physician Certificate for Child Annuitant; DD Form 2828; OMB Control Number 0730-0011.

Type of Request: Reinstatement.

Number of Respondents: 240.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Annual Responses: 240.

Average Burden per Response: 2 hours.

Annual Burden Hours: 480 hours.

Needs and Uses: The DD 2828 is required and must be on file to support an incapacitation occurring prior to age 18. The form provides the authority for the Directorate of Retired and Annuitant Pay, DFAS to establish and pay a Retired Service Member's Family Protection Plan (RSFPP) or Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) annuity to the incapacitated individual. The form is completed by the child annuitant, and/or their guardian, custodian or legal representative and certified by the physician.

Affected Public: Individuals and households.

Frequency: On occasion.

Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain or retain benefits.

OMB Desk Officer: Ms. Jasmeet Seehra.

Comments and recommendations on the proposed information collection should be emailed to Ms. Jasmeet Seehra, DoD Desk Officer, at [email protected]. Please identify the proposed information collection by DoD Desk Officer and the Docket ID number and title of the information collection.

You may also submit comments and recommendations, identified by Docket ID number and title, by the following method:

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

Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name, Docket ID 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.

DOD Clearance Officer: Mr. Frederick Licari.

Written requests for copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Mr. Licari at WHS/ESD Directives Division, 4800 Mark Center Drive, East Tower, Suite 03F09, Alexandria, VA 22350-3100.

Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Pentagon/Mark Center Transportation Commuter Survey; OMB Control Number 0704-0517.

Needs and Uses: Per requirements in the Administrative Instruction (AI) 109, and the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) approved Base Relocation and Closure (BRAC) #133 Transportation Management Plan (TMP), the WHS Transportation Management Program Office (TMPO) will conduct surveys of both Federal and non-Federal employees in order to monitor the effectiveness of the various Pentagon and Mark Center Transportation Programs and Strategies. The purpose of the surveys is to gather travel mode choice information from DoD employees and contractors located at the Pentagon and Mark Center. Information gathered from this effort will be used to refine the DoD shuttle service and travel demand management strategies currently being implemented at each facility to reduce traffic congestion. The results of the transportation/commuter surveys will be utilized to accomplish the aforementioned tasks and to support future transportation related improvement efforts to enhance transportation to and from the Pentagon, Mark Center, and DoD facilities in the National Capital Region.

Affected Public: Individuals and Households.

Annual Burden Hours: 4,001.

Number of Respondents: 16,005.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Annual Responses: 16,005.

Average Burden per Response: 15 minutes.

Frequency: Annual.

The 2014 Pentagon/Mark Center Transportation/Commuter Surveys will be administered through the use of technological collection techniques, such as the proprietary DoD Interactive Customer Evaluation (ICE) Survey Application.

Purpose of the Committee: The Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technical Advisory Committee (HTAC) was established under section 807 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT), Public Law 109-58; 119 Stat. 849, to provide advice and recommendations to the Secretary of Energy on the program authorized by Title VIII of EPACT.

Tentative Agenda: (updates will be posted on the web at): http://hydrogen.energy.gov/advisory_htac.html).

Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. Individuals who would like to attend and/or to make oral statements during the public comment period must register no later than 5:00 p.m. on Monday, April 24, 2017, by email at [email protected]. Entry to the meeting room will be restricted to those who have confirmed their attendance in advance. Please provide your name, organization, citizenship, and contact information. Anyone attending the meeting will be required to present government-issued identification. Those wishing to make a public comment are required to register. The public comment period will take place between 8:30 a.m. and 8:45 a.m. on May 4, 2017. Time allotted per speaker will depend on the number who wish to speak but will not exceed five minutes. Those not able to attend the meeting or have insufficient time to address the committee are invited to send a written statement to [email protected].

Minutes: The minutes of the meeting will be available for public review at http://hydrogen.energy.gov/advisory_htac.html.

This action applies to the public in general, and may be of particular interest to a wide range of stakeholders including members of the public interested in elemental mercury or mercury compounds generally or specifically in the supply, use, or trade of elemental mercury or mercury compounds, including mercury-added products and manufacturing processes, and interested in the assessment of chemical risks. As such, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be interested in this action.

As directed in TSCA section 8(b)(10)(B), EPA is publishing an inventory of mercury supply, use, and trade in the United States (15 U.S.C. 2507(b)(10)(B)). The Lautenberg Act defines “mercury” as “elemental mercury” or “a mercury compound” (15 U.S.C. 2507(b)(10)(A)). The purpose of the mercury inventory is to “identify any manufacturing processes or products that intentionally add mercury” (15 U.S.C. 2607(b)(10)(C)). This initial inventory report (Ref. 1) is a compilation of readily available, previously published data on the supply, use, and trade of elemental mercury and mercury compounds. Current, complete information is not available for some topics. EPA is not soliciting comments on this initial inventory report.

The Agency also is directed to carry out and publish such an inventory every three years after April 1, 2017, as supported by a rule authorized in the Lautenberg Act (15 U.S.C. 2507(b)(10)(B)). That rule must be promulgated by June 22, 2018. (15 U.S.C. 2507(b)(10)(B)). For inventories subsequent to the initial inventory report, EPA is authorized to promulgate a rule to “assist in the preparation of the inventory” so that “any person who manufactures mercury or mercury-added products or otherwise intentionally uses mercury in a manufacturing process shall make periodic reports to the Administrator, at such time and including such information as the Administrator shall determine” (15 U.S.C. 2607(b)(10)(D)). Future triennial inventories of mercury supply, use, and trade are expected to include data collected directly from persons who manufacture (including import) mercury or mercury-added products or otherwise intentionally use mercury in a manufacturing process.

The following is a listing of the documents that are specifically referenced in this document. The docket includes these documents and other information considered by EPA, including documents that are referenced within the documents that are included in the docket, even if the referenced document is not physically located in the docket. For assistance in locating these other documents, please consult the technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

• EPA. Mercury—U.S. Inventory Report: Supply, Use, and Trade. 2017.

OMB Control No.: 3060-0795.

Title: Associate WTB & PSHSB Call Sign & Antenna Registration Number With Licensee's FRN.

Form No.: FCC Form 606.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Individuals or households; business or other for-profit; not-for-profit institutions; state, local or tribal government.

Number of Respondents: 5,000 respondents; 5,000 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: (15 minutes) 0.25 hours.

Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement.

Total Annual Burden: 1,250 hours.

Total Annual Cost: No cost.

Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: In general there is no need for confidentiality. On a case-by-case basis, the Commission may be required to withhold from disclosure certain information about the location, character, or ownership of a historic property, including traditional religious sites.

Needs and Uses: The Commission will submit this information collection to the OMB after this 60-day comment period as an extension (no change in reporting and/or third-party disclosure requirements) to obtain the full three-year clearance from them.

Licensees use FCC Form 606 to associate their FCC Registration Number (FRN) with their Wireless Telecommunications Bureau and Public Safety Homeland Security Bureau call signs and antenna structure registration numbers. The form must be submitted before filing any subsequent applications associated with the existing license or antenna structure registration that is not associated with an FRN.

The information collected in the FCC Form 606 is used to populate the Universal Licensing System (ULS) with the FRNs of licensees and antenna structure registration owners who interact with ULS.

To access and respond to the RFI, go to the following Web address: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/rfi/rfi.cfm?ID=63.

OAR oversees and coordinates the conduct and support of all HIV/AIDS research activities across the NIH Institutes and Centers (ICs). The NIH-sponsored HIV/AIDS research program includes both extramural and intramural research, buildings and facilities, research training, program evaluation, and supports a comprehensive portfolio of research representing a broad range of basic, clinical, behavioral, social science, and translational research on HIV/AIDS and its associated coinfections and comorbidities.

OAR plans and coordinates research through the development of an annual Trans-NIH Plan for HIV-Related Research that articulates the overarching HIV/AIDS research priorities and serves as the framework for developing the trans-NIH HIV/AIDS research budget. This Plan provides information about the NIH's HIV/AIDS research priorities to the scientific community, Congress, community stakeholders, HIV-affected communities, and the broad public at large. The fiscal year 2018 Trans-NIH Plan for HIV-Related Research was recently distributed on the OAR Web site: (https://www.oar.nih.gov/strategic_plan/plan_18.asp).

New overarching priorities for HIV/AIDS research were defined in the NIH Director's Statement of August 12, 2015 (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-15-137.html).

High Priority topics of research for support include:

(1) Reducing the incidence of HIV/AIDS;

(2) Developing the next generation of HIV therapies;

(3) Identifying strategies towards a cure;

(4) Improving the prevention and treatment of HIV-associated comorbidities, coinfections, and complications; and

(5) Cross-cutting basic research, behavioral and social science research, health disparities, and training.

This RFI is for planning purposes only and should not be construed as a solicitation for applications or proposals, or as an obligation in any way on the part of the United States federal government. The federal government will not pay for the preparation of any information submitted or for the government's use. Additionally, the government cannot guarantee the confidentiality of the information provided.

Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) suggestions to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) suggestions 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, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the request for approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.

Title: Entry and Manifest of Merchandise Free of Duty, Carrier's Certificate and Release.

OMB Number: 1651-0013.

Form Number: CBP Form 7523.

Current Actions: CBP proposes to extend the expiration date of this information collection. There is no change to the burden hours or the information collected.

Type of Review: Extension (without change).

Affected Public: Businesses.

Abstract: CBP Form 7523, Entry and Manifest of Merchandise Free of Duty, Carrier's Certificate and Release, is used by carriers and importers as a manifest for the entry of merchandise free of duty under certain conditions. CBP Form 7523 is also used by carriers to show that articles being imported are to be released to the importer or consignee, and as an inward foreign manifest for a vehicle or a vessel of less than 5 net tons arriving in the United States from Canada or Mexico with merchandise conditionally free of duty. CBP uses this form to authorize the entry of such merchandise. CBP Form 7523 is authorized by 19 U.S.C. 1433, 1484 and 1498. It is provided for by 19 CFR 123.4 and 19 CFR 143.23. This form is accessible at https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/publications/forms?title=7523&=Apply.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 4,950.

Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 20.

Estimated Total Annual Responses: 99,000.

Estimated Time per Response: 5 minutes.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 8,247.

Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) suggestions to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) suggestions 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, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the request for approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.

Title: Foreign Trade Zone Annual Reconciliation Certification and Record Keeping Requirement.

OMB Number: 1651-0051.

Form Number: None.

Current Actions: CBP proposes to extend the expiration date of this information collection. There is no change to the burden hours, the information collected, or to the record keeping requirements.

Type of Review: Extension (without change).

Affected Public: Businesses or other for-profit institutions.

Abstract: In accordance with 19 CFR 146.4 and 146.25 foreign trade zone (FTZ) operators are required to account for zone merchandise admitted, stored, manipulated and removed from FTZs. FTZ operators must prepare a reconciliation report within 90 days after the end of the zone year for a spot check or audit by CBP. In addition, within 10 working days after the annual reconciliation, FTZ operators must submit to the CBP port director a letter signed by the operator certifying that the annual reconciliation has been prepared and is available for CBP review and is accurate. These requirements are authorized by Foreign Trade Zones Act, as amended (Pub. L. 104-201, 19 U.S.C. 81a et seq.)

Estimated Number of Respondents: 276.

Estimated Time per Respondent: 45 minutes.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 207.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 276.

Estimated Time per Respondent: 20 minutes.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 91.

Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) suggestions to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) suggestions 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, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the request for approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.

Title: Documents Required Aboard Private Aircraft.

OMB Number: 1651-0058.

Form Number: None.

Current Actions: CBP proposes to extend the expiration date of this information collection. There is no change to the burden hours or to the information collected.

Type of Review: Extension (without change).

Affected Public: Individuals.

Abstract: In accordance with 19 CFR 122.27(c), a commander of a private aircraft arriving in the U.S. must present several documents to CBP officers for inspection. These documents include: (1) A pilot certificate/license; (2) a medical certificate; and (3) a certificate of registration. The information on these documents is used by CBP officers as an essential part of the inspection process for private aircraft arriving from a foreign country. These requirements are authorized by 19 U.S.C. 1433, as amended by Public Law 99-570.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 120,000.

Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 120,000.

Estimated Time per Response: 1 minute.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 1,992.

Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) suggestions to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) suggestions 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, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the request for approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.

Title: e-Allegations Submission.

OMB Number: 1651-0131.

Form Number: None.

Current Actions: CBP proposes to extend the expiration date of this information collection. There is no change to the burden hours or to the information collected.

Type of Review: Extension (without change).

Affected Public: Businesses, Individuals.

Abstract: In the interest of detecting trade violations to customs laws, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) established the e-Allegations Web site to provide a means for concerned members of the trade community to confidentially report violations to CBP. The e-Allegations site allows the public to submit pertinent information that assists CBP in its decision whether or not to pursue the alleged violations by initiating an investigation. The information collected includes the name, phone number and email address of the member of the trade community reporting the alleged violation. It also includes a description of the alleged violation, and the name and address of the potential violators. The e-Allegations Web site is accessible at https://apps.cbp.gov/eallegations/.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 1,600.

Estimated Number of Total Annual Responses: 1,600.

Estimated Time per Response: 15 minutes.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 400.

Under Section 653 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act), 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq., FEMA is authorized to provide assistance to States based on needs before, during, and after a disaster has impacted the State. For a major disaster, the Stafford Act authorizes FEMA to direct any agency to utilize its existing authorities and resources in support of State and local assistance response and recovery efforts. See 42 U.S.C. 5170(a)(1). For an emergency, the Stafford Act authorizes FEMA to direct any agency to utilize its existing authorities and resources in support of State and local emergency assistance efforts. See 42 U.S.C. 5192(a)(1). FEMA may task other Federal agencies to assist during disasters and to support emergency efforts by State and local governments by issuing a mission assignment to the appropriate agency. See 44 CFR 206.5, 206.208. FEMA collects the information necessary to determine what resources are needed and if a mission assignment is appropriate. The information collected explains which State(s) require assistance, what needs to be accomplished, details any resource shortfalls, and explains what assistance is required to meet these needs.

Title: Request for Federal Assistance Form—How to Process Mission Assignments in Federal Disaster Operations.

Type of Information Collection: Revision of a currently approved information collection.

OMB Number: 1660-0047.

FEMA Forms: FEMA Form 010-0-7, Resource Request Form; FEMA Form 010-0-8, Mission Assignment.

Abstract: If a State determines that its capacity to respond to a disaster exceeds its available resources, it may submit to FEMA a request that the work be accomplished by a Federal agency. This request documents how the response requirements exceed the capacity for the State to respond to the situation on its own and what type of assistance is required. FEMA reviews this information and may issue a mission assignment to the appropriate Federal agency to assist the State in its response to the situation.

Affected Public: State, local or Tribal Government.

Number of Respondents: 10.

Number of Responses: 12,820.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 4,426 hours.

Estimated Cost: The estimated annual cost to respondents for the hour burden is $301,056.52. There are no annual costs to respondents operations and maintenance costs for technical services. There is no annual start-up or capital costs. The cost to the Federal Government is $28,309.28.

Comments may be submitted as indicated in the ADDRESSES caption above. Comments are solicited to (a) evaluate whether the proposed data collection is necessary for the proper performance of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) 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; (c) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

Section 106 of the HUD Reform Act added a new section 7(q) to the Department of Housing and Urban Development Act (42 U.S.C. 3535(q)), which provides that:

1. Any waiver of a regulation must be in writing and must specify the grounds for approving the waiver;

2. Authority to approve a waiver of a regulation may be delegated by the Secretary only to an individual of Assistant Secretary or equivalent rank, and the person to whom authority to waive is delegated must also have authority to issue the particular regulation to be waived;

3. Not less than quarterly, the Secretary must notify the public of all waivers of regulations that HUD has approved, by publishing a notice in the Federal Register. These notices (each covering the period since the most recent previous notification) shall:

a. Identify the project, activity, or undertaking involved;

b. Describe the nature of the provision waived and the designation of the provision;

c. Indicate the name and title of the person who granted the waiver request;

d. Describe briefly the grounds for approval of the request; and

e. State how additional information about a particular waiver may be obtained.

Section 106 of the HUD Reform Act also contains requirements applicable to waivers of HUD handbook provisions that are not relevant to the purpose of this notice.

This notice follows procedures provided in HUD's Statement of Policy on Waiver of Regulations and Directives issued on April 22, 1991 (56 FR 16337). In accordance with those procedures and with the requirements of section 106 of the HUD Reform Act, waivers of regulations are granted by the Assistant Secretary with jurisdiction over the regulations for which a waiver was requested. In those cases in which a General Deputy Assistant Secretary granted the waiver, the General Deputy Assistant Secretary was serving in the absence of the Assistant Secretary in accordance with the office's Order of Succession.

This notice covers waivers of regulations granted by HUD from October 1, 2016 through December 31, 2016. For ease of reference, the waivers granted by HUD are listed by HUD program office (for example, the Office of Community Planning and Development, the Office of Housing, and the Office of Public and Indian Housing, etc.). Within each program office grouping, the waivers are listed sequentially by the regulatory section of title 24 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) that is being waived. For example, a waiver of a provision in 24 CFR part 58 would be listed before a waiver of a provision in 24 CFR part 570.

Where more than one regulatory provision is involved in the grant of a particular waiver request, the action is listed under the section number of the first regulatory requirement that appears in 24 CFR and that is being waived. For example, a waiver of both § 58.73 and § 58.74 would appear sequentially in the listing under § 58.73.

Waiver of regulations that involve the same initial regulatory citation are in time sequence beginning with the earliest-dated regulatory waiver.

Should HUD receive additional information about waivers granted during the period covered by this report (the fourth quarter of calendar year 2016) before the next report is published (the first quarter of calendar year 2017), HUD will include any additional waivers granted for the fourth quarter in the next report.

Accordingly, information about approved waiver requests pertaining to HUD regulations is provided in the Appendix that follows this notice.

Barrick Cortez, Inc. is proposing modifications to the existing Deep South Project Plan of Operations (Project) which is located in Eureka and Lander Counties, south of Crescent Valley, Nevada. The proposed modifications include the following activities:

• Deepen the existing Crossroads Pit (Pipeline Complex) by 200 feet to 3,200 feet above mean sea level (amsl) and reconfigure the backfill. Three backfill scenarios are being evaluated at this time;

• Add Stage 11 to the existing Pipeline Pit;

• Expand the existing Gold Acres Pit Complex and expand the waste rock facility (WRF);

• Expand the existing Cortez Hills underground gold mine by increasing the depth of mining from the currently authorized floor of 3,800 feet amsl to 2,500 feet amsl;

• Expand the Pediment portion of the Cortez Hills Pit and shift the Plan of Operations boundary to the east by about 800 feet;

• Partially backfill the existing Cortez Hills Pit;

• Construct an additional water treatment plant in the Cortez Hills Complex;

• Expand the existing Cortez Pit and WRF;

• The maximum dewatering rate will remain below the authorized rate of 36,100 gpm;

• Add Rapid Infiltration Basins (RIBs), laydown areas and surface pipelines on fee land outside of the Plan of Operations boundary in Crescent Valley;

• Construct additional RIBs and surface pipelines, laydown areas and a booster station in Grass Valley and Pine Valley;

• Construct, if necessary, a water reservoir and pipelines for dewatering water management at Rocky Pass, construct a water line from the reservoir to the Dean Ranch, and construct a bypass road for public access; and

• Various additions/revisions to Facilities and Ancillary Disturbance:

○ Expand the plan boundary to capture proposed facilities;

○ Increase off site ore haulage from 1.2 to 2.5 million tons/year;

○ Modify the surface mining rate to allow up to 600,000 tons per day;

○ Expand the existing Pipeline oxide ore stockpile;

○ Add ore stockpiles;

○ Add ancillary disturbance around existing and proposed facilities;

○ Power lines, pipelines, buildings, communication sites, haul and access roads; and

○ Change the Grass Valley productions wells to injection wells and add monitor wells.

The BLM Mt. Lewis Field Office administers 54,825 acres of public lands within the plan boundary, and Cortez controls 3,268 acres of private lands. The BLM previously authorized Cortez to disturb 16,700 acres within the plan boundary. The Plan of Operations amendment (APO) would include increasing the existing approved plan boundary by 4,279 acres; from 58,093 acres to 62,372 acres. The proposed modifications will result in approximately 3,798 acres of new disturbance inside of the new proposed plan boundary. Barrick Cortez, Inc. would continue to employ the existing workforce of employees for the construction, operation, reclamation, and closure of the proposed project amendment, which is anticipated to extend the mine life by approximately another 12 years as a result of the proposed activities.

The BLM is seeking input regarding issues that may be analyzed in the EIS. The public scoping meeting provides the public and other interested agencies and organizations an opportunity to learn about the Project and to help identify issues, provide input, and propose alternatives to be addressed in the EIS before the BLM begins drafting it. Early public involvement is crucial to identify various issues that may be addressed through the process. Some of the potential anticipated issues and concerns may include:

Public involvement is an important part of the NEPA process. The level of public involvement varies with the different types of NEPA compliance and decision-making. Public involvement begins early in the NEPA process, with scoping, and continues throughout the preparation of the analysis and the decision. The CEQ Regulations require that agencies “make diligent efforts to involve the public in preparing and implementing their NEPA procedures” (40 CFR 1506.6(a)). There are a wide variety of ways to engage the public in the NEPA process. The purpose of public scoping is to ensure that all interested and affected parties are aware of the proposed action.

The BLM will use and coordinate the NEPA scoping process to help fulfill the public involvement process under the NHPA as provided in 42 CFR 800.2(d)(3). The information about historic and cultural resources within the area potentially affected by the proposed project will assist the BLM in identifying and evaluating impacts to such resources in the context of both NEPA and the NHPA.

The BLM will consult with Native American tribes on a government-to-government basis in accordance with Executive Order 13175 and other policies. Tribal concerns, including impacts on Indian trust assets and potential impacts to cultural resources, will be given due consideration.

Federal, State, and local agencies, along with tribes and other stakeholders that may be interested in or affected by the proposed project that the BLM is evaluating, are invited to participate in the scoping process and, if eligible, may request or be requested by the BLM to participate in the development of the EIS as a cooperating agency. Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting documentation we use in preparing the EIS, will be available for public inspection during normal business hours at the Mount Lewis Field Office (see ADDRESSES section, above).

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 may request in your comment that your personal identifying information be withheld from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

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 February 25, 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:

Background.—These investigations are being instituted, pursuant to sections 703(a) and 733(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1671b(a) and 1673b(a)), in response to a petition filed on March 23, 2017, by National Biodiesel Board Fair Trade Coalition (Washington, DC), and its individual members.

For further information concerning the conduct of these investigations and rules of general application, consult the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, part 201, subparts A and B (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, subparts A and B (19 CFR part 207).

Participation in the investigations and public service list.—Persons (other than petitioners) wishing to participate in the investigations as parties must file an entry of appearance with the Secretary to the Commission, as provided in sections 201.11 and 207.10 of the Commission's rules, not later than seven days after publication of this notice in the Federal Register. Industrial users and (if the merchandise under investigation is sold at the retail level) representative consumer organizations have the right to appear as parties in Commission antidumping duty and countervailing duty investigations. The Secretary will prepare a public service list containing the names and addresses of all persons, or their representatives, who are parties to these investigations upon the expiration of the period for filing entries of appearance.

Limited disclosure of business proprietary information (BPI) under an administrative protective order (APO) and BPI service list.—Pursuant to section 207.7(a) of the Commission's rules, the Secretary will make BPI gathered in these investigations available to authorized applicants representing interested parties (as defined in 19 U.S.C. 1677(9)) who are parties to the investigations under the APO issued in the investigations, provided that the application is made not later than seven days after the publication of this notice in the Federal Register. A separate service list will be maintained by the Secretary for those parties authorized to receive BPI under the APO.

Conference.—The Commission's Director of Investigations has scheduled a conference in connection with these investigations for 9:30 a.m. on Thursday, April 13, 2017, at the U.S. International Trade Commission Building, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC. Requests to appear at the conference should be emailed to [email protected] and [email protected] (DO NOT FILE ON EDIS) on or before April 11, 2017. Parties in support of the imposition of countervailing and antidumping duties in these investigations and parties in opposition to the imposition of such duties will each be collectively allocated one hour within which to make an oral presentation at the conference. A nonparty who has testimony that may aid the Commission's deliberations may request permission to present a short statement at the conference.

Written submissions.—As provided in sections 201.8 and 207.15 of the Commission's rules, any person may submit to the Commission on or before April 18, 2017, a written brief containing information and arguments pertinent to the subject matter of the investigations. Parties may file written testimony in connection with their presentation at the conference. All written submissions must conform with the provisions of section 201.8 of the Commission's rules; any submissions that contain BPI must also conform with the requirements of sections 201.6, 207.3, and 207.7 of the Commission's rules. The Commission's Handbook on E-Filing, available on the Commission's Web site at https://www.usitc.gov/secretary/documents/handbook_on_filing_procedures.pdf, elaborates upon the Commission's rules with respect to electronic filing.

In accordance with sections 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the rules, each document filed by a party to the investigations must be served on all other parties to the investigations (as identified by either the public or BPI service list), and a certificate of service must be timely filed. The Secretary will not accept a document for filing without a certificate of service.

Certification.—Pursuant to section 207.3 of the Commission's rules, any person submitting information to the Commission in connection with this/these investigation(s) must certify that the information is accurate and complete to the best of the submitter's knowledge. In making the certification, the submitter will acknowledge that any information that it submits to the Commission during this/these investigation(s) may be disclosed to and used: (i) By the Commission, its employees and Offices, and contract personnel (a) for developing or maintaining the records of these or related investigations or reviews, or (b) in internal investigations, audits, reviews, and evaluations relating to the programs, personnel, and operations of the Commission including under 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S. government employees and contract personnel, solely for cybersecurity purposes. All contract personnel will sign appropriate nondisclosure agreements.

Authority: These investigations are being conducted under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to section 207.12 of the Commission's rules.

The NRC staff issued RG 5.36 in June 1974 to provide guidance on meeting the requirements related to material control and accounting (MC&A) statistical control procedures in section 70.22(b) of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), “Contents of applications.” This requirement, regarding submittal of the licensees description of its material control and accounting (MC&A) procedures, did not specifically require the methodology that the guidance in RG 5.36 addressed and no longer exists in 10 CFR 70.22(b). The MC&A requirements have all been moved to 10 CFR part 74, and no specific requirements exist for performing outlier testing.

Regulatory guide 5.36 endorsed American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard E178-74, “Recommended Practice for Dealing with Outlying Observations,” with qualifications. ASTM E178-74 provided a common method used in testing for outlying observations. However, the NRC is not aware that any licensee ever used this particular RG or the ASTM standard it endorsed since it is not required by NRC regulations. Instructions on performing such an analysis, if a licensee chose to test their MC&A data for outliers, can be found in NUREG/CR-4604 (PNL-5849), “Statistical Methods for Nuclear Material Management” (ADAMS Accession No. ML103430339). NUREG/CR-4604 was developed to be a comprehensive guidance document on statistical methods that licensees may use in evaluating MC&A data.

Withdrawal of an RG means that the guide no longer provides useful information or has been superseded by other guidance, technological innovations, congressional actions, or other events. The NRC is withdrawing RG 5.36 because it is no longer needed. The withdrawal of RG 5.36 does not alter any prior or existing NRC licensing approvals or the acceptability of licensee commitments to RG 5.36. Although RG 5.36 is withdrawn, current licensees may continue to use it, and withdrawal does not affect any existing licenses or agreements.

However, by withdrawing RG 5.36, the NRC will no longer specifically approve its use in future requests or applications for NRC licensing actions.

Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2017-0041 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this action. You may obtain publically-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-2017-0041.

• 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 DG is electronically available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML16124A200.

• 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.

Please include Docket ID NRC-2017-0041 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 enters 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.

On February 13, 2017, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) solicited comments on DG-4026. The public comment period was originally scheduled to close on April 14, 2017; however, due to the NEI's request, the NRC has decided to extend the public comment period to allow more time for members of the public to develop and submit their comments.