Page Range | 20541-20818 | |
FR Document |
Page and Subject | |
---|---|
82 FR 20815 - Implementing an America-First Offshore Energy Strategy | |
82 FR 20811 - Establishment of the American Technology Council | |
82 FR 20809 - Loyalty Day, 2017 | |
82 FR 20807 - Small Business Week, 2017 | |
82 FR 20805 - National Charter Schools Week, 2017 | |
82 FR 20803 - Older Americans Month, 2017 | |
82 FR 20801 - National Physical Fitness and Sports Month, 2017 | |
82 FR 20799 - National Foster Care Month, 2017 | |
82 FR 20797 - Jewish American Heritage Month, 2017 | |
82 FR 20795 - Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month, 2017 | |
82 FR 20596 - Sunshine Act Notice | |
82 FR 20602 - Farm Credit Administration Board; Sunshine Act; Regular Meeting | |
82 FR 20589 - Sunshine Act Meeting | |
82 FR 20559 - Certain Aluminum Foil From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Extension of Time for Public Comment Regarding Status of the People's Republic of China as a Nonmarket Economy Country Under the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Laws | |
82 FR 20603 - Information Collection Being Submitted for Review and Approval to the Office of Management and Budget | |
82 FR 20597 - Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records | |
82 FR 20594 - Government-Industry Advisory Panel; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Meeting | |
82 FR 20642 - New Postal Products | |
82 FR 20607 - National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed Meeting | |
82 FR 20606 - National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed Meeting | |
82 FR 20549 - Training, Qualification, and Oversight for Safety-Related Railroad Employees | |
82 FR 20544 - Schedules of Controlled Substances: Temporary Placement of 4-Fluoroisobutyryl Fentanyl into Schedule I | |
82 FR 20541 - United States Standards for Barley | |
82 FR 20560 - Export Trade Certificate of Review | |
82 FR 20605 - Notice of Agreements Filed | |
82 FR 20607 - National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities; Notice of Meeting | |
82 FR 20608 - National Institute of Mental Health; Notice of Meeting | |
82 FR 20607 - National Institute of Mental Health; Notice of Closed Meeting | |
82 FR 20601 - Proposed Agency Information Collection Regarding the Energy Priorities and Allocations System | |
82 FR 20639 - Department of the Air Force; Robins Air Force Base, Georgia; Proposed Decommissioning Plan | |
82 FR 20610 - 30-day Extension of Nomination Period for the Royalty Policy Committee | |
82 FR 20687 - Agency Information Collection Activity: Statement in Support of Claim | |
82 FR 20686 - Agency Information Collection Activity Under OMB Review: Request for Employment Information in Connection With Claim for Disability Benefits | |
82 FR 20688 - Agency Information Collection Activity Under OMB Review: Authorization To Disclose Personal Information to a Third Party (Insurance) | |
82 FR 20687 - Agency Information Collection Activity Under OMB Review: Mandatory Status of Dependents | |
82 FR 20686 - Status of Dependents Questionnaire | |
82 FR 20637 - Notice of Proposed Information Collection Requests | |
82 FR 20601 - Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Savannah River Site | |
82 FR 20635 - Certain Two-Way Radio Equipment and Systems, Related Software and Components Thereof; Institution of Investigation | |
82 FR 20633 - Certain Thermoplastic-Encapsulated Electric Motors, Components Thereof, and Products and Vehicles Containing Same Institution of Investigation | |
82 FR 20587 - Sanctuary System Business Advisory Council: Public Meeting | |
82 FR 20608 - Notice of Correction for Announcement of Requirements and Registration for “Antimicrobial Resistance Rapid, Point-of-Need Diagnostic Test” Challenge | |
82 FR 20596 - Notice of Public Hearing and Business Meeting May 17 and June 14, 2017 | |
82 FR 20563 - Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Site Characterization Surveys Off the Coast of New Jersey | |
82 FR 20609 - National Advisory Council; Meeting | |
82 FR 20591 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Extension of Approval of Information Collection; Comment Request-Safety Standard for Multi-Purpose Lighters | |
82 FR 20591 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Generic Clearance for the Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery | |
82 FR 20589 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Consumer Focus Groups | |
82 FR 20590 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Extension of Approval of Information Collection; Comment Request-Procedures for Export of Noncomplying Products | |
82 FR 20592 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Generic Clearance for the Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery | |
82 FR 20686 - Environmental Impact Statement; Walton County & Bay County | |
82 FR 20685 - Central Valley Fund III (SBIC), L.P., License No. 09/09-0486; Notice Seeking Exemption Under Section 312 of the Small Business Investment Act, Conflicts of Interest | |
82 FR 20685 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation; Notice of Designation of Longer Period for Commission Action on Proposed Rule Change To Implement the Capped Contingency Liquidity Facility in the Government Securities Division Rulebook | |
82 FR 20562 - Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; General Provisions for Domestic Fisheries; Application for Exempted Fishing Permits | |
82 FR 20664 - Commonwealth Annuity and Life Insurance Company, et al. | |
82 FR 20652 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation; Notice of No Objection To Advance Notice Filing To Establish the Centrally Cleared Institutional Triparty Service and Make Other Changes | |
82 FR 20648 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Investors Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing of Amendment No. 1 and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To Amend IEX Rule 16.135 To Adopt Generic Listing Standards for Managed Fund Shares | |
82 FR 20643 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Adopt an Annual Fee Cap for Acquisition Companies | |
82 FR 20656 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Listing and Trading of Shares of the Franklin Liberty Intermediate Municipal Opportunities ETF and Franklin Liberty Municipal Bond ETF Under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600 | |
82 FR 20673 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To List and Trade the Guggenheim Limited Duration ETF | |
82 FR 20587 - Global Intellectual Property Academy (GIPA) Surveys | |
82 FR 20600 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Teacher Incentive Fund Annual Performance Report | |
82 FR 20634 - 100- to 150-Seat Large Civil Aircraft From Canada; Institution of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations and Scheduling of Preliminary Phase Investigations | |
82 FR 20595 - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces Proposed Rules Changes | |
82 FR 20645 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation; Notice of No Objection To Advance Notice Filing Concerning the Options Clearing Corporation's Enhancements to OCC's Stock Loan Programs | |
82 FR 20671 - Order Granting Application by New York Stock Exchange LLC, NYSE MKT LLC, NYSE Arca, Inc., and NYSE National, Inc., Respectively, for a Conditional Exemption Pursuant to Section 36(a) of the Exchange Act From Certain Requirements of Rule 6a-2 Under the Exchange Act | |
82 FR 20605 - Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies | |
82 FR 20604 - Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission | |
82 FR 20637 - Arts Advisory Panel Meetings | |
82 FR 20606 - Issuance of Final Guidance Publications | |
82 FR 20559 - U.S. Department of Agriculture Multi-Family Housing Program 2017 Industry Forums-Open Teleconference and/or Web Conference Meetings | |
82 FR 20643 - Product Change-Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement | |
82 FR 20642 - Product Change-Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, & First-Class Package Service Negotiated Service Agreement | |
82 FR 20636 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; New Collection: Supplemental Fraud Survey (SFS) to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) 2017 | |
82 FR 20561 - National Advisory Committee on Windstorm Impact Reduction Meeting | |
82 FR 20630 - Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Alaska Region, Anchorage, AK | |
82 FR 20615 - Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items: Robert S. Peabody Museum of Archaeology, Phillips Academy, Andover, MA | |
82 FR 20619 - Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items: Placer County Museums, Auburn, CA | |
82 FR 20628 - Notice of Inventory Completion: San Diego Museum of Man, San Diego, CA | |
82 FR 20621 - Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items: Peabody Museum of Natural History, Yale University, New Haven, CT | |
82 FR 20611 - Notice of Inventory Completion: Peabody Museum of Natural History, Yale University, New Haven, CT | |
82 FR 20632 - Notice of Inventory Completion: Allen County-Fort Wayne Historical Society, Fort Wayne, IN | |
82 FR 20610 - Notice of Inventory Completion: Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, IL; Correction | |
82 FR 20622 - Notice of Inventory Completion: History Colorado, Formerly Colorado Historical Society, Denver, CO | |
82 FR 20617 - Notice of Inventory Completion: Office of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA | |
82 FR 20620 - Notice of Inventory Completion: Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Archaeology, Nashville, TN | |
82 FR 20625 - Notice of Inventory Completion: Fowler Museum at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA | |
82 FR 20612 - Notice of Inventory Completion: Human Remains Repository, Department of Anthropology, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY | |
82 FR 20627 - Notice of Inventory Completion: Kansas State Historical Society, Topeka, KS | |
82 FR 20616 - Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items: Worcester Society of Natural History d.b.a. EcoTarium, Worcester, MA | |
82 FR 20624 - Notice of Inventory Completion: Department of Anthropology at Indiana University, Bloomington, IN | |
82 FR 20631 - Notice of Inventory Completion: University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, Philadelphia, PA | |
82 FR 20629 - Notice of Inventory Completion: Tennessee Valley Authority, Knoxville, TN; Correction | |
82 FR 20621 - Notice of Inventory Completion: Tennessee Valley Authority, Knoxville, TN; Correction | |
82 FR 20618 - Notice of Inventory Completion: Nebraska State Historical Society, Lincoln, NE | |
82 FR 20628 - Notice of Inventory Completion: Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Grand Canyon National Park, Grand Canyon, AZ; Correction | |
82 FR 20623 - Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items: Museum of Northern Arizona, Flagstaff, AZ | |
82 FR 20558 - Petitions for Reconsideration of Action in Rulemaking Proceeding | |
82 FR 20555 - Bonding Requirements for Recipients | |
82 FR 20554 - Proposed Amendment of Class D and E Airspace: Battle Creek, MI | |
82 FR 20606 - Notice of Proposals To Engage in or To Acquire Companies Engaged in Permissible Nonbanking Activities | |
82 FR 20589 - Notice of Meeting | |
82 FR 20548 - Clarification of Employer's Continuing Obligation To Make and Maintain an Accurate Record of Each Recordable Injury and Illness | |
82 FR 20602 - Notice of Filing of Self-Certification of Coal Capability Under the Powerplant and Industrial Fuel Use Act | |
82 FR 20750 - Medicare Program; FY 2018 Hospice Wage Index and Payment Rate Update and Hospice Quality Reporting Requirements | |
82 FR 20690 - Medicare Program; Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility Prospective Payment System for Federal Fiscal Year 2018 |
Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration
Rural Housing Service
International Trade Administration
National Institute of Standards and Technology
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Patent and Trademark Office
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
National Institutes of Health
Federal Emergency Management Agency
National Park Service
Drug Enforcement Administration
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
National Endowment for the Arts
Federal Aviation Administration
Federal Highway Administration
Federal Railroad Administration
Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, and notice of recently enacted public laws.
To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents electronic mailing list, go to https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USGPOOFR/subscriber/new, enter your e-mail address, then follow the instructions to join, leave, or manage your subscription.
Grain Inspection Packers and Stockyards Administration, USDA.
Final rule.
The Department of Agriculture (USDA), Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) is revising the U.S. Standards for Barley (barley standards) under the United States Grain Standards Act (USGSA) by revising the definitions of other terms to remove Six-rowed Blue Malting barley and the reference to kernels with white aleurone layers. Further, GIPSA is revising the barley standards to add the factors injured-by mold and mold-damaged kernels to the subclass Six-rowed Malting barley. Finally, GIPSA is revising the grade requirements for Two-rowed Malting Barley and Six-rowed Malting barley, and removing those for Six-rowed Blue Malting barley.
This rule is effective August 1, 2018.
Barry Gomoll, 202-720-8286. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication (Braille, large print, audio tape, etc.) should contact the USDA Target Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).
Barley is defined in the U.S. Standards for Barley as grain that, before the removal of dockage, consists of 50 percent or more of whole kernels of cultivated barley (
In 2015, U.S. barley producers harvested 3.1 million acres of barley, producing 214.3 million bushels of the grain. Beer production in the United States accounts for approximately 56 percent of total domestic use; feed and industrial uses account for about 36 percent of domestic use; and whiskey, food and seed account for about 8 percent of domestic use (2005-2014 average). Barley is also exported for feed and malting purposes, typically accounting for less than five percent of total barley usage.
Section 76 of the USGSA authorizes GIPSA to establish and maintain the standards for barley and other grains regarding kind, class, quality, and condition (7 U.S.C. 76(a)). The barley standards facilitate the marketing of barley, define U.S. barley quality, and define commonly used industry terms in the domestic and global marketplace. Also, the barley standards contain basic principles such as the basis of determination used for a particular quality factor analysis, as well as specify grades, grade requirements, special grades, and special grade requirements. The barley standards were established on August 24, 1926, were last revised in 1997, and appear in the USGSA regulations at 7 CFR 810.201 through 810.207.
This final rule makes several revisions to the barley standards. The term “Blue Malting barley” and references to kernels with white aleurone layers are being removed from the definitions and the subclass Six-rowed Blue Malting barley is being removed from the barley standards (7 CFR 810.202 and 810.204). These references are being removed because (1) blue aleurone barley is no longer used by the malting and brewing industry in the United States, (2) no blue aleurone malting varieties are grown for export, and (3) United States production of blue aleurone malting barley is minimal.
Further, the grade requirement tables for Six-rowed Malting barley and Two-rowed Malting barley are being harmonized to have the same grade limits for all factors except for test weight and thin barley.
The following changes are being made to the grade requirements for Six-rowed Malting barley:
• The minimum limit for barley of suitable malting types for grade numbers 1 and 2 is increased.
• The minimum percentage of sound barley for all grades is increased.
• Maximum limits of wild oats are added to all grades.
The following changes are being made to the grade requirements for Two-rowed Malting barley:
• Maximum limits of damaged kernels are added to all grades.
• Maximum limits of other grains are added to all grades.
• The maximum limits for skinned and broken kernels are lowered for grade numbers 1, 2, and 3.
Along with the changes to the grade requirements, the definition of Six-rowed Malting barley is being revised to include limits for injured-by-mold kernels and mold-damaged kernels.
These changes are being made as the result of producer and industry comments in response to an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking published on October 4, 2011, in the
Additionally, these changes to the grade standards make it necessary to update the tolerances for the inspection of shiplot, unit train, and lash barges in single lots. These types of lots are inspected using a statistically based inspection plan, which uses tolerances to allow slight deviation in quality. These tolerances, published in Table 1 and Table 2 of section 800.86(c)(2), are being updated to reflect the harmonization of the standards.
On July 25, 2014, GIPSA issued a proposed rule requesting comments on proposed changes to the barley standards (79 FR 43281). GIPSA received two comments in response to this proposed rule.
One comment came from a malting barley industry group. The comment expressed agreement with the changes in the proposed rule, commenting that the changes in the barley standards provide consistency for barley trading and insurance purposes.
The other comment came from a farmer who grows wheat and barley. The comment expressed concern that, by adding limits for injured-by-mold and mold-damaged kernels to Six-rowed Malting barley, the proposed rule might impose more restrictions on growers of barley. Since mold is primarily a storage issue, these additions should not place any further burden on barley producers. Furthermore, the inclusion of these factors in the barley standards should allow crop insurance to cover losses to farmers in the event that mold damage does occur, protecting the farmers from rejection of their crop by buyers.
As specified in the USGSA (7 U.S.C. 76(b)), amendments to the standards cannot become effective less than 1 calendar year after public notification, unless in the judgment of the Secretary, the public health, interest, or safety require that they become effective sooner. Following this section of the USGSA, GIPSA has determined that it is in the public interest to make this final rule effective on August 1, 2018, in order to coincide with the start of the barley marketing year.
This rule does not meet the definition of a significant regulatory action contained in section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, and is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Additionally, because this rule does not meet the definition of a significant regulatory action it does not trigger the requirements contained in Executive Order 13771.
GIPSA is revising the barley standards in the Definitions of Other Terms by removing Six-rowed Blue Malting barley and the reference to kernels with white aleurone layers. In addition, the change adds injured-by-mold and mold-damaged kernels to the definition of Six-rowed Malting barley. The definition change also revises the grade and grade requirements for Two-rowed Malting barley. Further, the grade and grade requirements for Six-rowed Malting barley and Six-rowed Blue Malting barley are revised. Under the provisions of the USGSA, grain exported from the United States must be officially inspected and weighed. GIPSA provides mandatory inspection and weighing services at 45 export facilities in the United States and 7 facilities for U.S. grain transshipped through Canadian ports. Five delegated State agencies provide mandatory inspection and weighing services at 13 facilities. All of these facilities are owned by multi-national corporations, large cooperatives, or public entities that do not meet the requirements for small entities established by the SBA. Further, the regulations are applied equally to all entities. The USGSA (7 U.S.C. 87f-1) requires the registration of all persons engaged in the business of buying grain for sale in foreign commerce. In addition, those persons who handle, weigh, or transport grain for sale in foreign commerce must also register. Section 800.30 of the USGSA regulations (7 CFR 800.30) define a foreign commerce grain business as a person who regularly engage in buying for sale, handling, weighing, or transporting grain totaling 15,000 metric tons or more during the preceding or current calendar year. At present, there are 108 registrants registered to export grain. GIPSA believes that most of the 108 registrants are large businesses and very few are small businesses.
GIPSA also provides domestic and miscellaneous inspection and weighing services at other than export locations. Such services are provided by official state and private agencies. Approximately 217 different applicants receive domestic inspection services each year and approximately 150 different locations receive track scale tests as a miscellaneous service each year.
Most users of the official inspection and weighing services do not meet the requirements for small entities nor do the agencies that provide such services. Further, GIPSA is required by statute to make services available and to recover, as nearly as practicable, the costs of providing such services. There would be no additional reporting, record keeping, or other compliance requirements imposed upon small entities as a result of this rulemaking. Further, GIPSA has not identified any other Federal rules that may duplicate, overlap or conflict with this rulemaking. Therefore, GIPSA has determined that this rulemaking will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities as defined in the RFA.
This rulemaking has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This action is not intended to have retroactive effect. The USGSA provides in section 87g that no subdivision may require or impose any requirements or restrictions concerning the inspection, weighing, or description of grain under the USGSA. Otherwise, this rule would not preempt any State or local laws, or regulations, or policies unless they present an irreconcilable conflict with this rule. There are no administrative procedures which must be exhausted prior to any judicial challenge to the provisions of this rule.
This rulemaking has been reviewed with the requirements of Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments. GIPSA has received no requests for official services for barley from any Tribal Government. Therefore, GIPSA believes that this rule would not have substantial and direct effects on Tribal governments and would not have significant Tribal implications.
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the information collection and recordkeeping requirements included in this rulemaking has previously been approved by the OMB under control number 0580-0013.
GIPSA is committed to complying with the Government Paperwork Elimination Act, which requires Government agencies in general to provide the public the option of submitting information or transacting business electronically to maximum extent possible.
GIPSA is committed to complying with the E-Government Act, to promote
Administrative practice and procedure, Conflict of interests, Exports, Freedom of information, Grains, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Exports, Grain.
For reasons set out in the preamble 7 CFR parts 800 and 810 are amended as follows:
7 U.S.C. 71-87k.
(c) * * *
(2) * * *
Malting barley must not be infested in accordance with § 810.107(b) and must not contain any special grades as defined in § 810.206. Six- and two-rowed barley varieties not meeting the above requirements must be graded in accordance with standards established for the class Barley.
7 U.S.C. 71-87k.
(c) * * *
(1)
(i)
(ii)
Malting barley must not be infested in accordance with § 810.107(b) and must not contain any special grades as defined in § 810.206. Six-rowed Malting barley varieties not meeting the requirements of this section must be graded in accordance with standards established for the class Barley.
Malting barley must not be infested in accordance with § 810.107(b) and must not contain any special grades as defined in § 810.206. Six-rowed Malting barley and Six-rowed Blue Malting barley varieties not meeting the requirements of this section must be graded in accordance with standards established for the class Barley.
Drug Enforcement Administration, Department of Justice.
Temporary scheduling order.
The Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration is issuing this temporary scheduling order to schedule the synthetic opioid,
This temporary scheduling order is effective May 3, 2017, until May 3, 2019, unless it is extended for an additional year or a permanent scheduling proceeding is completed. The DEA will publish a document in the
Michael J. Lewis, Diversion Control Division, Drug Enforcement Administration; Mailing Address: 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152; Telephone: (202) 598-6812.
Section 201 of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), 21 U.S.C. 811, provides the Attorney General with the authority to temporarily place a substance into schedule I of the CSA for two years without regard to the requirements of 21 U.S.C. 811(b) if he finds that such action is necessary to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(1). In addition, if proceedings to control a substance are initiated under 21 U.S.C. 811(a)(1), the Attorney General may extend the temporary scheduling
Where the necessary findings are made, a substance may be temporarily scheduled if it is not listed in any other schedule under section 202 of the CSA, 21 U.S.C. 812, or if there is no exemption or approval in effect for the substance under section 505 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), 21 U.S.C. 355. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(1). The Attorney General has delegated scheduling authority under 21 U.S.C. 811 to the Administrator of the DEA. 28 CFR 0.100.
Section 201(h)(4) of the CSA, 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(4), requires the Administrator to notify the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) of his intention to temporarily place a substance into schedule I of the CSA.
To find that placing a substance temporarily into schedule I of the CSA is necessary to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety, the Administrator is required to consider three of the eight factors set forth in section 201(c) of the CSA, 21 U.S.C. 811(c): The substance's history and current pattern of abuse; the scope, duration and significance of abuse; and what, if any, risk there is to the public health. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(3). Consideration of these factors includes actual abuse, diversion from legitimate channels, and clandestine importation, manufacture, or distribution. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(3).
A substance meeting the statutory requirements for temporary scheduling may only be placed into schedule I. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(1). Substances in schedule I are those that have a high potential for abuse, no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, and a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision. 21 U.S.C. 812(b)(1).
Available data and information for 4-fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl, summarized below, indicate that this synthetic opioid has a high potential for abuse, no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, and a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision. The DEA's three-factor analysis, and the Assistant Secretary's January 17, 2017, letter, are available in their entirety under the tab “Supporting Documents” of the public docket of this action at
The recreational abuse of fentanyl-like substances continues to be a significant concern. These substances are distributed to users, often with unpredictable outcomes. 4-Fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl has recently been encountered by law enforcement and public health officials and the adverse health effects and outcomes are demonstrated by fatal overdose cases. The documented negative effects of 4-fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl are consistent with those of other opioids.
On October 1, 2014, the DEA implemented STARLiMS (a web-based, commercial laboratory information management system) to replace the System to Retrieve Information from Drug Evidence (STRIDE) as its laboratory drug evidence data system of record. DEA laboratory data submitted after September 30, 2014, are reposited in STARLiMS. Data from STRIDE and STARLiMS were queried on December 21, 2016. STARLiMS registered 21 reports containing 4-fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl, all reported in 2016, from Florida, Maryland, Mississippi, New Jersey, New York, Texas, and the District of Columbia. According to STARLiMS, the first laboratory submission of 4-fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl occurred in March 2016 in Maryland. The DEA is not aware of any laboratory identifications of 4-fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl prior to 2016.
The National Forensic Laboratory Information System (NFLIS) is a national drug forensic laboratory reporting system that systematically collects results from drug chemistry analyses conducted by other federal, state and local forensic laboratories across the country. According to NFLIS, the only report of 4-fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl from state or local forensic laboratories was recorded in August 2016 in Pennsylvania. Due to normal lag time in reporting, NFLIS data from August through November 2016 is incomplete.
Evidence suggests that the pattern of abuse of fentanyl analogues, including 4-fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl, parallels that of heroin and prescription opioid analgesics. Seizures of 4-fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl have been encountered in powder form and packaged similar to that of heroin. 4-Fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl has been encountered as a single substance as well as in combination with other substances of abuse, including heroin, fentanyl, furanyl fentanyl, methamphetamine, and cocaine. 4-Fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl has been connected to fatal overdoses, in which insufflation and intravenous routes of administration are documented.
Reports collected by the DEA demonstrate 4-fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl is being abused for its opioid properties. This abuse of 4-fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl has resulted in morbidity and mortality (
The population likely to abuse 4-fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl overlaps with
4-Fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl exhibits pharmacological profiles similar to that of fentanyl and other µ-opioid receptor agonists. The toxic effects of 4-fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl in humans are demonstrated by overdose fatalities involving this substance. Abusers of 4-fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl may not know the origin, identity, or purity of this substance, thus posing significant adverse health risks when compared to abuse of pharmaceutical preparations of opioid analgesics, such as morphine and oxycodone.
Based on information received by the DEA, the abuse of 4-fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl leads to the same qualitative public health risks as heroin, fentanyl and other opioid analgesic substances. As with any non-medically approved opioid, the health and safety risks for users are great. The public health risks attendant to the abuse of heroin and opioid analgesics are well established and have resulted in large numbers of drug treatment admissions, emergency department visits, and fatal overdoses.
4-Fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl has been associated with numerous fatalities. At least 62 confirmed overdose deaths involving 4-fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl abuse have been reported from Maryland in 2016. As the data demonstrates, the potential for fatal and non-fatal overdose exists for 4-fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl; thus, 4-fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl poses an imminent hazard to the public safety.
In accordance with 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(3), based on the data and information summarized above, the continued uncontrolled manufacture, distribution, importation, exportation, and abuse of 4-fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl pose an imminent hazard to the public safety. The DEA is not aware of any currently accepted medical uses for this substance in treatment in the United States. A substance meeting the statutory requirements for temporary scheduling, 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(1), may only be placed into schedule I. Substances in schedule I are those that have a high potential for abuse, no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, and a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision. Available data and information for 4-fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl indicate that this substance has a high potential for abuse, no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, and a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision. As required by section 201(h)(4) of the CSA, 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(4), the Administrator, through a letter dated January 5, 2017, notified the Assistant Secretary of the DEA's intention to temporarily place this substance into schedule I. A notice of intent was subsequently published in the
In accordance with the provisions of section 201(h) of the CSA, 21 U.S.C. 811(h), the Administrator considered available data and information, herein sets forth the grounds for his determination that it is necessary to temporarily schedule 4-fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl into schedule I of the CSA, and finds that placement of this synthetic opioid into schedule I of the CSA is necessary to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety.
Because the Administrator hereby finds it necessary to temporarily place this synthetic opioid into schedule I to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety, this temporary order scheduling 4-fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl will be effective on the date of publication in the
The CSA sets forth specific criteria for scheduling a drug or other substance. Permanent scheduling actions in accordance with 21 U.S.C. 811(a) are subject to formal rulemaking procedures done “on the record after opportunity for a hearing” conducted pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 556 and 557. 21 U.S.C. 811. The permanent scheduling process of formal rulemaking affords interested parties with appropriate process and the government with any additional relevant information needed to make a determination. Final decisions that conclude the permanent scheduling process of formal rulemaking are subject to judicial review. 21 U.S.C. 877. Temporary scheduling orders are not subject to judicial review. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(6).
Upon the effective date of this temporary order, 4-fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl will become subject to the regulatory controls and administrative, civil, and criminal sanctions applicable to the manufacture, distribution, reverse distribution, importation, exportation, engagement in research, and conduct of instructional activities or chemical analysis with, and possession of schedule I controlled substances including the following:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Section 201(h) of the CSA, 21 U.S.C. 811(h), provides for a temporary scheduling action where such action is necessary to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety. As provided in this subsection, the Attorney General may, by order, schedule a substance in schedule I on a temporary basis. Such an order may not be issued before the expiration of 30 days from (1) the publication of a notice in the
Inasmuch as section 201(h) of the CSA directs that temporary scheduling actions be issued by order and sets forth the procedures by which such orders are to be issued, the DEA believes that the notice and comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) at 5 U.S.C. 553, do not apply to this temporary scheduling action. In the alternative, even assuming that this action might be subject to 5 U.S.C. 553, the Administrator finds that there is good cause to forgo the notice and comment requirements of 5 U.S.C. 553, as any further delays in the process for issuance of temporary scheduling orders would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest in view of the manifest urgency to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety.
Further, the DEA believes that this temporary scheduling action is not a “rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 601(2), and, accordingly, is not subject to the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The requirements for the preparation of an initial regulatory flexibility analysis in 5 U.S.C. 603(a) are not applicable where, as here, the DEA is not required by the APA or any other law to publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking.
Additionally, this action is not a significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), section 3(f), and, accordingly, this action has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
This action will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in accordance with Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) it is determined that this action does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
As noted above, this action is an order, not a rule. Accordingly, the Congressional Review Act (CRA) is inapplicable, as it applies only to rules. However, if this were a rule, pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, “any rule for which an agency for good cause finds that notice and public procedure thereon are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest, shall take effect at such time as the federal agency promulgating the rule determines.” 5 U.S.C. 808(2). It is in the public interest to schedule this substance immediately to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety. This temporary scheduling action is taken pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 811(h), which is specifically designed to enable the DEA to act in an expeditious manner to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety. 21 U.S.C. 811(h) exempts the temporary scheduling order from standard notice and comment rulemaking procedures to ensure that the process moves swiftly. For the same reasons that underlie 21 U.S.C. 811(h), that is, the DEA's need to move quickly to place this substance into schedule I because it poses an imminent hazard to the public safety, it would be contrary to the public interest to delay implementation of the temporary scheduling order. Therefore, this order shall take effect immediately upon its publication. The DEA has submitted a copy of this temporary order to both Houses of Congress and to the Comptroller General, although such filing is not required under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Congressional Review Act), 5 U.S.C. 801-808 because, as noted above, this action is an order, not a rule.
Administrative practice and procedure, Drug traffic control, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons set out above, the DEA amends 21 CFR part 1308 as follows:
21 U.S.C. 811, 812, 871(b), unless otherwise noted.
(h) * * *
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.
Final rule.
Under the Congressional Review Act, Congress has passed, and the President has signed, Public Law 115-21, a resolution of disapproval of OSHA's final rule titled, “Clarification of Employer's Continuing Obligation to Make and Maintain an Accurate Record of each Recordable Injury and Illness.” OSHA published the rule, which contained various amendments to OSHA's recordkeeping regulations, on December 19, 2016. The amendments became effective on January 18, 2017. Because Public Law 115-21 invalidates the amendments to OSHA's recordkeeping regulations contained in the rule promulgated on December 19, 2016, OSHA is hereby removing those amendments from the Code of Federal Regulations.
This final rule becomes effective on May 3, 2017.
On December 19, 2016, OSHA issued a final rule titled, “Clarification of Employer's Continuing Obligation to Make and Maintain an Accurate Record of Each Recordable Injury and Illness.” See 81 FR 91792. The final rule, which became effective on January 18, 2017, resulted in various amendments to OSHA's recordkeeping regulations clarifying that the duty to make and maintain accurate records of work-related injuries and illnesses is an ongoing obligation. On March 1, 2017 (Cong. Rec. pp. H1421-H1430), the House of Representatives passed a resolution of disapproval (H.J. Res. 83) of the rule under the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801
Health statistics, Occupational safety and health, Safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, State plans.
Accordingly, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration amends part 1904 of title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
29 U.S.C. 657, 658, 660, 666, 669, 673, Secretary of Labor's Order No. 1-2012 (77 FR 3912, Jan. 25, 2012).
The purpose of this rule (part 1904) is to require employers to record and report work-related fatalities, injuries, and illnesses.
Recording or reporting a work-related injury, illness, or fatality does not mean that the employer or employee was at fault, that an OSHA rule has been violated, or that the employee is eligible for workers' compensation or other benefits.
(a)
(b) * * *
(3)
(a)
(1) Review the OSHA 300 Log to verify that the entries are complete and accurate, and correct any deficiencies identified;
(2) Create an annual summary of injuries and illnesses recorded on the OSHA 300 Log;
(3) Certify the summary; and
(4) Post the annual summary
(b) * * *
(1)
(b)
(2)
(3)
If your business changes ownership, you are responsible for recording and reporting work-related injuries and illnesses only for that period of the year during which you owned the establishment. You must transfer the part 1904 records to the new owner. The new owner must save all records of the establishment kept by the prior owner, as required by § 1904.33 of this part, but need not update or correct the records of the prior owner.
(b) * * *
(2)
(iii)
(a)
Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of Transportation (DOT).
Final rule; delay of implementation dates.
This document delays the implementation dates in the final rule published November 7, 2014, because model training program developers alerted FRA they will not be able to timely produce model programs that an estimated 1,459 railroads and contractors are expected to use to comply with the rule's program submission requirements.
This regulation is effective June 2, 2017. Petitions for reconsideration of this delay must be received on or before May 23, 2017. Petitions for reconsideration will be posted in the docket for this proceeding. Comments on any submitted petition for reconsideration must be received on or before June 19, 2017.
Petitions for reconsideration or comments on such petitions: Any petitions and any comments on petitions related to Docket No. FRA-2009-0033 may be submitted by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
Robert J. Castiglione, Staff Director—Technical Training, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, 4100 International Plaza, Suite 450, Fort Worth, TX 76109-4820 (telephone: 817-447-2715); or Alan H. Nagler, Senior Trial Attorney, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Office of Chief Counsel, RCC-10, Mail Stop 10, West Building 3rd Floor, Room W31-309, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: 202-493-6038).
FRA issued a final rule establishing minimum training standards for each category and subcategory of safety-related railroad employees and requiring railroad carriers, contractors, and subcontractors to submit training programs to FRA for FRA approval. The final rule was published November 7, 2014 (79 FR 66459) and was effective on January 6, 2015 (2014 Final Rule). The 2014 Final Rule was required by section 401(a) of the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008, Public Law 110-432, 122 Stat. 4883 (Oct. 16, 2008), codified at 49 U.S.C. 20162, and the Secretary of
In the preamble to the 2014 Final Rule, FRA noted the importance of establishing implementation dates and providing incentives for the early filing of model programs to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the review process. FRA recognized it was paramount to give model program developers sufficient time to develop programs and receive FRA approval. FRA also recognized that employers would not use those model programs unless the employers were given a reasonable time to consider using those programs before the employers' deadline for implementation. Consequently, the 2014 Final Rule provided model program developers with an incentive to file all model programs by May 1, 2017—eight months before the first employers would have to submit model programs and two years before smaller employers (
After publishing the 2014 Final Rule, FRA took significant steps to educate the regulated community on its requirements. On May 1, 2015, FRA notified the regulated community it issued an Interim Final Compliance Guide published in the rulemaking docket. The guide illustrates ways to comply with the rule, provides the requirements in a different format to make it quicker and easier to understand, and answers questions FRA believes are likely to be frequently asked. Any sized employer can use this guide as a quick way to determine if FRA will likely find the employer's training program complies with the 2014 Final Rule. The guide was “Interim Final” because it was effective upon publication and signaled FRA would consider amending the guidance based on comments received. FRA considered all comments received by the June 30, 2015 deadline and considered many late-filed comments, as practicable, before issuing the Final Compliance Guide published in the rulemaking docket May 25, 2016.
FRA personnel also conducted significant outreach to the regulated community; making presentations at association conferences; participating in association-sponsored webinars; and having numerous meetings, conference calls, and other exchanges of information in which FRA answered questions as they arose. FRA included many of the questions and answers with broad industry scope in the Final Compliance Guide.
On March 20, 2017, FRA added information to its Web site to more broadly disseminate information about the 2014 Final Rule's requirements.
During FRA's outreach on the 2014 Final Rule, FRA heard concerns from the American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association (ASLRRA) and National Railroad Construction and Maintenance Association, Inc. (NRC), two of the associations identified in the Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) as likely model program developers. These two associations represent most of the 1,459 employers FRA projected would adopt model training programs rather than develop their own.
Similarly, NRC informed FRA it found certain aspects of the rule confusing to implement and difficult for contractors to apply in practice. Despite FRA's efforts since 2015 to explain the regulatory requirements to NRC and its members through multiple webinars, conference calls, and other outreach, NRC informed FRA it needs more time to develop and submit model training programs the 2014 Final Rule requires.
The fact that both ASLRRA and NRC have notified FRA they cannot submit most or all of their model training programs by the May 1, 2017 deadline significantly impacts the costs associated with the rule and complicates the approval process. The 1,459 employers would bear significantly higher costs developing personalized training programs, rather than adopting model programs that are generic enough to apply to any size railroad or contractor. Further, FRA's resources would be stretched thin reviewing up to 1,459 individual employer programs, rather than a relatively small number of model programs. In addition, if FRA gives the associations additional time to produce model programs, FRA expects the quality of those model programs will be much better than those separately prepared by a large number of individual small or medium employers.
The additional time to implement the rule should also help model training program developers and other regulated entities comply with the final rule. Nevertheless, any individual employer, model training program developer, or other regulated person that finds these revised implementation deadlines difficult to comply with may file a waiver requesting additional time as permitted by 49 CFR part 211, subpart C for FRA approval. FRA would appreciate receiving any such request for additional time to comply with the implementation dates no earlier than four months before the relevant implementation deadline.
Of course, nothing in this rule affects the ability of any regulated entity from complying with the requirements in advance of any deadline.
In consideration of the foregoing, FRA delays each of the implementation dates in the 2014 Final Rule by one year.
The implementation dates in this section are delayed by one year so all employers will have an additional year to develop and submit training programs. Specifically, in paragraphs (a)(1) and (b), the January 1, 2018 implementation dates are changed to January 1, 2019.
In paragraph (a)(2), the implementation date in the 2014 Final Rule was dependent on the date FRA issued the Interim Final Compliance Guide published May 1, 2015. Because that date has passed, and FRA can now calculate the specific implementation date in paragraph (a)(2), FRA calculated that implementation date and added an additional year. Consequently, the May 1, 2019 implementation date is changed to May 1, 2020. It is also no longer necessary to reference the Interim Final Compliance Guide.
The implementation date in paragraph (a)(3) of this section is delayed by one year. Consequently, model program developers will have an additional year to submit model programs. Instead of a May 1, 2017 implementation date, model program developers will have until May 1, 2018, for their programs to be considered approved by FRA and can be implemented 180 days after the date of submission.
Each training organization or learning institution that has provided training services to employers this part covers will have an extra year to continue to offer such training services without FRA approval. The 2014 Final Rule specified that a training organization or learning institution that has provided training services to employers covered by this part before January 1, 2017, may continue to offer such training services without FRA approval until January 1, 2018. FRA amends paragraph (b) of this section so that both dates are delayed by one year. That requirement now reads that a training organization or learning institution that has provided training services to employers covered by this part before January 1, 2018, may continue to offer such training services without FRA approval until January 1, 2019.
The implementation dates in this section are delayed by one year so all employers have an additional year to designate each of their existing safety-related railroad employees by occupational category or subcategory, and only permit designated employees to perform safety-related service in that occupational category or subcategory. In paragraph (a)(1), the September 1, 2018 implementation date is changed to September 1, 2019.
In paragraph (a)(2), the implementation date in the 2014 Final Rule was dependent on the date FRA issued the Interim Final Compliance Guide published May 1, 2015. Because that date has passed, and FRA can now calculate the specific implementation date in paragraph (a)(2), FRA calculated that implementation date and added an additional year. Consequently, the May 1, 2019 implementation date is changed to January 1, 2021. It also is no longer necessary to reference the Interim Final Compliance Guide.
In paragraph (b), the January 1, 2018 implementation date is changed to January 1, 2019.
In paragraphs (e)(1) and (2), the implementation dates for refresher training are also delayed by one year. Thus, the January 1, 2020 implementation date in paragraph (e)(1) is changed to January 1, 2021, and completion of that refresher training for each employee must be completed by no later than December 31, 2023, instead of the 2014 Final Rule requirement of December 31, 2022. In paragraph (e)(2), each employer with less than 400,000 total employee work hours annually must implement a refresher training program by May 1, 2022, rather than the 2014 Final Rule requirement of May 1, 2021, and complete that refresher training for each employee by no later than December 31, 2024, instead of the 2014 Final Rule requirement of December 31, 2023.
The Administrative Procedure Act generally requires agencies to provide the public with notice of proposed rulemaking and an opportunity to comment prior to publication of a substantive rule. However, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) authorizes agencies to dispense with notice and comment “when the agency for good cause finds that notice and public procedure thereon are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” FRA finds that providing notice and an opportunity to comment would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest. The first of several implementation deadlines for the regulated community is forthcoming on May 1, 2017. Providing notice and an opportunity to comment would likely preclude FRA from delaying the implementation dates before this important deadline passes. Delaying the implementation dates is necessary to ensure model programs have a chance to succeed. If FRA does not delay the implementation dates, costs to the regulated community and FRA are expected to escalate, and the quality of training programs is expected to decrease, which would be contrary to the public interest.
This rule has been evaluated in accordance with existing regulatory policies and procedures and is considered to be nonsignificant under both Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 and DOT policies and procedures.
FRA determines and certifies that this final rule is not expected to have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The requirements of this rule will apply to employers of safety-related railroad employees, whether the employers are railroads, contractors, or subcontractors. Although a substantial number of small entities are subject to this rule, the rule provides relief by extending all of the implementation dates in the 2014 Final Rule. Thus, the economic impact of this rule will not be significant because it will only provide additional time for all entities to comply.
This final rule will have no direct impact on small units of government, businesses, or other organizations. State rail agencies are not required to participate in this program. State owned
There are no new collection of information requirements contained in this final rule and, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501
This rule will not have a substantial effect on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Thus in accordance with Executive Order 13132, “Federalism” (64 FR 43255, Aug. 10, 1999), preparation of a Federalism Assessment is not warranted.
The Trade Agreement Act of 1979 prohibits Federal agencies from engaging in any standards or related activities that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. Legitimate domestic objectives, such as safety, are not considered unnecessary obstacles. The statute also requires consideration of international standards and where appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards.
This final rule is purely domestic in nature and is not expected to affect trade opportunities for U.S. firms doing business overseas or for foreign firms doing business in the United States.
FRA has evaluated this rule in accordance with its “Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts” (FRA's Procedures) (64 FR 28545, May 26, 1999) as required by the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321
In accordance with section 4(c) and (e) of FRA's Procedures, the agency has further concluded that no extraordinary circumstances exist with respect to this final rule that might trigger the need for a more detailed environmental review. As a result, FRA finds that this final rule is not a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.
Pursuant to section 201 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4, 2 U.S.C. 1531), each Federal agency “shall, unless otherwise prohibited by law, assess the effects of Federal regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal governments, and the private sector (other than to the extent that such regulations incorporate requirements specifically set forth in law).” Section 202 of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1532) further requires that “before promulgating any general notice of proposed rulemaking that is likely to result in the promulgation of any rule that includes any Federal mandate that may result in expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any 1 year, and before promulgating any final rule for which a general notice of proposed rulemaking was published, the agency shall prepare a written statement” detailing the effect on State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector. This final rule will not result in such an expenditure, and thus preparation of such a statement is not required.
Executive Order 13211 requires Federal agencies to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for any “significant energy action.” 66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001). FRA has evaluated this final rule in accordance with Executive Order 13211, and has determined that this regulatory action is not a “significant energy action” within the meaning of the Executive Order.
Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments received into any of DOT's dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement published in the
Administrative practice and procedure, Penalties, Railroad employees, Railroad safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, FRA amends chapter II, subtitle B of title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
49 U.S.C. 20103, 20107, 20131-20155, 20162, 20301-20306, 20701-20702, 21301-21304, 21311; 28 U.S.C. 2461, note; and 49 CFR 1.89.
(a)(1) Effective January 1, 2019, each employer conducting operations subject to this part with 400,000 total employee work hours annually or more shall submit, adopt, and comply with a training program for its safety-related railroad employees.
(2) Effective May 1, 2020, each employer conducting operations subject to this part with less than 400,000 total employee work hours annually shall submit, adopt, and comply with a training program for its safety-related railroad employees.
(b) Except for an employer subject to the requirement in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, an employer commencing operations subject to this part after January 1, 2019, shall submit a training program for its safety-related railroad employees before commencing operations. Upon commencing operations, the employer shall adopt and comply with the training program.
(a) * * *
(3) Each model training program submitted to FRA before May 1, 2018, is considered approved and may be implemented 180 days after the date of submission unless the Associate Administrator advises the organization, business, or association that developed and submitted the program that all or part of the program does not conform.
(b) A training organization or learning institution that has provided training services to employers covered by this part before January 1, 2018, may continue to offer such training services without FRA approval until January 1, 2019. The Associate Administrator may extend this period at any time based on a written request. Such written requests for an extension of time to submit a program should contain any factors the training organization or learning institution wants the Associate Administrator to consider before approving or disapproving the extension.
(a) * * *
(1) By no later than September 1, 2019, each employer with 400,000 total employee work hours annually or more in operation as of January 1, 2019, shall declare the designation of each of its existing safety-related railroad employees by occupational category or subcategory, and only permit designated employees to perform safety-related service in that occupational category or subcategory. The Associate Administrator may extend this period based on a written request.
(2) By no later than January 1, 2021, each employer with less than 400,000 total employee work hours annually in operation as of January 1, 2020, shall declare the designation of each of its existing safety-related railroad employees by occupational category or subcategory, and only permit designated employees to perform safety-related service in that occupational category or subcategory. The Associate Administrator may extend this period based on a written request.
(b) Except for an employer subject to the requirement in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, an employer commencing operations after January 1, 2019 shall declare the designation of each of its existing safety-related railroad employees by occupational category or subcategory before beginning operations, and only permit designated employees to perform safety-related service in that category or subcategory. Any person designated shall have met the requirements for newly hired employees or those assigned new safety-related duties in accordance with paragraph (c) of this section.
(e) * * *
(1) Beginning January 1, 2021, each employer with 400,000 total employee work hours annually or more shall deliver refresher training at an interval not to exceed 3 calendar years from the date of an employee's last training event, except where refresher training is specifically required more frequently in accordance with this chapter. If the last training event occurs before FRA's approval of the employer's training program, the employer shall provide refresher training either within 3 calendar years from that prior training event or no later than December 31, 2023. Each employer shall ensure that, as part of each employee's refresher training, the employee is trained and qualified on the application of any Federal railroad safety laws, regulations, and orders the person is required to comply with, as well as any relevant railroad rules and procedures promulgated to implement those Federal railroad safety laws, regulations, and orders.
(2) Beginning May 1, 2022, each employer with less than 400,000 total employee work hours annually shall deliver refresher training at an interval not to exceed 3 calendar years from the date of an employee's last training event, except where refresher training is specifically required more frequently in accordance with this chapter. If the last training event occurs before FRA's approval of the employer's training program, the employer shall provide refresher training either within 3 calendar years from that prior training event or no later than December 31, 2024. Each employer shall ensure that, as part of each employee's refresher training, the employee is trained and qualified on the application of any Federal railroad safety laws, regulations, and orders the person is required to comply with, as well as any relevant railroad rules and procedures promulgated to implement those Federal railroad safety laws, regulations, and orders.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
This action proposes to modify Class D airspace, and Class E airspace designated as an extension at W.K. Kellogg Airport (formerly W.K. Kellogg Field), Battle Creek, MI. Airspace reconfiguration is necessary due to the decommissioning of the Battle Creek VHF Omnidirectional Range Collocated Tactical Air Navigation System (VORTAC), and cancellation of the VOR approaches. Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface also would be amended due to the redesign of the Instrument Landing System (ILS) approach, thereby removing reference to the BATOL navigation aid and Battle Creek ILS localizer. This action would also update the geographic coordinates of the airport, as well as make an editorial change replacing Airport/Facility Directory with the term Chart Supplement in the associated Class D and E airspace areas.
Comments must be received on or before June 19, 2017.
Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590; telephone (202) 366-9826, or 1-800-647-5527. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2017-0232; Airspace Docket No. 17-AGL-11, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments through the Internet at
FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at
FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.
Ron Laster, Federal Aviation Administration, Contract Support, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone (817) 222-5879.
The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, part, A, subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it would amend Class D airspace, Class E extension area airspace and Class E airspace extending upward 700 feet above the surface at W.K. Kellogg Airport, Battle Creek, MI.
Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal. Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to Docket No. FAA-2017-0232/Airspace Docket No. 17-AGL-11.” The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the Internet at
You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office (see the
All communications received before the specified closing date for comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule. The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the docket.
This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2016, and effective
The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by amending Class D airspace, Class E airspace designated as an extension, and Class E Airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at W.K. Kellogg Airport (formerly W.K. Kellogg Field), Battle Creek, MI.
The airport name change to W.K. Kellogg Airport from W.K. Kellogg Field and the airport's geographic coordinates would be amended in the associated Class D and Class E airspace listed in this proposal.
Class E extension area airspace would be amended by removing the Battle Creek VORTAC from the airspace description due to its decommissioning.
Also, Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface would be amended by removing the southwest segment, and the segment 7 miles northwest and 4.4 miles southeast of the Battle Creek ILS localizer northeast course extending 10.4 miles northeast of the localizer outer marker/nondirectional radio beacon. The northeast segment would be amended to within 2 miles each side of the 047° bearing (from 4 miles each side of the 049° bearing) from the airport extending from 7-mile radius of the airport to 10 miles northeast (from 10.9 miles) of the airport, and southeast segment would be amended to within 2 miles each side of the 126° bearing from the airport extending from the 7-mile radius to 7.4 miles (from 11.1 miles) southeast of the airport. This action would enhance the safety and management of the standard instrument approach procedures for IFR operations at the airport. Additionally, this action would amend Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface by removing reference to the BATOL navigation aid and Battle Creek ILS localizer. This action would enhance the safety and management of the standard instrument approach procedures for IFR operations at the airport.
Lastly, this action would replace the outdated term Airport/Facility directory with the term Chart Supplement.
Class D and E airspace designations are published in paragraph 5000, 6004 and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.11A, dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15, 2016, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.
The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, “Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures” prior to any FAA final regulatory action.
Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.
That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 3,500 feet MSL within a 4.5-mile radius of W.K. Kellogg Airport. This Class D airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective dates and times will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.
That airspace extending upward from the surface within the 4.5-mile radius of W.K. Kellogg Airport. This Class E airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective dates and times will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.
That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 7-mile radius of W.K. Kellogg Airport, and within 2 miles each side of the 047° bearing from the airport extending from the 7-mile radius to 10 miles northeast of the airport, and within 2 miles each side of the 126° bearing from the airport extending from the 7-mile radius to 7.4 miles southeast of the airport.
Legal Services Corporation.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
This proposed rule would revise the Legal Services Corporation's (LSC or Corporation) regulation about bonding requirements for LSC
Comments must be received by June 2, 2017.
You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Stefanie K. Davis, Assistant General Counsel, Legal Services Corporation, 3333 K Street NW., Washington, DC 20007; (202) 295-1563 (phone), (202) 337-6519 (fax), or
LSC created part 1629 in 1984 after several instances in which recipients lost LSC funds through the dishonest behavior of persons associated with the recipient. 49 FR 28717, July 16, 1984. While the recipient recovered the funds in some cases, in others, the recipient had to absorb the loss.
Before enacting part 1629, LSC recommended that recipients have fidelity coverage as a basic internal control.
LSC added rulemaking on part 1629 to its annual rulemaking agenda in April 2016. Regulatory action is justified for three reasons. First, the regulation is outdated. LSC has not revised part 1629 since it was adopted in 1984, and LSC should update it to reflect current insurance practices.
Second, the regulation was derived from a source that does not provide the optimal model for a federally funded grant-making entity today. The original rule was based on fidelity bonding provisions found in the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA).
Third, the current regulation is in some respects unclear or ambiguous. LSC has received requests for guidance on how to interpret certain provisions in part 1629, particularly those sections about the form and extent of coverage required by the rule. LSC does not believe that the language in part 1629 provides sufficiently clear guidance to LSC recipients or to LSC staff. LSC proposes crafting an approach that is tailored to LSC's needs and that simplifies the language in the rule to reduce confusion.
On October 17, 2016, the Operations and Regulations Committee (Committee) of LSC's Board of Directors (Board) voted to recommend that the Board authorize rulemaking on part 1629. On October 19, 2016, the Board authorized LSC to begin rulemaking. On April 23, 2017, the Committee voted to recommend that the Board approve publication of this NPRM in the
LSC proposes to add a purpose section stating who must be covered under the bond and what losses the bond must protect against. Part 1629 currently does not have a purpose section.
LSC proposes to define
LSC currently requires recipients to bond “[e]very director, officer, employee and agent of a program who
LSC currently requires grantees to bond “agents” who handle funds or property of the program. 45 CFR 1629.2(a). But LSC has found that most recipients' policies do not cover the dishonest or fraudulent actions of agents and independent contractors. In fact, many policies explicitly exclude agents and independent contractors from the definition of “covered employee.” This exclusion is problematic, as LSC recipients often turn to third parties to handle payroll functions.
To address these issues and adequately protect LSC funds from misappropriation by recipients and third parties, LSC proposes three changes to the existing rule. First, LSC proposes to require that recipients' bonds cover volunteers, in addition to directors, officers, employees, and agents of the recipient. Second, LSC proposes to require that recipients ensure that third parties who provide payroll, billing, and collection services to the recipient have fidelity bond coverage or similar insurance. The recipient may accomplish this either by extending its own insurance to the third party or by ensuring that the third party has its own fidelity bond coverage sufficient to protect LSC funds in the third party's hands. Finally, LSC proposes to include language allowing recipients to either cover subrecipients through their own fidelity policies or ensure that the subrecipients have policies adequate to protect subgranted funds.
Current § 1629.5 allows recipients to choose different forms of bonds, such as individual, blanket, or schedule. 45 CFR 1629.5. Section 1629.5 currently does not address whether recipients may choose types of insurance other than a fidelity bond that achieve the same purpose as a fidelity bond. Most LSC recipients now protect against employee dishonesty through riders to their standard commercial crime policies. Few grantees obtain separate fidelity bonds.
In 1999, LSC issued an external opinion permitting recipients to use employee dishonesty insurance to satisfy the bonding requirements of part 1629 if the recipient could show that the policy gives the same level of protection as a fidelity bond.
Current § 1629.4 requires recipients to have bonds that protect them against “all those risks of loss that might arise through dishonest or fraudulent acts in the handling of funds [.]” The strict language—“all those risks of loss”—implies that recipients must be completely covered in the event of a loss, and that policies with deductibles would not be acceptable under current part 1629. That is because if a recipient has LSC funds stolen, and the policy requires the recipient to absorb a portion of that loss by paying a deductible, then the recipient's policy did not cover against “all those risks of loss.” Such strict language makes sense under ERISA statutes and regulations, as they are designed to protect retirees' pension funds. But such language may prevent recipients from obtaining policies that will protect LSC funds adequately if policies without deductibles are prohibitively expensive.
LSC proposes to simplify the language about the types of losses that the bond must cover and to revise the rule to allow recipients to purchase policies that require payment of deductibles. LSC proposes revising the definition to state simply that the “bond must provide recovery for loss caused by such acts as: Fraud, dishonesty, larceny, theft, embezzlement, forgery, misappropriation, wrongful abstraction, wrongful conversion, willful misapplication, or any other fraudulent or dishonest act committed by an employee, officer, director, agent, or volunteer.”
Under the existing rule, recipients must maintain bond coverage equal to at least 10% of the recipient's annualized LSC funding or of the initial grant if the program is a new grantee. 45 CFR 1629.1(a). The minimum level of coverage may never be less than $50,000.
Part 1629 currently is silent as to which costs associated with fidelity bond coverage—deductibles, premiums, rates, and single loss retention—are allowable using LSC funds. To improve clarity on this point, LSC proposes to allow recipients to use LSC funds to pay for the costs of bonding under this part if they are (1) consistent with 45 CFR part 1630, (2) in accordance with sound business practice, and (3) reasonable. This proposed rule is based on the Uniform Guidance, which allows for such costs.
LSC considered limiting the amount of deductibles that LSC would consider reasonable in the proposed rule. During the process of drafting this proposed rule, LSC examined a sample of recipients' current fidelity bonds and found that most of those recipients' policies have deductibles ranging from $1,000 to $5,000. LSC could not determine, based on research of external sources, whether there are current best practices in the nonprofit insurance world that would help LSC establish a reasonable limit on deductibles. LSC determined that it would need more data to set deductible limits and has therefore chosen to allow recipients the flexibility to consider the losses they are willing to absorb when deciding the appropriate deductibles.
Fidelity bond, Grant programs—law, Insurance, Legal services, Surety bonds.
42 U.S.C. 2996e(1)(A) and 2996f(3).
This part is intended to protect LSC funds by requiring that recipients be
(a) A recipient must supply fidelity bond coverage for all employees, officers, directors, agents, and volunteers.
(b) If a recipient uses a third party for payroll, billing, or collection services, the recipient must either supply coverage covering the third party or ensure that the third party has a fidelity bond or similar insurance coverage.
(c) For recipients with subgrants:
(1) The recipient must extend its fidelity bond coverage to supply identical coverage to the subrecipient and the subrecipient's directors, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers to the extent required to comply with this Part; or
(2) The subrecipient must supply proof of its own fidelity bond coverage that meets the requirements of this Part for the subrecipient's directors, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers.
(a) A recipient may use any form of bond, such as individual, name schedule, position schedule, blanket, or any combination of such forms of bonds, as long as the type or combination of bonds secured adequately protects LSC funds.
(b) A recipient may use similar forms of insurance that essentially fulfill the same purpose as a fidelity bond.
The bond must provide recovery for loss caused by such acts as fraud, dishonesty, larceny, theft, embezzlement, forgery, misappropriation, wrongful abstraction, wrongful conversion, willful misapplication, or any other fraudulent or dishonest act committed by an employee, officer, director, agent, or volunteer.
(a) A recipient must carry fidelity bond coverage or similar coverage at a minimum level of at least ten percent of its annualized funding level for the previous fiscal year.
(b) If a recipient is a new recipient, the coverage must be at a minimum level of at least ten percent of the initial grant.
(c) Notwithstanding paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, recipients must not carry coverage under this part at a level less than $100,000.
Costs of bonding required by this part are allowable if expended consistent with 45 CFR part 1630. Costs of bonding such as rates, deductibles, single loss retention, and premiums, are allowable as an indirect cost if such bonding is in accordance with sound business practice and is reasonable.
Federal Communications Commission.
Petitions for reconsideration.
Petitions for Reconsideration (Petitions) have been filed in the Commission's rulemaking proceeding by Jennifer A. Manner, on behalf of HUGHES NETWORK SYSTEMS, LLC, Bohdan R. Pankiw, on behalf of Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, and Arthur F. McNulty, on behalf of Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development.
Oppositions to the Petitions must be filed on or before May 18, 2017. Replies to an opposition must be filed on or before May 30, 2017.
Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554.
Alexander Minard, Telecommunications Access Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau, at (202) 418-7400 or email:
This is a summary of the Commission's document, Report No. 3075, released April 25, 2017. The full text of the Petitions is available for viewing and copying at the FCC Reference Information Center, 445 12th Street SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. They also may be accessed online via the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System at:
Rural Housing Service, USDA.
Notice.
This Notice announces a series of teleconferences and/or web conference meetings regarding the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Multi-Family Housing program, which will be scheduled on a quarterly basis, but may be held more often at the Agency's discretion. This Notice also outlines suggested discussion topics for the meetings and is intended to notify the general public of their opportunity to participate in the teleconference and/or web conference meetings.
See
Timothy James, Loan and Finance Analyst, Multi-Family Housing, (919) 873-2056, or email
The objectives of this series of teleconferences are as follows:
• Enhance the effectiveness of the Multi-Family Housing program.
• Establish a two-way communications forum to update industry participants and Rural Housing Service (RHS) staff.
• Enhance RHS' awareness of issues that impact the Multi-Family Housing program.
• Increase transparency and accountability in the Multi-Family Housing program.
Topics to be discussed could include, but will not be limited to, the following:
• Updates on USDA Multi-Family Housing Program activities.
• Perspectives on the Multi-Family Housing Notice of Funds Availability processes.
• Comments on multi-family transaction processes.
• Comments on particular servicing-related activities of interest at that time.
Teleconference and/or web conference meetings are scheduled to occur quarterly during 2017. The dates and times for the teleconference and/or web conference meetings will be announced via email to parties registered as described below.
Any member of the public wishing to register for the meetings and obtain the call-in number, access code, web link and other information for any of the public teleconference and/or web conference meetings may contact Timothy James, Loan and Finance Analyst, Multi-Family Housing, (919) 873-2056, or email
In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USD, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discrimination based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident.
Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (
To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at:
(1)
(2)
(3)
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
Notice; extension of comment period.
In response to requests for additional time, the Department of Commerce (Department) is extending the closing deadline for submitting comments to a request for public comment and information entitled
To be assured of consideration, written comments and information must be received no later than May 10, 2017.
You may submit comments and information by either of the following methods:
•
• Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery to Leah Wils-Owens, Department of Commerce, Enforcement and Compliance, Room 3720, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230 and reference “Inquiry Into the Status of the People's Republic of China as a Nonmarket Economy Country Under the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Laws, ITA-2017-0002” in the subject line.
Albert Hsu at (202) 482-4491 or Daniel Calhoun at (202) 482-1439.
The Department has treated the PRC as an NME country under section 771(18) of the Act in all past antidumping duty investigations and administrative reviews.
The original deadline for the submission of public comments and information was May 3, 2017.
This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 771(18)(C)(ii) of the Act.
Notice of Application for an Export Trade Certificate of Review for Fox Petroleum USA Corporation (“FPUC”), Application No. 17-00002.
The Office of Trade and Economic Analysis (“OTEA”) of the International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce, has received an application for an Export Trade Certificate of Review (“Certificate”). This notice summarizes the proposed application and requests comments relevant to whether the Certificate should be issued.
Joseph Flynn, Director, Office of Trade and Economic Analysis, International Trade Administration, (202) 482-5131 (this is not a toll-free number) or email at
Title III of the Export Trading Company Act of 1982 (15 U.S.C. Sections 4001-21) (“the Act”) authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to issue Export Trade Certificates of Review. An Export Trade Certificate of Review protects the holder and the members identified in the Certificate from State and Federal government antitrust actions and from private treble damage antitrust actions for the export conduct specified in the Certificate and carried out in compliance with its terms and conditions. Section 302(b)(1) of the Export Trading Company Act of 1982 and 15 CFR 325.6(a) require the Secretary to publish a notice in the
Interested parties may submit written comments relevant to the determination whether a Certificate should be issued. If the comments include any privileged or confidential business information, it must be clearly marked and a non-confidential version of the comments (identified as such) should be included. Any comments not marked as privileged or confidential business information will be deemed to be non-confidential.
An original and five (5) copies, plus two (2) copies of the non-confidential version, should be submitted no later than 20 days after the date of this notice to: Export Trading Company Affairs, International Trade Administration,
Information submitted by any person is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). However, non-confidential versions of the comments will be made available to the applicant if necessary for determining whether or not to issue the Certificate. Comments should refer to this application as “Export Trade Certificate of Review, application number 17-00002.”
The Export Markets include all parts of the world except the United States (the fifty states of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands).
To engage in Export Trade in the Export Markets, FPUC may
1. Provide and/or arrange for the provision of Export Trade Facilitation Services;
2. Enter into exclusive and/or non-exclusive licensing and/or sales agreements with Suppliers for the export of Products and Services, and/or Technology Rights to Export Markets;
3. Enter into exclusive and/or non-exclusive agreements with distributors and/or sales representatives in Export Markets;
4. Allocate export orders or divide Export Markets among Suppliers for the sale and/or licensing of Products and Services and/or Technology Rights;
5. Establish the price of Products and Services and/or Technology Rights for sales and/or licensing in Export Markets;
6. Negotiate, enter into, and/or manage licensing agreements for the export of Technology Rights; and
7. FPUC may exchange information with individual Suppliers on a one-to-one basis regarding that Supplier's inventories and near-term production schedules in order that the availability of Products for export can be determined and effectively coordinated by FPUC with its distributors in Export Markets.
“Supplier” means a person who produces, provides, or sells Products, Services, and/or Technology Rights.
National Institute of Standards and Technology, Department of Commerce.
Notice of open meeting.
The National Advisory Committee on Windstorm Impact Reduction (NACWIR or Committee), will hold a webinar initiating the work of the Committee via video conference on Wednesday, May 17, 2017, from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. Eastern Time. This will be the first meeting of the Committee and is intended to provide Committee members and the public with a description of the statutory requirements and scope of work of the Committee, an overview of the National Windstorm Impact Reduction Program (NWIRP) and the draft NWIRP Strategic Plan, and to propose timeframes and milestones for the work of the Committee. Interested members of the public will be able to view the webinar and participate from remote locations by calling in to a central phone number.
The NACWIR will hold a meeting via video conference on Wednesday, May 17, 2017, from 9:00 a.m. until 1:00 p.m. Eastern Time. The meeting will be open to the public.
Questions regarding the meeting should be sent to the National Windstorm Impact Reduction Program Director, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 8611, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899. Anyone wishing to participate must register by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Wednesday, May 10, 2017. For instructions on how to participate in the meeting, please see the
Steve Potts, Management and Program Analyst, NWIRP, Engineering Laboratory, NIST, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 8611, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899. He can also be contacted by email at
The National Advisory Committee on Windstorm Impact Reduction (NACWIR) was established in accordance with the requirements of the National Windstorm Impact Reduction Act Reauthorization of 2015, Public Law 114-52. The NACWIR is charged with offering assessments and recommendations on—
• trends and developments in the natural, engineering, and social sciences and practices of windstorm impact mitigation;
• the priorities of the Strategic Plan for the National Windstorm Impact Reduction Program (Program);
• the coordination of the Program;
• the effectiveness of the Program in meeting its purposes; and
• any revisions to the Program which may be necessary.
Background information on NWIRP and the Committee is available at
Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, 5 U.S.C. App., notice is hereby given that the NACWIR will hold a webinar initiating the work of the Committee via video conference on Wednesday, May 17, 2017, from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. Eastern Time. This will be the first meeting of the Committee and is intended to provide Committee members and the public with a description of the statutory requirements and scope of work of the Committee, an overview of the NWIRP and the draft NWIRP Strategic Plan, and to propose timeframes and milestones for the work of the Committee. The agenda and meeting materials will be posted on the NACWIR Web site at
All participants of the meeting are required to pre-register. Please submit your first and last name, email address, and phone number to Steve Potts at
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice; request for comments.
The Assistant Regional Administrator for Sustainable Fisheries, Greater Atlantic Region, NMFS, has made a preliminary determination that two Exempted Fishing Permit (EFP) applications contain all of the required information and warrant further consideration. These EFPs would allow commercial fishing vessels to land Atlantic halibut under the minimum size limit and in excess of the possession limit for studies by the University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth, School for Marine Science and Technology, and The Nature Conservancy.
Regulations under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act require publication of this notification to provide interested parties the opportunity to comment on applications for proposed EFPs.
Comments must be received on or before May 18, 2017.
You may submit written comments by any of the following methods:
•
•
Spencer Talmage, Fishery Management Specialist, 978-281-9232,
The University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth, School for Marine Science and Technology (SMAST) and the Nature Conservancy submitted complete applications for two EFPs on March 17, 2017, and March 27, 2017, to conduct commercial fishing activities that regulations would otherwise restrict. The EFPs would authorize commercial fishing vessels to land Atlantic halibut in excess of the possession limit and that are smaller than the legal size limit.
The two EFPs would support a project studying Atlantic halibut stock structure, seasonal movement, behavior, and life history being conducted with funding from the Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Program. The goal of the project is to address identified information gaps to improve future Atlantic halibut stock assessments. The project consists of two components: Tagging, and biological sampling. Project Investigators have requested two EFPs and a scientific Letter of Acknowledgement (LOA) for the project. The LOA was issued on March 31, 2017, for research trips to conduct at-sea tagging during summer 2017.
The SMAST EFP would support the tagging component of the research project. The EFP would allow one vessel to land Atlantic halibut in excess of the possession limit as described in 50 CFR 648.86(c) and below the minimum size limit as described in § 648.83(a)(1). Up to 10 Atlantic halibut would be landed under the tagging component of the project. Once these fish have been landed, no additional Atlantic halibut above the possession limit or below the minimum size limit would be landed. These fish would be held by SMAST to test preliminary tagging techniques prior to field tagging that will be conducted under the LOA this summer. Fish would be caught during regular fishing operations by the exempted vessel. This testing is necessary to ensure that tagging conducted in the course of the main project is effective. The exemption from the minimum size limit is necessary to ensure testing is completed on all size ranges of halibut expected to be tagged during the course of the main project.
Fishing under the SMAST tagging EFP would occur from April 2017 through July 2017. On average, the fishing vessel would conduct three to five tows per day on seven day trips, with each tow lasting three to five hours. Fishing would occur east of Cape
For biological sampling component, TNC requested exemptions from the Atlantic halibut possession limit as described in § 648.86(c) and the Atlantic halibut minimum size limit as described in § 648.83(a)(1). The EFP would be issued to 21 commercial fishing vessels, and fish would be caught during regular fishing operations by the exempted vessels. A maximum of two halibut may be biologically sampled per trip. Atlantic halibut under the minimum size limit may be landed and transferred to SMAST researchers. Fish above the minimum size limit would be sampled at sea and landed for commercial sale. A total of 250 halibut would be sampled under this EFP, and approximately 165 fish would be under the minimum size limit. Sampling would include recording of fish length and weight, as well as removal of gonads, otoliths, and genetic material. The exemption from the minimum size limit would allow for researchers to acquire data from all sizes of halibut, which is necessary to ensure that results of the project are accurate and reflective of the halibut population. The exemption from the possession limit is necessary to ensure that the researchers are able to obtain sufficient biological samples to conduct their research. No halibut above the possession limit or below the minimum size limit could be landed for sale.
Fishing under the biological sampling EFP would occur during the 2017 fishing years, from May 1, 2017 through April 30, 2018. Multiple gear types, including handline/jig, longline, sink gillnet,and otter trawl would be used by vessels fishing under the EFP. Fishing under the biological sampling EFP would occur throughout both the Gulf of Maine and the Georges Bank Regulated Mesh Areas. Statistical areas 514, 521, 522, 525, and 526 would be most commonly fished by vessels participating in the biological sampling EFP.
If approved, the applicants may request minor modifications and extensions to the EFPs throughout the year. EFP modifications and extensions may be granted without further notice if they are deemed essential to facilitate completion of the proposed research and have minimal impacts that do not change the scope or impact of the initially approved EFP request. Any fishing activity conducted outside the scope of the exempted fishing activity would be prohibited.
16 U.S.C. 1801
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice; proposed incidental harassment authorization; request for comments.
NMFS has received an application from Ocean Wind, LLC (Ocean Wind), for an Incidental Harassment Authorization (IHA) to take marine mammals, by harassment, incidental to high-resolution geophysical (HRG) and geotechnical survey investigations associated with marine site characterization activities off the coast of New Jersey in the area of the Commercial Lease of Submerged Lands for Renewable Energy Development on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS-A 0498) (Lease Area). Pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments on its proposal to issue an IHA to Ocean Wind to incidentally take marine mammals during the specified activities.
Comments and information must be received no later than June 2, 2017.
Comments on Ocean Wind's IHA application should be addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. The mailbox address for providing email comments is
Laura McCue, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the applications and supporting documents, as well as a list of the references cited in this document, may be obtained online at:
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361
An authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such takings are set forth.
NMFS has defined “negligible impact” 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.
The MMPA states that the term “take” means to harass, hunt, capture, kill or attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill any marine mammal.
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
To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321
NMFS received a request from Ocean Wind for an IHA to take marine mammals incidental to Spring 2017 geophysical survey investigations off the coast of New Jersey in the OCS-A 0498 Lease Area, designated and offered by the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), to support the development of an offshore wind project. Ocean Wind's request was for harassment only, and NMFS concurs that mortality is not expected to result from this activity; therefore, an IHA is appropriate.
The proposed geophysical survey activities would occur for 42 days beginning in early June 2017, and geotechnical survey activities would take place in September 2017 and last for approximately 12 days. The following specific aspects of the proposed activities are likely to result in the take of marine mammals: Shallow and medium-penetration sub-bottom profilers (chirper and sparker) used during the HRG survey, and dynamically-positioned (DP) vessel thruster used in support of geotechnical survey activities. Take, by Level B Harassment only, of individuals of five species of marine mammals is anticipated to result from the specified activities. No serious injury or mortality is expected from Ocean Wind's HRG and geotechnical surveys.
Ocean Wind proposes to conduct a geophysical and geotechnical survey off the coast of New Jersey in the Lease Area to support the characterization of the existing seabed and subsurface geological conditions in the Lease Area. This information is necessary to support the siting, design, and deployment of up to two meteorological data collection buoys called floating light and detection ranging buoys (FLIDARs) and up to two metocean and current buoys, as well as to obtain a baseline assessment of seabed/sub-surface soil conditions in the Lease Area to support the siting of the proposed wind farm. Surveys will include the use of the following equipment: Multi-beam depth sounder, side-scan sonar, sub-bottom profiler, and cone penetration tests (CPTs).
HRG surveys are anticipated to commence in early June 2017 and will last for approximately 42 days, including estimated weather down time. Geotechnical surveys requiring the use of the DP drill ship will take place in September 2017, at the earliest, and will last for approximately 12 days excluding weather downtime. Equipment is expected run continuously for 24 hours per day.
Ocean Wind's survey activities will occur in the approximately 160,480-acre Lease Area designated and offered by the BOEM, located approximately nine miles (mi) southeast of Atlantic City, New Jersey, at its closest point (see Figure 1 of the IHA application). The Lease Area falls within the New Jersey Wind Energy Area (NJ WEA; Figure 1-1 of the IHA application) with water depths ranging from 15-40 meters (m) (49-131 feet (ft)).
Marine site characterization surveys will include the following HRG survey activities:
• Depth sounding (multibeam depth sounder) to determine water depths and general bottom topography;
• Magnetic intensity measurements for detecting local variations in regional magnetic field from geological strata and potential ferrous objects on and below the bottom;
• Seafloor imaging (sidescan sonar survey) for seabed sediment classification purposes, to identify natural and man-made acoustic targets resting on the bottom as well as any anomalous features;
• Shallow penetration sub-bottom profiler (chirper) to map the near surface stratigraphy (top 0-5 meter (m) soils below seabed); and
• Medium penetration sub-bottom profiler (sparker) to map deeper subsurface stratigraphy as needed (soils down to 75-100 m below seabed).
The HRG surveys are scheduled to begin, at the earliest, on June 1, 2017. Table 1 identifies the representative survey equipment that is being considered in support of the HRG survey activities. The make and model of the listed HRG equipment will vary depending on availability but will be finalized as part of the survey preparations and contract negotiations with the survey contractor. The final selection of the survey equipment will be confirmed prior to the start of the HRG survey program. Only the make and model of the HRG equipment may change, not the types of equipment or the addition of equipment with characteristics that might have effects beyond (
The HRG survey activities will be supported by a vessel approximately 98 to 180 feet (ft) in length and capable of maintaining course and a survey speed of approximately 4.5 knots while transiting survey lines. HRG survey activities across the Lease Area will generally be conducted at 900-meter (m) line spacing. Up to two FLIDARs and two wave buoys would be deployed within the Lease Area, and up to three potential locations for FLIDAR deployment will be investigated. At each FLIDAR and wave buoy deployment locations, the survey will be conducted along a tighter 30-m line spacing to meet the BOEM requirements as set out in the July 2015 Guidelines for Providing Geophysical, Geotechnical, and Geohazard Information Pursuant and Archeological and Historic Property Information in 30 CFR part 585.
Given the size of the Lease Area (160,480 acres), to minimize cost, the duration of survey activities, and the period of potential impact on marine species, Ocean Wind has proposed conducting continuous HRG survey operations 24 hours per day. Based on 24-hour operations, the estimated duration of the survey activities would be approximately 42 days (including estimated weather down time).
Both NMFS and BOEM have advised that the deployment of HRG survey equipment, including the use of intermittent, impulsive sound-producing equipment operating below 200 kilohertz (kHz) (
The equipment positioning systems use vessel-based underwater acoustic positioning to track equipment (in this case, the sub-bottom profiler) in very shallow to very deep water. Equipment positioning systems will be operational at all times during HRG survey data acquisition (
Marine site characterization surveys will involve the following geotechnical survey activities:
• Sample boreholes to determine geological and geotechnical characteristics of sediments;
• Deep CPTs to determine stratigraphy and in-situ conditions of the deep surface sediments; and
• Shallow CPTs to determine stratigraphy and in-situ conditions of the near surface sediments.
It is anticipated that the geotechnical surveys will take place no sooner than September 2017. The geotechnical survey program will consist of up to 8 deep sample bore holes and adjacent 8 deep CPTs both to a depth of approximately 130 ft to 200 ft (40 m to 60 m) below the seabed, as well as 30 shallow CPTs, up to 130 ft (40 m) below seabed.
The investigation activities are anticipated to be conducted from a 250-ft to 350-ft (76 m to 107 m) DP drill ship. DP vessel thruster systems maintain their precise coordinates in waters with automatic controls. These control systems use variable levels of power to counter forces from current and wind. Operations will take place over a 24-hour period to ensure cost, the duration of survey activities, and the period of potential impact on marine species are minimized. Based on 24-hour operations, the estimated duration of the geotechnical survey activities would be approximately 12 days excluding weather downtime. Estimated weather downtime is approximately 10 days.
Field studies conducted off the coast of Virginia (Tetra Tech 2014) to determine the underwater noise produced by borehole drilling and CPTs confirm that these activities do not result in underwater noise levels that are harmful or harassing to marine mammals (
Proposed mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures are described in detail later in the document (Mitigation section and Monitoring and Reporting section).
There are 35 species of marine mammals that potentially occur in the Northwest Atlantic OCS region (BOEM 2014) (Table 2). The majority of these species are pelagic and/or northern species, or are so rarely sighted that their presence in the Lease Area is unlikely. Five marine mammal species are listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and are known to be present, at least seasonally, in the waters off the Northwest Atlantic OCS: Blue whale, fin whale, right whale, sei whale, and sperm whale. These species are highly migratory and do not spend extended periods of time in a localized area. The waters off the Northwest Atlantic OCS (including the Lease Area) are primarily used as a stopover point for these species during seasonal movements north or south between important feeding and breeding grounds. While fin whales have the potential to occur within the Lease Area, the sperm, blue, and sei whales are more pelagic and/or northern species, and although their presence within the Lease Area is possible, they are considered less common with regards to sightings. In particular, while sperm whales are known to occur occasionally in the region, their sightings are considered rare and thus their presence in the Lease Area at the time of the proposed activities is considered unlikely. These large whale species are generally migratory and typically do not spend
Because the potential for many of the odontocete species to occur within the Lease Area during the marine survey period is unlikely, given that these species are either extralimital or are found more often offshore and do not occur as often on the outer continental shelf, these species will not be described further in this analysis. Bottlenose dolphins, short-beaked common dolphin, and harbor porpoise, however, do occur in the lease area, and are described below.
While stranding data indicate that gray seals have the potential to occur within the Lease Area, multiple sources indicate that their presence would not be likely within the Lease Area. BOEM (2012) indicates that the presence of gray seals would not be likely. Furthermore, Northeast Navy Operations Area (OPAREA) Density Estimates indicate that data for gray seals in the Mid-Atlantic are so lacking that density estimates for this species are not possible (DoN 2007). Therefore, gray seals will not be described further in this analysis.
We have reviewed Ocean Wind's species information—which summarizes available information regarding status and trends, distribution and habitat preferences, behavior and life history, and auditory capabilities of the potentially affected species—for accuracy and completeness and refer the reader to Sections 3 and 4 of the applications, as well as to NMFS' Stock Assessment Reports (SAR;
Marine mammal abundance estimates presented in this document represent the total number of individuals that make up a given stock or the total number estimated within a particular study area. NMFS's stock abundance estimates for most species represent the total estimate of individuals within the geographic area, if known, that comprises that stock. For some species, this geographic area may extend beyond U.S. waters. Survey abundance (as compared to stock or species abundance) is the total number of individuals estimated within the survey area, which may or may not align completely with a stock's geographic range as defined in the SARs. These surveys may also extend beyond U.S. waters.
Five species are considered to have the potential to co-occur with the proposed survey activities: Fin whale (
Fin whales are common in waters of the U.S. Atlantic Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), principally from Cape Hatteras northward (Waring
The current abundance estimate for the western North Atlantic stock of fin whales is 1,618 with PBR at 2.5 animals (Waring
There are two distinct bottlenose dolphin morphotypes: The coastal and offshore forms in the western North Atlantic (Waring
The current abundance estimate for this stock is 77,532 with PBR at 561 (Waring
The short-beaked common dolphin is found world-wide in temperate to subtropical seas. In the North Atlantic, short-beaked common dolphins are commonly found over the continental shelf between the 100-m and 2000-m isobaths and over prominent underwater topography and east to the mid-Atlantic Ridge (Waring
The current abundance estimate for this stock is 70,184 with PBR at 557 (Waring
In the Lease Area, only the Gulf of Maine/Bay of Fundy stock may be present. This stock is found in U.S. and Canadian Atlantic waters and are concentrated in the northern Gulf of Maine and southern Bay of Fundy region, generally in waters less than 150 m deep (Waring
The current abundance estimate for this stock is 79,883, with PBR at 706 (Waring
The harbor seal is found in all nearshore waters of the North Atlantic and North Pacific Oceans and adjoining seas above about 30° N. (Burns 2009). In the western North Atlantic, they are distributed from the eastern Canadian Arctic and Greenland south to southern New England and New York, and occasionally to the Carolinas (Waring
The current abundance estimate for this stock is 75,834, with PBR at 2,006 (Waring
This section includes a summary and discussion of the ways that components of the specified activity may impact marine mammals and their habitat. The
Sound is a physical phenomenon consisting of minute vibrations that travel through a medium, such as air or water, and is generally characterized by several variables. Frequency describes the sound's pitch and is measured in Hz or kHz, while sound level describes the sound's intensity and is measured in decibels (dB). Sound level increases or decreases exponentially with each dB of change. The logarithmic nature of the scale means that each 10-dB increase is a 10-fold increase in acoustic power (and a 20-dB increase is then a 100-fold increase in power). A 10-fold increase in acoustic power does not mean that the sound is perceived as being 10 times louder, however. Sound levels are compared to a reference sound pressure (micro-Pascal) to identify the medium. For air and water, these reference pressures are “re: 20 µPa” and “re: 1 µPa,” respectively. Root mean square (RMS) is the quadratic mean sound pressure over the duration of an impulse. RMS is calculated by squaring all of the sound amplitudes, averaging the squares, and then taking the square root of the average (Urick 1975). RMS accounts for both positive and negative values; squaring the pressures makes all values positive so that they may be accounted for in the summation of pressure levels. This measurement is often used in the context of discussing behavioral effects, in part because behavioral effects, which often result from auditory cues, may be better expressed through averaged units rather than by peak pressures.
HRG survey equipment use and use of the DP thruster during the geophysical and geotechnical surveys may temporarily impact marine mammals in the area due to elevated in-water sound levels. Marine mammals are continually exposed to many sources of sound. Naturally occurring sounds such as lightning, rain, sub-sea earthquakes, and biological sounds (
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. Current data indicate that not all marine mammal species have equal hearing capabilities (Richardson
Animals are less sensitive to sounds at the outer edges of their functional hearing range and are more sensitive to a range of frequencies within the middle of their functional hearing range. For mid-frequency cetaceans, functional hearing estimates occur between approximately 150 Hz and 160 kHz with best hearing estimated to occur between approximately 10 to less than 100 kHz (Finneran
On August 4, 2016, NMFS released its Technical Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing (NMFS 2016; 81 FR 51694). This new guidance established new thresholds for predicting onset of temporary (TTS) and permanent (PTS) threshold shifts for impulsive (
When sound travels (propagates) from its source, its loudness decreases as the distance traveled by the sound increases. Thus, the loudness of a sound at its source is higher than the loudness of that same sound a kilometer (km) away. Acousticians often refer to the loudness of a sound at its source (typically referenced to one meter from the source) as the source level and the loudness of sound elsewhere as the received level (
As sound travels from a source, its propagation in water is influenced by various physical characteristics, including water temperature, depth, salinity, and surface and bottom properties that cause refraction, reflection, absorption, and scattering of sound waves. Oceans are not homogeneous and the contribution of each of these individual factors is extremely complex and interrelated. The physical characteristics that determine the sound's speed through the water will change with depth, season, geographic location, and with time of day (as a result, in actual active sonar operations, crews will measure oceanic conditions, such as sea water temperature and depth, to calibrate models that determine the path the sonar signal will take as it travels through the ocean and how strong the sound signal will be at a given range along a particular transmission path). As sound travels through the ocean, the intensity associated with the wavefront diminishes, or attenuates. This decrease in intensity is referred to as propagation loss, also commonly called transmission loss.
As mentioned previously in this document, five marine mammal species (four cetaceans and one pinniped) are likely to occur in the Lease Area. Of the four cetacean species likely to occur in the Lease Area, one classified as low-frequency cetaceans (
Marine mammals may experience temporary or permanent hearing impairment when exposed to loud sounds. Hearing impairment is classified by TTS and PTS. There are no empirical data for onset of PTS in any marine mammal; therefore, PTS-onset must be estimated from TTS-onset measurements and from the rate of TTS growth with increasing exposure levels above the level eliciting TTS-onset. PTS is presumed to be likely if the hearing threshold is reduced by ≥ 40 dB (that is, 40 dB of TTS). PTS is considered auditory injury (Southall
TTS is the mildest form of hearing impairment that can occur during exposure to a loud sound (Kryter 1985). While experiencing TTS, the hearing threshold rises and a sound must be stronger in order to be heard. At least in terrestrial mammals, TTS can last from minutes or hours to (in cases of strong TTS) days, can be limited to a particular frequency range, and can occur to varying degrees (
Marine mammal hearing plays a critical role in communication with conspecifics and in interpretation of environmental cues for purposes such as predator avoidance and prey capture. Depending on the degree (elevation of threshold in dB), duration (
Currently, TTS data only exist for four species of cetaceans (bottlenose dolphin, beluga whale (
Scientific literature highlights the inherent complexity of predicting TTS onset in marine mammals, as well as the importance of considering exposure duration when assessing potential
Animals in the Lease Area during the HRG survey are unlikely to incur TTS hearing impairment due to the characteristics of the sound sources, which include low source levels (208 to 221 dB re 1 µPa-m) and generally very short pulses and duration of the sound. Even for high-frequency cetacean species (
For the HRG survey activities, animals may avoid the area around the survey vessel, thereby reducing exposure. Any disturbance to marine mammals is more likely to be in the form of temporary avoidance or alteration of opportunistic foraging behavior near the survey location.
Masking is the obscuring of sounds of interest to an animal by other sounds, typically at similar frequencies. Marine mammals are highly dependent on sound, and their ability to recognize sound signals amid other sound is important in communication and detection of both predators and prey (Tyack 2000). Background ambient sound may interfere with or mask the ability of an animal to detect a sound signal even when that signal is above its absolute hearing threshold. Even in the absence of anthropogenic sound, the marine environment is often loud. Natural ambient sound includes contributions from wind, waves, precipitation, other animals, and (at frequencies above 30 kHz) thermal sound resulting from molecular agitation (Richardson
Background sound may also include anthropogenic sound, and masking of natural sounds can result when human activities produce high levels of background sound. Conversely, if the background level of underwater sound is high (
Although masking is a phenomenon which may occur naturally, the introduction of loud anthropogenic sounds into the marine environment at frequencies important to marine mammals increases the severity and frequency of occurrence of masking. For example, if a baleen whale is exposed to continuous low-frequency sound from an industrial source, this would reduce the size of the area around that whale within which it can hear the calls of another whale. The components of background noise that are similar in frequency to the signal in question primarily determine the degree of masking of that signal. In general, little is known about the degree to which marine mammals rely upon detection of sounds from conspecifics, predators, prey, or other natural sources. In the absence of specific information about the importance of detecting these natural sounds, it is not possible to predict the impact of masking on marine mammals (Richardson
Marine mammal communications would not likely be masked appreciably by the sub-bottom profiler signals given the directionality of the signal and the brief period when an individual mammal is likely to be within its beam. And while continuous sound from the DP thruster when in use is predicted to extend 500 m to the 120 dB threshold, the generally short duration of DP thruster use and low source levels, coupled with the likelihood of animals to avoid the sound source, would result in very little opportunity for this activity to mask the communication of local marine mammals for more than a brief period of time.
Classic stress responses begin when an animal's central nervous system perceives a potential threat to its homeostasis. That perception triggers stress responses regardless of whether a stimulus actually threatens the animal; the mere perception of a threat is sufficient to trigger a stress response (Moberg 2000; Seyle 1950). Once an animal's central nervous system perceives a threat, it mounts a biological response or defense that consists of a combination of the four general biological defense responses: behavioral responses, autonomic nervous system responses, neuroendocrine responses, or immune responses.
In the case of many stressors, an animal's first and sometimes most economical (in terms of biotic costs) response is behavioral avoidance of the potential stressor or avoidance of continued exposure to a stressor. An animal's second line of defense to stressors involves the sympathetic part of the autonomic nervous system and the classical “fight or flight” response which includes the cardiovascular system, the gastrointestinal system, the exocrine glands, and the adrenal medulla to produce changes in heart rate, blood pressure, and gastrointestinal activity that humans commonly associate with “stress.” These responses have a relatively short duration and may or may not have significant long-term effect on an animal's welfare.
An animal's third line of defense to stressors involves its neuroendocrine systems; the system that has received the most study has been the hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal system (also known as the HPA axis in mammals or the hypothalamus-pituitary-interrenal axis in fish and some reptiles). Unlike stress responses associated with the autonomic nervous system, virtually all neuro-endocrine functions that are affected by stress—including immune competence, reproduction, metabolism, and behavior—are regulated by pituitary hormones. Stress-induced changes in the secretion of pituitary hormones have been implicated in failed reproduction (Moberg 1987; Rivier 1995), altered metabolism (Elasser
The primary distinction between stress (which is adaptive and does not normally place an animal at risk) and distress is the biotic cost of the response. During a stress response, an animal uses glycogen stores that can be quickly replenished once the stress is alleviated. In such circumstances, the cost of the stress response would not pose a risk to the animal's welfare. However, when an animal does not have sufficient energy reserves to satisfy the energetic costs of a stress response, energy resources must be diverted from other biotic function, which impairs those functions that experience the diversion. For example, when mounting a stress response diverts energy away from growth in young animals, those animals may experience stunted growth. When mounting a stress response diverts energy from a fetus, an animal's reproductive success and its fitness will suffer. In these cases, the animals will have entered a pre-pathological or pathological state which is called “distress” (Seyle 1950) or “allostatic loading” (McEwen and Wingfield 2003). This pathological state will last until the animal replenishes its biotic reserves sufficient to restore normal function. Note that these examples involved a long-term (days or weeks) stress response exposure to stimuli.
Relationships between these physiological mechanisms, animal behavior, and the costs of stress responses have also been documented fairly well through controlled experiments; because this physiology exists in every vertebrate that has been studied, it is not surprising that stress responses and their costs have been documented in both laboratory and free-living animals (for examples see, Holberton
Studies of other marine animals and terrestrial animals would also lead us to expect some marine mammals to experience physiological stress responses and, perhaps, physiological responses that would be classified as “distress” upon exposure to high frequency, mid-frequency and low-frequency sounds. For example, Jansen (1998) reported on the relationship between acoustic exposures and physiological responses that are indicative of stress responses in humans (for example, elevated respiration and increased heart rates). Jones (1998) reported on reductions in human performance when faced with acute, repetitive exposures to acoustic disturbance. Trimper
Hearing is one of the primary senses marine mammals use to gather information about their environment and to communicate with conspecifics. Although empirical information on the relationship between sensory impairment (TTS, PTS, and acoustic masking) on marine mammals remains limited, it seems reasonable to assume that reducing an animal's ability to gather information about its environment and to communicate with other members of its species would be stressful for animals that use hearing as their primary sensory mechanism. Therefore, we assume that acoustic exposures sufficient to trigger onset PTS or TTS would be accompanied by physiological stress responses because terrestrial animals exhibit those responses under similar conditions (NRC 2003). More importantly, marine mammals might experience stress responses at received levels lower than those necessary to trigger onset TTS. Based on empirical studies of the time required to recover from stress responses (Moberg 2000), we also assume that stress responses are likely to persist beyond the time interval required for animals to recover from TTS and might result in pathological and pre-pathological states that would be as significant as behavioral responses to TTS.
In general, there are few data on the potential for strong, anthropogenic underwater sounds to cause non-auditory physical effects in marine mammals. Such effects, if they occur at all, would presumably be limited to short distances and to activities that extend over a prolonged period. The available data do not allow identification of a specific exposure level above which non-auditory effects can be expected (Southall
Behavioral disturbance may include a variety of effects, including subtle changes in behavior (
Habituation can occur when an animal's response to a stimulus wanes with repeated exposure, usually in the absence of unpleasant associated events (Wartzok
Available studies show wide variation in response to underwater sound; therefore, it is difficult to predict specifically how any given sound in a particular instance might affect marine mammals perceiving the signal. If a marine mammal does react briefly to an underwater sound by changing its behavior or moving a small distance, the impacts of the change are unlikely to be significant to the individual, let alone the stock or population. However, if a sound source displaces marine mammals from an important feeding or breeding area for a prolonged period, impacts on individuals and populations could be significant (
Changes in dive behavior can vary widely and may consist of increased or decreased dive times and surface intervals as well as changes in the rates of ascent and descent during a dive (
Disruption of feeding behavior can be difficult to correlate with anthropogenic sound exposure, so it is usually inferred by observed displacement from known foraging areas, the appearance of secondary indicators (
Variations in respiration naturally vary with different behaviors and alterations to breathing rate as a function of acoustic exposure can be expected to co-occur with other behavioral reactions, such as a flight response or an alteration in diving. However, respiration rates in and of themselves may be representative of annoyance or an acute stress response. Various studies have shown that respiration rates may either be unaffected or could increase, depending on the species and signal characteristics, again highlighting the importance in understanding species differences in the tolerance of underwater noise when determining the potential for impacts resulting from anthropogenic sound exposure (
Marine mammals vocalize for different purposes and across multiple modes, such as whistling, echolocation click production, calling, and singing. Changes in vocalization behavior in response to anthropogenic noise can occur for any of these modes and may result from a need to compete with an increase in background noise or may reflect increased vigilance or a startle response. For example, in the presence of potentially masking signals, humpback whales and killer whales have been observed to increase the length of their songs (Miller
Avoidance is the displacement of an individual from an area or migration path as a result of the presence of a sound or other stressors, and is one of the most obvious manifestations of disturbance in marine mammals (Richardson
A flight response is a dramatic change in normal movement to a directed and rapid movement away from the perceived location of a sound source. The flight response differs from other avoidance responses in the intensity of the response (
Behavioral disturbance can also impact marine mammals in more subtle ways. Increased vigilance may result in costs related to diversion of focus and attention (
Many animals perform vital functions, such as feeding, resting, traveling, and socializing, on a diel cycle (24-hour cycle). Disruption of such functions resulting from reactions to stressors such as sound exposure are more likely to be significant if they last more than one diel cycle or recur on subsequent days (Southall
Marine mammals are likely to avoid the HRG survey activity, especially the naturally shy harbor porpoise, while the harbor seals might be attracted to them out of curiosity. However, because the sub-bottom profilers and other HRG survey equipment operate from a moving vessel, and the maximum radius to the 160 dB harassment threshold is less than 200 m, the area and time that this equipment would be affecting a given location is very small. Further, once an area has been surveyed, it is not likely that it will be surveyed again, therefore reducing the likelihood of repeated HRG-related impacts within the survey area. And while the drill ship using DP thrusters will generally remain stationary during geotechnical survey activities, the short duration (up to 12 days) of the DP thruster use would likely result in only short-term and temporary avoidance of the area, rather than permanent abandonment, by marine mammals.
We have also considered the potential for severe behavioral responses such as stranding and associated indirect injury or mortality from Ocean Wind's use of HRG survey equipment, on the basis of a 2008 mass stranding of approximately one hundred melon-headed whales in a Madagascar lagoon system. An investigation of the event indicated that use of a high-frequency mapping system (12-kHz multibeam echosounder) was the most plausible and likely initial behavioral trigger of the event, while providing the caveat that there is no unequivocal and easily identifiable single cause (Southall
Numerous studies have shown that underwater sounds from industrial activities are often readily detectable by marine mammals in the water at distances of many km. However, other studies have shown that marine mammals at distances more than a few km away often show no apparent response to industrial activities of various types (Miller
Ship strikes of marine mammals can cause major wounds, which may lead to the death of the animal. An animal at the surface could be struck directly by a vessel, a surfacing animal could hit the bottom of a vessel, or a vessel's propeller could injure an animal just below the surface. The severity of injuries typically depends on the size and speed of the vessel (Knowlton and Kraus 2001; Laist
The most vulnerable marine mammals are those that spend extended periods of time at the surface in order to restore oxygen levels within their tissues after deep dives (
An examination of all known ship strikes from all shipping sources (civilian and military) indicates vessel speed is a principal factor in whether a vessel strike results in death (Knowlton and Kraus 2001; Laist
There are no rookeries or mating grounds known to be biologically important to marine mammals within the proposed project area. The area is an important feeding area for fin whales. There is no designated critical habitat for any ESA-listed marine mammals. NMFS' regulations at 50 CFR part 224 designated the nearshore waters of the Mid-Atlantic Bight as the Mid-Atlantic U.S. Seasonal Management Area (SMA) for right whales in 2008. Mandatory vessel speed restrictions (less than 10 knots) are in place in that SMA from November 1 through April 30 to reduce the threat of collisions between ships and right whales around their migratory route and calving grounds.
Bottom disturbance associated with the HRG survey activities may include grab sampling to validate the seabed classification obtained from the multibeam echosounder/sidescan sonar data. This will typically be accomplished using a Mini-Harmon Grab with 0.1 m
Because of the temporary nature of the disturbance, the availability of similar habitat and resources (
This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes proposed for authorization through 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 type 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).
Authorized takes would be by Level B harassment only, in the form of disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals resulting from exposure to HRG and geotechnical surveys. Based on the nature of the activity, the short duration of activities, and the small Level A isopleths (less than 3 m for all sources), Level A harassment is neither anticipated nor 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 for this activity. Below we describe how the take is estimated for this project.
Project activities that have the potential to harass marine mammals, as defined by the MMPA, include
The basis for the take estimate is the number of marine mammals that would be exposed to sound levels in excess of NMFS' Level B harassment criteria for impulsive noise (160 dB re 1 μPa (rms) and continuous noise (120 dB re 1 μPa (rms)), which is generally determined by overlaying the area ensonified above NMFS acoustic thresholds for harassment within a day with the density of marine mammals, and multiplying by the number of days. NMFS' current acoustic thresholds for estimating take are shown in Table 4 below.
Modeling took into consideration sound sources using the potential operational parameters, bathymetry, geoacoustic properties of the Lease Area, time of year, and marine mammal hearing ranges. Results from the hydroacoustic modeling and measurements showed that estimated maximum distance to the 160 dB re 1 μPa (rms) MMPA threshold for all water depths for the HRG survey sub-bottom profilers (the HRG survey equipment with the greatest potential for effect on marine mammal) was approximately 75.28 m from the source using practical spreading (Subacoustech 2016), and the estimated maximum critical distance to the 120 dB re 1 μPa (rms) MMPA threshold for all water depths for the drill ship DP thruster was approximately 500 m from the source (Subacoustech 2016). Ocean Wind and NMFS believe that these estimates represent the a conservative scenario and that the actual distances to the Level B harassment threshold may be shorter, as practical spreading (15logR) was used to estimate the ensonified area here and there are some sound measurements taken in the Northeast that suggest a higher spreading coefficient (which would result in a shorter distance) may be applicable.
Ocean Wind estimated species densities within the proposed project area in order to estimate the number of marine mammal exposures to sound levels above the 120 dB Level B harassment threshold for continuous noise (
The data used as the basis for estimating cetacean density (“D”) for the Lease Area are sightings per unit effort (SPUE) derived by Duke University (Roberts
The Zone of influence (ZOI) is the extent of the ensonified zone in a given day. The ZOI was calculated using the following equations:
Where distance is the maximum survey trackline per day (177.6 km) and r is the distance to the 160 dB (for impulsive sources) and 120 dB (for non-impulsive sources) isopleths. The isopleths were calculated using practical spreading.
Estimated takes were calculated by multiplying the species density (animals per km
Ocean Wind used a ZOI of 26.757 km
Ocean Wind used a ZOI of 0.31 m
Ocean Wind's requested take numbers are provided in Tables 6 and 7 and are also the number of takes NMFS is proposing to authorize. Ocean Wind's calculations do not take into account whether a single animal is harassed multiple times or whether each exposure is a different animal. Therefore, the numbers in Tables 6 and 7 are the maximum number of animals that may be harassed during the HRG and geotechnical surveys (
Ocean Wind used NMFS' Guidance (NMFS 2016) to determine sound exposure thresholds to determine when an activity that produces sound might result in impacts to a marine mammal such that a take by injury, in the form of PTS, might occur. The functional hearing groups and the associated PTS onset acoustic thresholds are indicated in Table 8 below. Ocean Wind used the user spreadsheet to calculate the isopleth for the loudest source (sparker, sub-bottom profiler). The sub-bottom profiler was calculated with the following conditions: Source level at 172.4 rms, vessel velocity of 2.058 m/s, repetition rate of 0.182, pulse duration of 22 ms and a weighting factor adjustment of 10 based on the spectrogram for this equipment (Gardline 2016). Isopleths were less than 3 m for all hearing groups; therefore, no Level A takes are requested. The Geo-source sparker model used the following parameters: source level at 188.7 rms Source level, vessel velocity of 2.058 meters per second (m/s), repetition rate of 0.25 seconds, pulse duration of 10 ms and weighting factor adjustment of 3 based on the spectrograms for this equipment. Isopleths were less than 2 m for all hearing groups; therefore, no Level A takes are requested. The DP thruster was defined as non-impulsive static continuous source with an extrapolated source level of 150 dB rms based on far field measurements (Subacoustech 2016), an activity duration of 4 hours and weighting factor adjustment of 2. The transmission loss coefficient of 11.1 was used based on the slope of best fit from field measurements (Subacoustech 2016). Isopleths were less than 1 m for all hearing groups; therefore, no Level A take are requested. No level A take is requested or proposed to be authorized for any of the sources used during HRG and geotechnical surveys.
In order to issue an IHA under Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to such activity, “and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on such species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on the availability of such species or stock for taking” for certain subsistence uses (latter not applicable for this action). NMFS regulations require applicants for incidental take authorizations to include information about the availability and feasibility (economic and technological) of equipment, methods, and manner of conducting such activity or other means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact upon the affected species or stocks and their habitat (50 CFR 216.104(a)(11)).
In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and their habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, we carefully balance two primary factors: (1) The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful implementation of the measure(s) is expected to reduce impacts to marine mammals, marine mammal species or stocks, and their habitat, which considers the nature of the potential adverse impact being mitigated (likelihood, scope, range), as well as the likelihood that the measure will be effective if implemented; and the likelihood of effective implementation, and; (2) the practicability of the measures for applicant implementation, which may consider such things as cost, impact on operations, and, in the case of a military readiness activity, personnel safety, practicality of implementation, and impact on the effectiveness of the military readiness activity.
With NMFS' input during the application process, and as per the BOEM Lease, Ocean Wind is proposing the following mitigation measures during site characterization surveys utilizing HRG survey equipment and use of the DP thruster. The mitigation measures outlined in this section are based on protocols and procedures that have been successfully implemented and resulted in no observed take of marine mammals for similar offshore projects and previously approved by NMFS (ESS 2013; Dominion 2013 and 2014).
Protected species observers (PSOs) will monitor the following exclusion/monitoring zones for the presence of marine mammals:
• A 200-m exclusion zone during HRG surveys (this exceeds the estimated Level B harassment isopleth).
• A 500-m monitoring zone during the use of DP thrusters during geotechnical survey activities (this is equal to the Level B harassment isopleth).
The 200 m exclusion zone is the default exclusion zone specified in stipulation 4.4.6.1 of the New Jersey OCS-A 0498 Lease Agreement. The 500 m exclusion zone is based on field-verified distances established during similar survey work conducted within the Bay State Wind Lease Area (Subacoustech 2016).
Visual monitoring of the established exclusion zone(s) for the HRG and geotechnical surveys will be performed by qualified and NMFS-approved PSOs, the resumes of whom will be provided to NMFS for review and approval prior to the start of survey activities. An observer team comprising a minimum of four NMFS-approved PSOs and two certified Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM) operators (PAM operators will not function as PSOs), operating in shifts, will be stationed aboard either the survey vessel or a dedicated PSO-vessel. PSOs and PAM operators will work in shifts such that no one monitor will work more than 4 consecutive hours without a 2-hour break or longer than 12 hours during any 24-hour period. During daylight hours the PSOs will rotate in shifts of one on and three off, while during nighttime operations PSOs will work in pairs. The PAM operators will also be on call as necessary during daytime operations should visual observations become impaired. Each PSO will monitor 360 degrees of the field of vision.
PSOs will be responsible for visually monitoring and identifying marine mammals approaching or within the established exclusion zone(s) during survey activities. It will be the responsibility of the Lead PSO on duty to communicate the presence of marine mammals as well as to communicate and enforce the action(s) that are necessary to ensure mitigation and monitoring requirements are implemented as appropriate. PAM operators will communicate detected vocalizations to the Lead PSO on duty, who will then be responsible for implementing the necessary mitigation procedures. A mitigation and monitoring communications flow diagram has been included as Appendix A in the IHA application.
PSOs will be equipped with binoculars and have the ability to estimate distances to marine mammals located in proximity to the vessel and/or exclusion zone using range finders. Reticulated binoculars will also be available to PSOs for use as appropriate based on conditions and visibility to support the siting and monitoring of marine species. Digital single-lens reflex camera equipment will be used to record sightings and verify species identification. During night operations, PAM (see
The PSOs will begin observation of the exclusion zone(s) at least 60 minutes prior to ramp-up of HRG survey equipment. Use of noise-producing equipment will not begin until the exclusion zone is clear of all marine mammals for at least 60 minutes, as per the requirements of the BOEM Lease.
If a marine mammal is detected approaching or entering the 200-m exclusion zones during the HRG survey, or the 500-m monitoring zone during DP thrusters use, the vessel operator would adhere to the shutdown (during HRG survey) or powerdown (during DP thruster use) procedures described below to minimize noise impacts on the animals.
At all times, the vessel operator will maintain a separation distance of 500 m from any sighted North Atlantic right whale as stipulated in the
The Applicant will ensure that vessel operators and crew maintain a vigilant watch for cetaceans and pinnipeds and slow down or stop their vessels to avoid striking these species. Survey vessel crew members responsible for navigation duties will receive site-specific training on marine mammal and sea turtle sighting/reporting and vessel strike avoidance measures. Vessel strike avoidance measures will include the following, except under extraordinary circumstances when complying with these requirements would put the safety of the vessel or crew at risk:
• All vessel operators will comply with 10 knot (<18.5 km per hour [km/h]) speed restrictions in any Dynamic Management Area (DMA). In addition, all vessels operating from November 1 through July 31 will operate at speeds of 10 knots (<18.5 km/h) or less.
• All survey vessels will maintain a separation distance of 500 m or greater from any sighted North Atlantic right whale.
• If underway, vessels must steer a course away from any sited North Atlantic right whale at 10 knots (<18.5 km/h) or less until the 500 m minimum separation distance has been established. If a North Atlantic right whale is sited in a vessel's path, or within 100 m to an underway vessel, the underway vessel must reduce speed and shift the engine to neutral. Engines will not be engaged until the North Atlantic right whale has moved outside of the vessel's path and beyond 100 m. If stationary, the vessel must not engage engines until the North Atlantic right whale has moved beyond 100 m.
• All vessels will maintain a separation distance of 100 m or greater from any sighted non-delphinoid (
• All vessels will maintain a separation distance of 50 m or greater from any sighted delphinoid cetacean. Any vessel underway will remain parallel to a sighted delphinoid cetacean's course whenever possible and avoid excessive speed or abrupt changes in direction. Any vessel underway reduces vessel speed to 10 knots or less when pods (including mother/calf pairs) or large assemblages of delphinoid cetaceans are observed. Vessels may not adjust course and speed until the delphinoid cetaceans have moved beyond 50 m and/or abeam (
• All vessels will maintain a separation distance of 50 m (164 ft) or greater from any sighted pinniped.
The training program will be provided to NMFS for review and approval prior to the start of surveys. Confirmation of the training and understanding of the requirements will be documented on a training course log sheet. Signing the log sheet will certify that the crew members understand and will comply with the necessary requirements throughout the survey event.
Between watch shifts, members of the monitoring team will consult the NMFS North Atlantic right whale reporting systems for the presence of North Atlantic right whales throughout survey operations. The proposed survey activities will, however, occur outside of the SMA located off the coasts of Delaware and New Jersey. The proposed survey activities will also occur in June/July and September, which is outside of the seasonal mandatory speed restriction period for this SMA (November 1 through April 30).
Throughout all survey operations, Ocean Wind will monitor the NMFS North Atlantic right whale reporting systems for the establishment of a DMA. If NMFS should establish a DMA in the Lease Area under survey, within 24 hours of the establishment of the DMA Ocean Wind will work with NMFS to shut down and/or alter the survey activities to avoid the DMA.
As per the BOEM Lease, alternative monitoring technologies (
Given the range of species that could occur in the Lease Area, the PAM system will consist of an array of hydrophones with both broadband (sampling mid-range frequencies of 2 kHz to 200 kHz) and at least one low-frequency hydrophone (sampling range frequencies of 75 Hz to 30 kHz). Monitoring of the PAM system will be conducted from a customized processing station aboard the HRG survey vessel. The on-board processing station provides the interface between the PAM system and the operator. The PAM operator(s) will monitor the hydrophone signals in real time both aurally (using headphones) and visually (via the monitor screen displays). Ocean Wind proposes the use of PAMGuard software for “target motion analysis” to support localization in relation to the identified exclusion zone. PAMGuard is an open source and versatile software/hardware interface to enable flexibility in the configuration of in-sea equipment (number of hydrophones, sensitivities, spacing, and geometry). PAM operators will immediately communicate detections/vocalizations to the Lead PSO on duty who will ensure the implementation of the appropriate mitigation measure (
As per the BOEM Lease, a ramp-up procedure will be used for HRG survey equipment capable of adjusting energy levels at the start or re-start of HRG survey activities. A ramp-up procedure will be used at the beginning of HRG survey activities in order to provide additional protection to marine mammals near the Lease Area by allowing them to vacate the area prior to the commencement of survey equipment use. The ramp-up procedure will not be initiated during daytime, night time, or periods of inclement weather if the exclusion zone cannot be adequately monitored by the PSOs using the appropriate visual technology (
The DP vessel thrusters will be engaged to support the safe operation of the vessel and crew while conducting geotechnical survey activities and require use as necessary. Therefore, there is no opportunity to engage in a ramp-up procedure.
As per the BOEM Lease, if a non-delphinoid (
As per the BOEM Lease, if a delphinoid cetacean or pinniped is detected at or within the exclusion zone, the HRG survey equipment (including the sub-bottom profiler) must be powered down to the lowest power output that is technically feasible. Subsequent power up of the survey equipment must use the ramp-up procedures described above and may occur after (1) the exclusion zone is clear of a delphinoid cetacean and/or pinniped for 60 minutes or (2) a determination by the PSO after a minimum of 10 minutes of observation that the delphinoid cetacean or pinniped is approaching the vessel or towed equipment at a speed and vector that indicates voluntary approach to bow-ride or chase towed equipment.
If the HRG sound source (including the sub-bottom profiler) shuts down for reasons other than encroachment into the exclusion zone by a marine mammal including but not limited to a mechanical or electronic failure, resulting in in the cessation of sound source for a period greater than 20 minutes, a restart for the HRG survey equipment (including the sub-bottom profiler) is required using the full ramp-up procedures and clearance of the exclusion zone of all cetaceans and pinnipeds for 60 minutes. If the pause is less than 20 minutes, the equipment may be restarted as soon as practicable at its operational level as long as visual surveys were continued diligently throughout the silent period and the exclusion zone remained clear of cetaceans and pinnipeds. If the visual surveys were not continued diligently during the pause of 20 minutes or less, a restart of the HRG survey equipment (including the sub-bottom profiler) is required using the full ramp-up procedures and clearance of the exclusion zone for all cetaceans and pinnipeds for 60 minutes.
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, as well as other measures considered by NMFS, NMFS has preliminarily determined that the proposed mitigation measures provide the means of effecting the least practicable impact on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance.
In order to issue an IHA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth, “requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of such taking.” The MMPA implementing regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for incidental take authorizations (ITAs) must include the suggested means of accomplishing the necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present in the proposed action area. Effective reporting is critical both to compliance as well as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the required monitoring.
Monitoring measures prescribed by NMFS should contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following general goals:
• Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the action area (
• Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or chronic), through better understanding of: (1) Action or environment (
• Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative), other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors.
• How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1) Long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2) populations, species, or stocks.
• Effects on marine mammal habitat (
• Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.
Ocean Wind submitted marine mammal monitoring and reporting measures as part of the IHA application. These measures may be modified or supplemented based on comments or new information received from the public during the public comment period.
The PSOs will begin observation of the monitoring zone during all HRG survey activities and all geotechnical operations where DP thrusters are employed. Observations of the monitoring zone will continue throughout the survey activity and/or while DP thrusters are in use. PSOs will be responsible for visually monitoring and identifying marine mammals approaching or entering the established monitoring zone during survey activities.
Observations will take place from the highest available vantage point on the survey vessel. General 360-degree scanning will occur during the monitoring periods, and target scanning by the PSO will occur when alerted of a marine mammal presence.
Data on all PSO observations will be recorded based on standard PSO collection requirements. This will include dates and locations of construction operations; time of observation, location and weather; details of the sightings (
Ocean Wind must conduct field verification of the exclusion zone (the 160 dB isopleth) for HRG survey equipment and the powerdown zone (the 120 dB isopleth) for DP thruster use for all equipment operating below 200 kHz. Ocean Wind must take acoustic measurements at a minimum of two reference locations and in a manner that is sufficient to establish source level (peak at 1 meter) and distance to the 160 dB isopleth (the Level B harassment zones for HRG surveys) and 120 dB isopleth (the Level B harassment zone) for DP thruster use. Sound measurements must be taken at the reference locations at two depths (
Ocean Wind may use the results from its field-verification efforts to request modification of the exclusion/monitoring zones for the HRG or geotechnical surveys. Any new exclusion/monitoring zone radius proposed by Ocean Wind must be based on the most conservative measurements (
The Applicant will provide the following reports as necessary during survey activities:
• The Applicant will contact NMFS and BOEM within 24 hours of the commencement of survey activities and again within 24 hours of the completion of the activity.
•
•
• Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the incident;
• Name and type of vessel involved;
• Vessel's speed during and leading up to the incident;
• Description of the incident;
• Status of all sound source use in the 24 hours preceding the incident;
• Water depth;
• Environmental conditions (
• Description of all marine mammal observations in the 24 hours preceding the incident;
• Species identification or description of the animal(s) involved;
• Fate of the animal(s); and
• Photographs or video footage of the animal(s) (if equipment is available).
Activities would not resume until NMFS is able to review the circumstances of the event. NMFS would work with Ocean Wind to minimize reoccurrence of such an event in the future. Ocean Wind would not resume activities until notified by NMFS.
In the event that Ocean Wind discovers an injured or dead marine mammal and determines that the cause of the injury or death is unknown and the death is relatively recent (
In the event that Ocean Wind discovers an injured or dead marine mammal and determines that the injury or death is not associated with or related to the activities authorized in the IHA (
• Within 90 days after completion of the marine site characterization survey activities, a technical report will be provided to NMFS and BOEM that fully documents the methods and monitoring protocols, summarizes the data recorded during monitoring, estimates the number of marine mammals that may have been taken during survey activities, and provides an interpretation of the results and effectiveness of all monitoring tasks. Any recommendations made by NMFS must be addressed in the final report prior to acceptance by NMFS.
• In addition to the Applicant's reporting requirements outlined above, Ocean Wind will provide an assessment report of the effectiveness of the various mitigation techniques,
NMFS has defined negligible impact 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. A negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (
As discussed in the
Potential impacts to marine mammal habitat were discussed previously in this document (see the
The proposed mitigation measures are expected to reduce the number and/or severity of takes by (1) giving animals the opportunity to move away from the sound source before HRG survey equipment reaches full energy and (2) reducing the intensity of exposure within a certain distance by reducing the DP thruster power. Additional vessel strike avoidance requirements will further mitigate potential impacts to marine mammals during vessel transit to and within the Study Area.
Ocean Wind did not request, and NMFS is not proposing, take of marine mammals by injury, serious injury, or mortality. NMFS expects that most takes would be in the form of short-term Level
NMFS concludes that exposures to marine mammal species and stocks due to Ocean Wind's HRG and geotechnical survey activities would result in only short-term (temporary and short in duration) and relatively infrequent effects to individuals exposed and not of the type or severity that would be expected to be additive for the very small portion of the stocks and species likely to be exposed. Given the duration and intensity of the activities (including the mitigation) NMFS does not anticipate the proposed take estimates to impact annual rates of recruitment or survival. Animals may temporarily avoid the immediate area, but are not expected to permanently abandon the area. Major shifts in habitat use, distribution, or foraging success, are not expected.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into consideration the implementation of the proposed monitoring and mitigation measures, NMFS preliminarily finds that the total marine mammal take from the proposed activity will have a negligible impact on all affected marine mammal species or stocks.
As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be authorized under Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA for specified activities other than military readiness activities. The MMPA does not define small numbers and so, in practice, NMFS compares the number of individuals taken to the most appropriate estimation of the relevant species or stock size in our determination of whether an authorization is limited to small numbers of marine mammals.
The requested takes proposed to be authorized for the HRG and geotechnical surveys represent 0.31 percent of the WNA stock of fin whale, 0.045 percent of the WNA stock of short-beaked common dolphin, 0.368 percent of the Western north Atlantic, offshore stock of bottlenose dolphin, 0.005 percent of the Gulf of Maine/Bay of Fundy stock of harbor porpoise, and 0.001 percent of the WNA stock of harbor seal (Tables 9). These take estimates represent the percentage of each species or stock that could be taken by Level B behavioral harassment and are extremely small numbers (less than 1 percent) relative to the affected species or stock sizes.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the proposed activity (including the proposed mitigation and monitoring measures) and the anticipated take of marine mammals, NMFS preliminarily finds that small numbers of marine mammals will be taken relative to the population size of the affected species or stocks.
There are no relevant subsistence uses of the affected marine mammal stocks or species implicated by this action. Therefore, NMFS has determined that the total taking of affected species or stocks would not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such species or stocks for taking for subsistence purposes.
Issuance of an MMPA authorization requires compliance with the ESA. Within the project area, fin, humpback, and North Atlantic right whale are listed as endangered under the ESA. Under section 7 of the ESA, BOEM consulted with NMFS on commercial wind lease issuance and site assessment activities on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New York and New Jersey Wind Energy Areas. NOAA's GARFO issued a Biological Opinion concluding that these activities may adversely affect but are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of fin whale, humpback whale, or North Atlantic right whale. The Biological Opinion can be found online at
NMFS is preparing an Environmental Assessment (EA) in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and will consider comments submitted in response to this notice as part of that process. The EA will be posted at
As a result of these preliminary determinations, NMFS proposes to issue an IHA to Ocean Wind for conducting HRG survey activities and use of DP vessel thrusters during geotechnical survey activities from June 2017 through May 2018, provided the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated. This section contains a draft of the IHA itself. The wording contained in this section is proposed for inclusion in the IHA (if issued).
Ocean Wind, LLC (Ocean Wind) is hereby authorized under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the Marine Mammal Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 1371(a)(5)(D)) and 50 CFR 216.107, to harass marine
1. This Authorization is valid from June 1, 2017 through May 31, 2018.
2. This Authorization is valid only for HRG and geotechnical survey investigations associated with marine site characterization activities, as described in the Incidental Harassment Authorization (IHA) application.
3. The holder of this authorization (Holder) is hereby authorized to take, by Level B harassment only, 32 short-beaked common dolphins (
4. The taking of any marine mammal in a manner prohibited under this IHA must be reported immediately to NMFS' Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office (GARFO).
5. The Holder or designees must notify NMFS GARFO and Office of Protected Resources (OPR) at least 24 hours prior to the seasonal commencement of the specified activity.
6. The holder of this Authorization must notify the Chief of the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, or her designee at least 24 hours prior to the start of survey activities (unless constrained by the date of issuance of this Authorization in which case notification shall be made as soon as possible) at 301-427-8401 or to
The Holder is required to abide by the following mitigation conditions listed in 7(a)-(f). Failure to comply with these conditions may result in the modification, suspension, or revocation of this IHA.
(a)
• A 200-m exclusion zone during HRG surveys is in operation.
• A 500-m monitoring zone during the use of DP thrusters during geotechnical survey.
• At all times, the vessel operator shall maintain a separation distance of 500 m from any sighted North Atlantic right whale as stipulated in the
(b)
(d)
• All vessel operators shall comply with 10 knot (<18.5 km per hour (km/h)) speed restrictions in any Dynamic Management Area (DMA). In addition, all vessels operating from November 1 through July 31 shall operate at speeds of 10 knots (<18.5 km/h) or less.
• All survey vessels shall maintain a separation distance of 500 m or greater from any sighted North Atlantic right whale.
• If underway, vessels must steer a course away from any sited North Atlantic right whale at 10 knots (<18.5 km/h) or less until the 500 m minimum separation distance has been established. If a North Atlantic right whale is sited in a vessel's path, or within 100 m to an underway vessel, the underway vessel must reduce speed and shift the engine to neutral. Engines shall not be engaged until the North Atlantic right whale has moved outside of the vessel's path and beyond 100 m. If stationary, the vessel must not engage engines until the North Atlantic right whale has moved beyond 100 m.
• All vessels shall maintain a separation distance of 100 m or greater from any sighted non-delphinoid (
• All vessels shall maintain a separation distance of 50 m or greater from any sighted delphinoid cetacean. Any vessel underway shall remain parallel to a sighted delphinoid cetacean's course whenever possible, and avoid excessive speed or abrupt changes in direction. Any vessel underway shall reduce vessel speed to 10 knots or less when pods (including mother/calf pairs) or large assemblages of delphinoid cetaceans are observed. Vessels may not adjust course and speed until the delphinoid cetaceans have moved beyond 50 m and/or abeam of the underway vessel.
• All vessels shall maintain a separation distance of 50 m (164 ft) or greater from any sighted pinniped.
(e)
(f)
The PAM system shall consist of an array of hydrophones with both broadband (sampling mid-range frequencies of 2 kHz to 200 kHz) and at least one low-frequency hydrophone (sampling range frequencies of 75 Hz to 30 kHz). The PAM operator(s) shall monitor the hydrophone signals in real time both aurally (using headphones) and visually (via the monitor screen displays). PAM operators shall communicate detections/vocalizations to the Lead PSO on duty who shall ensure the implementation of the appropriate mitigation measure.
The Holder is required to abide by the following monitoring conditions listed in 8(a)-(b). Failure to comply with these conditions may result in the modification, suspension, or revocation of this IHA.
(a)
(b)
The Holder shall provide the following reports as necessary during survey activities:
(a) The Holder shall contact NMFS (301-427-8401) and BOEM (703-787-1300) within 24 hours of the commencement of survey activities and again within 24 hours of the completion of the activity.
(b) Any observed significant behavioral reactions (
Additional reporting requirements for injured or dead animals are described below (
(i) In the unanticipated event that the specified HRG and geotechnical survey activities lead to an injury of a marine mammal (Level A harassment) or mortality (
• Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the incident;
• Name and type of vessel involved;
• Vessel's speed during and leading up to the incident;
• Description of the incident;
• Status of all sound source use in the 24 hours preceding the incident;
• Water depth;
• Environmental conditions (
• Description of all marine mammal observations in the 24 hours preceding the incident;
• Species identification or description of the animal(s) involved;
• Fate of the animal(s); and
• Photographs or video footage of the animal(s) (if equipment is available).
Activities shall not resume until NMFS is able to review the circumstances of the event. NMFS would work with the Holder to minimize reoccurrence of such an event in the future. The Holder shall not resume activities until notified by NMFS.
(ii) In the event that the Holder discovers an injured or dead marine mammal and determines that the cause of the injury or death is unknown and the death is relatively recent (
(iii) In the event that the Holder discovers an injured or dead marine mammal and determines that the injury or death is not associated with or related to the activities authorized in the IHA (
(d) Within 90 days after completion of the marine site characterization survey activities, a technical report shall be provided to NMFS and BOEM that fully documents the methods and monitoring protocols, summarizes the data recorded during monitoring, estimates the number of marine mammals that may have been taken during survey activities, and provides an interpretation of the results and effectiveness of all monitoring tasks. Any recommendations made by NMFS shall be addressed in the final report prior to acceptance by NMFS.
(e) In addition to the Holder's reporting requirements outlined above, the Holder shall provide an assessment report of the effectiveness of the various mitigation techniques,
10. This Authorization may be modified, suspended, or withdrawn if the Holder fails to abide by the conditions prescribed herein or if NMFS determines the authorized taking is having more than a negligible impact on the species or stock of affected marine mammals.
11. A copy of this Authorization and the Incidental Take Statement must be in the possession of each vessel operator taking marine mammals under the authority of this Incidental Harassment Authorization.
12. The Holder is required to comply with the Terms and Conditions of the Incidental Take Statement corresponding to NMFS' Biological Opinion.
We request comment on our analyses, the draft authorization, and any other aspect of this Notice of Proposed IHA for the proposed HRG and geotechnical
Office of National Marine Sanctuaries, National Ocean Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Department of Commerce.
Notice of open meeting.
Notice is hereby given of a Sanctuary System Business Advisory Council (council) meeting. The meeting is open to the public and will be conducted as a web-based conference call, where participants may provide comments at the appropriate time during the meeting. Participants can choose to access the meeting's audio via telephone, or both the meeting's audio and web-based visual components on a computer.
The meeting will be held Thursday, May 18, 2017 from 3:00 to 5:00 p.m. ET, and an opportunity for public comment will be provided at approximately 4:30 p.m. ET. Members of the public that wish to participate in the meeting must register in advance before or by Wednesday, May 17, 2017. Both times and agenda topics are subject to change.
The meeting will be held via web conference call. In order to register for the meeting before or by Wednesday, May 17, 2017, contact Kate Spidalieri at
Kate Spidalieri, Office of National Marine Sanctuaries, 1305 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910 (Email:
ONMS serves as the trustee for a network of underwater parks encompassing more than 600,000 square miles of marine and Great Lakes waters from Washington state to the Florida Keys, and from Lake Huron to American Samoa. The network includes a system of 13 national marine sanctuaries and Papahānaumokuākea and Rose Atoll marine national monuments. National marine sanctuaries protect our nation's most vital coastal and marine natural and cultural resources, and through active research, management, and public engagement, sustain healthy environments that are the foundation for thriving communities and stable economies. One of the many ways ONMS ensures public participation in the designation and management of national marine sanctuaries is through the formation of advisory councils. The Sanctuary System Business Advisory Council (council) has been formed to provide advice and recommendations to the Director regarding the relationship of ONMS with the business community. Additional information on the council can be found at
16 U.S.C. Sections 1431,
Proposed collection; comment request.
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), invites comments on a proposed extension of an existing information collection.
Written comments must be submitted on or before July 3, 2017.
You may submit any comments by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
Requests for additional information should be directed to J. David Binsted, Program Manager, Global Intellectual Property Academy, United States Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450; by telephone at 571-272-1500; or by email at
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) surveys international and domestic participants of the USPTO's Global Intellectual Property Academy (GIPA) training programs to obtain feedback from the participants on the effectiveness of the various services provided to them in the training programs. GIPA was established in 2006 to offer training programs on the enforcement of intellectual property rights, patents, trademarks, and copyright. The training programs offered by GIPA are designed to meet the specific needs of foreign government officials (including judges; prosecutors; police; customs officials; patent, trademark, and copyright officials; and policy makers) concerning various intellectual property topics, such as global intellectual property rights protection, enforcement, and strategies to handle the protection and enforcement issues in their respective countries.
This collection contains three surveys directed to separate audiences: Pre-program, post-program, and alumni. The pre-program survey is designed to obtain the background and experience of a participant and is delivered to the participant prior to their arrival for a GIPA training program. The post-program survey is used to analyze the overall effectiveness of the program and is conducted at the conclusion of the training program. The alumni survey is used to determine the value of the GIPA
The GIPA surveys are voluntary surveys. The USPTO expects to hire a survey contractor to conduct these surveys. The surveys will primarily be conducted electronically, but the USPTO will also have paper surveys to mail to those participants who have poor Internet connectivity or have access restrictions. In-person surveys may also be conducted. Survey participants will be able to access the online surveys through links provided to them in email invitations. The links provided in these emails are individualized links that are uniquely tied to the survey participants so passwords, user IDs, or usernames are not needed to access the surveys.
Information collected from the surveys will be kept private, to the extent provided by law. Responses to the pre-program, post-program, and alumni surveys can be linked to the participants and to the demographic data collected from them during the various GIPA training programs. However, the actual data recorded from the surveys will not be directly linked to the participants. Any data linking the individual to their responses will not be retained after the data has been aggregated. The USPTO will have limited access to the data. The only data that the USPTO can access will be the aggregated survey data and the frequency of the responses. The agency will not be able to view the individual responses or the data related to the survey. The survey contractor will have access to individual survey responses for analysis purposes only and will only report the aggregated data and the frequency of the responses. The USPTO does not intend to collect any personally identifying data from the participants and intends to maintain the contact information for the participants in a separate file for the quantitative data.
The surveys will primarily be online surveys but the USPTO will also have paper surveys to mail to those participants who have poor Internet connectivity or have access restrictions. The surveys will also be distributed by email. In-person surveys may also be conducted.
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.
The USPTO is soliciting public comments to:
(a) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(b) Evaluate the accuracy of the 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,
The next meeting of the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts is scheduled for 18 May 2017, at 9:00 a.m. in the Commission offices at the National Building Museum, Suite 312, Judiciary Square, 401 F Street NW., Washington DC, 20001-2728. Items of discussion may include buildings, parks and memorials.
Draft agendas and additional information regarding the Commission are available on our Web site:
82 FR 19665, April 28, 2017.
11:00 a.m., Thursday, May 4, 2017.
The meeting has been cancelled.
Christopher Kirkpatrick, 202-418-5964.
Consumer Product Safety Commission.
Notice.
As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC or Commission) requests comments on a proposed extension of approval of a collection of information from persons who may voluntarily participate in consumer focus groups. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) previously approved the collection of information under control number 3041-0136. OMB's most recent extension of approval will expire on August 31, 2017. The Commission will consider all comments received in response to this notice before requesting an extension of this collection of information from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
Submit written or electronic comments on the collection of information by July 3, 2017.
You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CPSC-2010-0046, by any of the following methods:
Charu S. Krishnan, Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East-West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814; (301) 504-7221, or by email to:
CPSC seeks to renew the following currently approved collection of information:
To help identify and evaluate product-related incidents, Commission staff invites and obtains direct feedback from consumers on issues related to product safety, such as recall effectiveness, product use, and perceptions regarding safety issues. The information that the CPSC collects from future focus groups will help inform the Commission's identification and evaluation of consumer products and product use, by providing insight and information into consumer perceptions and usage patterns. In some cases, one-on-one interviews may be conducted as a more in-depth extension of a focus group or in place of a traditional focus group. This information may also assist the Commission in its efforts to support voluntary standards activities and help CPSC identify consumer safety issues requiring additional research. In addition, based on the information obtained, CPSC may be able to provide safety information to the public that is easier to read and understood by a wider range of consumers.
The Commission solicits written comments from all interested persons about the proposed collection of information. The Commission specifically solicits information relevant to the following topics:
• Whether the collection of information described above is necessary for the proper performance of the Commission's functions, including whether the information would have practical utility;
• Whether the estimated burden of the proposed collection of information is accurate;
• Whether the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected could be enhanced; and
• Whether the burden imposed by the collection of information could be minimized by use of automated, electronic or other technological collection techniques, or other forms of information technology.
Consumer Product Safety Commission.
Notice.
As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC or Commission) requests comments on a proposed extension of approval of a collection of information relating to the procedures for the export of noncomplying products. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) previously approved the collection of information under control number 3041-0003. OMB's most recent extension of approval will expire on August 31, 2017. The Commission will consider all comments received in response to this notice before requesting an extension of approval of this collection of information from OMB.
The Office of the Secretary must receive comments not later than July 3, 2017.
You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CPSC-2010-0054, by any of the following methods:
Charu S. Krishnan, Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East-West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814; (301) 504-7221, or by email to:
CPSC seeks to renew the following currently approved collection of information:
The Commission solicits written comments from all interested persons about the proposed collection of information. The Commission specifically solicits information relevant to the following topics:
• Whether the collection of information described above is necessary for the proper performance of the Commission's functions, including whether the information would have practical utility;
• Whether the estimated burden of the proposed collection of information is accurate;
• Whether the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected could be enhanced; and
• Whether the burden imposed by the collection of information could be minimized by use of automated, electronic or other technological collection techniques, or other forms of information technology.
Consumer Product Safety Commission.
Notice.
As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC or Commission) requests comments on a proposed extension of approval of a collection of information associated with the collection of information for the Safety Standard for Multi-Purpose Lighters, 16 CFR part 1212. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) previously approved the collection of information under control number 3041-0130. OMB's most recent extension of approval will expire on August 31, 2017. The Commission will consider all comments received in response to this notice before requesting an extension of approval of this collection of information from OMB.
The Office of the Secretary must receive comments not later than July 3, 2017.
You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CPSC-2010-0053, by any of the following methods:
Charu S. Krishnan, Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East-West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814; (301) 504-7221, or by email to:
CPSC seeks to renew the following currently approved collection of information:
The Commission solicits written comments from all interested persons about the proposed collection of information. The Commission specifically solicits information relevant to the following topics:
• Whether the collection of information described above is necessary for the proper performance of the Commission's functions, including whether the information would have practical utility;
• Whether the estimated burden of the proposed collection of information is accurate;
• Whether the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected could be enhanced; and
• Whether the burden imposed by the collection of information could be minimized by use of automated, electronic or other technological collection techniques, or other forms of information technology.
Consumer Product Safety Commission.
Notice and request for comments.
As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC or Commission) requests comments on a proposed extension of approval of a generic clearance for the collection of qualitative feedback on agency service delivery. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) previously approved the collection of information under control number 3041-0148. OMB's most recent extension of approval will expire on August 31, 2017. The Commission will consider all comments received in response to this notice before requesting an extension of approval of this collection of information from OMB.
The Office of the Secretary must receive comments not later than July 3, 2017.
You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CPSC-2011-0014, by any of the following methods:
Charu S. Krishnan, Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East-West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814; (301) 504-7221, or by email to:
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information, unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number.
The Commission solicits written comments from all interested persons about the proposed collection of information. The Commission specifically solicits information relevant to the following topics:
• Whether the collection of information described above is necessary for the proper performance of the Commission's functions, including whether the information would have practical utility;
• Whether the estimated burden of the proposed collection of information is accurate;
• Whether the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected could be enhanced; and
• Whether the burden imposed by the collection of information could be minimized by use of automated, electronic, or other forms of information technology.
Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency for the District of Columbia (CSOSA).
Notice and request for comments.
As part of a federal government-wide effort to streamline the process to seek feedback from the public on service delivery, CSOSA is seeking comment on the development of the following proposed Generic Information Collection Request (Generic ICR): “Generic Clearance for the Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery ” for approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). This notice announces our intent to submit this collection to OMB for approval and solicit comments on specific aspects for the proposed information collection.
Consideration will be given to all comments received by July 3, 2017.
You may submit written comments, identified by “Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery” to: Rochelle Durant, Program Analyst, Office of General Counsel, Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency for the District of Columbia, 633 Indiana Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004 or to
Comments submitted in response to this notice may be made available to the public. For this reason, please do not include in your comments information of a confidential nature, such as sensitive personal information or proprietary information. If you send an email comment, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and may be made available on the Internet. Please note that responses to this public comment request containing any routine notice about the confidentiality of the communication will be treated as public comments that may be made available to the public notwithstanding the inclusion of the routine notice.
Rochelle Durant, Program Analyst, Office of General Counsel, Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency for the District of Columbia, 633
The Agency has traditionally used paper form surveys as its primary public information collection method. However, to further comply with the goals of the PRA, the Agency is planning to implement the use of online electronic survey tools to obtain customer and client feedback regarding Agency programs and supervision support services. The Agency will request authorization from OMB to add to the Agency's current paper form option provided to our public stakeholders, an electronic option to complete the Agency's standard surveys online. The contents in online version and in paper versions of the Agency's surveys will be identical.
Similar to the process used for gaining public feedback via the Agency's traditional paper form surveys, the online surveys would be forwarded to the meeting participants at the conclusion of an event or program via the participants previously registered email address. The results of the electronic surveys would be tallied by the online software and then forward to a centralized user account for further evaluation and review or to be merged with any results from completed hard copy paper surveys. Prior to implementation and use of the online survey, the Agency will conduct internal testing with fewer than nine members of the public to ensure proper functioning and ease of use.
The solicitation of feedback will target areas such as: Timeliness, appropriateness, accuracy of information, courtesy, efficiency of service delivery, and resolution of issues with service delivery. Responses will be assessed to plan and inform efforts to improve or maintain the quality of service offered to the public. If this information is not collected, vital feedback from customers and stakeholders on the Agency's services will be unavailable.
The Agency will only submit a collection for approval under this generic clearance if it meets the following conditions:
1. The collections are voluntary;
2. The collections are low-burden for respondents (based on considerations of total burden hours, total number of respondents, or burden-hours per respondent) and are low-cost for both the respondents and the federal government;
3. The collections are non-controversial and do not raise issues of concern to other federal agencies;
4. Any collection is targeted to the solicitation of opinions from respondents who have experience with the program or may have experience with the program in the near future;
5. Personally identifiable information (PII) is collected only to the extent necessary and is not retained;
6. Information gathered will be used only internally for general service improvement and program management purposes and is not intended for release outside of the agency;
7. Information gathered will not be used for the purpose of substantially informing influential policy decisions; and
8. Information gathered will yield qualitative information; the collections will not be designed or expected to yield statistically reliable results or used as though the results are generalizable to the population of study.
As a general matter, information collections will not result in any new system of records containing privacy information and will not ask questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual behavior and attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly considered private.
(1)
Below we provide projected average estimates for the next three years:
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, Department of Defense.
Federal advisory committee meeting notice.
The Department of Defense is publishing this notice to announce the following Federal advisory committee meeting of the Government-Industry Advisory Panel. This meeting is open to the public.
The meeting will be held from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday and Thursday, May 10 and 11, 2017. Public registration will begin at 8:45 a.m. on each day. For entrance into the meeting, you must meet the necessary requirements for entrance into the Pentagon. For more detailed information, please see the following link:
Pentagon Library, Washington Headquarters Services, 1155 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-1155. The meeting room will be displayed on the information screen for both days. The Pentagon Library is located in the Pentagon Library and Conference Center (PLC2) across the Corridor 8 bridge.
LTC Andrew Lunoff, Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Acquisition), 3090 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-3090, email:
Due to circumstances beyond the control of the Designated Federal Officer and the Department of Defense, the Government-Industry Advisory Panel was unable to provide public notification concerning its meeting on May 10 through 11, 2017, as required by 41 CFR 102-3.150(a). Accordingly, the Advisory Committee Management Officer for the Department of Defense, pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.150(b), waives the 15-calendar day notification requirement.
Minor changes to the agenda will be announced at the meeting. All materials will be posted to the FACA database after the meeting.
Individuals requiring special accommodations to access the public meeting or seeking additional information about public access procedures, should contact LTC Lunoff, the committee DFO, at the email address or telephone number listed in the
Notice of availability of Proposed Changes to the Rules of Practice and Procedure of the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces.
This notice announces the following proposed changes to Rules 3A(a) and 21(a) of the Rules of Practice and Procedure, United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. Although these rules of practice and procedure fall within the Administrative Procedure Act's exemptions for notice and comment, the Department, as a matter of policy, has decided to make these changes available for public review and comment before they are implemented.
Comments on the proposed changes must be received by June 2, 2017.
You may submit comments, identified by docket number and/or Regulatory Information Number (RIN) and title by any of the following methods:
•
•
William A. DeCicco, Clerk of the Court, telephone (202) 761-1448.
Rule 3A(a)—SENIOR JUDGES—currently reads:
With the Senior Judge's consent, and at the request of the Chief Judge, a Senior Judge may perform judicial duties with the Court if an active Judge of the Court is disabled or has recused himself or if there is a vacancy in an active judgeship on the Court. For the periods of time when performing judicial duties with the Court, a Senior Judge shall receive the same pay, per diem, and travel allowances as an active Judge; and the receipt of pay shall be in lieu of receipt of retired pay or annuity with respect to these same periods. The periods of performance of judicial duties by a Senior Judge shall be certified by the Chief Judge and recorded by the Clerk of the Court. The Clerk of the Court shall notify the appropriate official to make timely payments of pay and allowances with
The proposed change to Rule 3A(a) would read:
With the Senior Judge's consent, and at the request of the Chief Judge, a Senior Judge may perform judicial duties with the Court if an active Judge of the Court is disabled or has recused himself or if there is a vacancy in an active judgeship on the Court. For the periods of time when performing judicial duties with the Court, a Senior Judge shall receive the same pay, per diem, and travel allowances as an active Judge. The periods of performance of judicial duties shall be certified by the Chief Judge and reported to the Court Executive who shall take appropriate steps so that the Senior Judge is paid in accordance with Article 142(e)(2), UCMJ.
Rule 21(a)—Supplement to Petition for Grant of Review—currently reads:
Review on petition for grant of review requires a showing of good cause. Good cause must be shown by the appellant in the supplement to the petition, which shall state with particularity the error(s) claimed to be materially prejudicial to the substantial rights of the appellant.
The proposed change to Rule 21(a) would read:
Review on petition for grant of review requires a showing of good cause. Good cause should be shown by the appellant in the supplement to the petition, which shall state with particularity the error(s) claimed to be materially prejudicial to the substantial rights of the appellant.
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.
Notice of public business meeting.
The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (Board) published a notice in the
Glenn Sklar, General Manager, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, 625 Indiana Avenue NW., Suite 700, Washington, DC 20004-2901, (800) 788-4016. This is a toll-free number.
In the
Persons interested in speaking during the public comment period are encouraged to pre-register by submitting a request to the Board by telephone to the Office of the General Counsel at (202) 694-7062 prior to close of business on May 10, 2017. The Board requests that commenters limit the nature and scope of their oral comments to the subject of the agenda. Those who pre-register will be scheduled to speak first. Individual oral comments may be limited by the time available, depending on the number of persons who register. At the beginning of the meeting, the Board will post a list of speakers at the entrance to the meeting room. Anyone who wishes to comment or provide technical information or data may do so in writing, either in lieu of, or in addition to, making an oral presentation. The Board Members may question presenters to the extent deemed appropriate.
Notice is hereby given that the Delaware River Basin Commission will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, May 17, 2017. A business meeting will be held the following month, on Wednesday, June 14, 2017. The hearing and business meeting are open to the public and will be held at the Washington Crossing Historic Park Visitor Center, 1112 River Road, Washington Crossing, Pennsylvania.
The list of projects scheduled for hearing, including project descriptions, will be posted on the Commission's Web site,
Written comments on matters scheduled for hearing on May 17 will be accepted through 5:00 p.m. on May 22. Time permitting, an opportunity for Open Public Comment will be provided upon the conclusion of Commission business at the June 14 Business Meeting; in accordance with recent format changes, this opportunity will not be offered upon completion of the Public Hearing.
The public is advised to check the Commission's Web site periodically prior to the hearing date, as items scheduled for hearing may be postponed if additional time is deemed necessary to complete the Commission's review, and items may be added up to ten days prior to the hearing date. In reviewing docket descriptions, the public is also asked to be aware that project details commonly change in the course of the Commission's review, which is ongoing.
After all scheduled business has been completed and as time allows, the Business Meeting will also include up to one hour of Open Public Comment.
There will be no opportunity for additional public comment for the record at the June 14 Business Meeting on items for which a hearing was completed on May 17 or a previous date. Commission consideration on June 14 of items for which the public hearing is closed may result in approval of the item (by docket or resolution) as proposed, approval with changes, denial, or deferral. When the Commissioners defer an action, they may announce an additional period for written comment on the item, with or without an additional hearing date, or they may take additional time to consider the input they have already received without requesting further public input. Any deferred items will be considered for action at a public meeting of the Commission on a future date.
Office of General Counsel, Department of Education.
Notice of a modified system of records.
In accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, the Department of Education (the Department) publishes this notice of a modified system of records entitled “Department of Education Federal Docket Management System (EDFDMS) (18-09-05).” EDFDMS contains individually identifying information voluntarily provided by individuals who submit public comments on the Department's rulemaking documents that are in the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS). FDMS is an interagency system that allows the public to search, view, download, and comment on Federal agency rulemaking documents through a single online system. The public accesses the FDMS Web portal at
Submit your comments on this modified system of records notice on or before June 2, 2017.
The Department filed a report describing the modified system of records covered by this notice with the Chair of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, the Chair of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and the Deputy Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), on March 29, 2017. This modified system of records will become effective upon publication in the
Submit your comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. We will not accept comments submitted by fax or by email
•
•
Hilary Malawer, Assistant General Counsel, Regulatory Services Division, Office of the General Counsel. Telephone: (202) 401-6148.
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text telephone (TTY), you may call the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1-800-877-8339.
The Department of Education Federal Docket Management System (EDFDMS) (18-09-05) system of records was last published in the
The Department also proposes to add to this system of records notice a new routine use (10) entitled “Disclosure in Assisting another Agency in Responding to a Breach of Data”. This will allow the Department to disclose records in this system to another Federal agency or entity in order to assist the recipient agency in responding to a suspected or confirmed breach of data.
None.
The central location is at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711-0001. Access is available through the Internet from other locations.
Assistant General Counsel, Regulatory Services Division, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20202-6110.
Section 206(d) of the E-Government Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 107-347, 44 U.S.C. 3501 note); 20 U.S.C. 3474; 20 U.S.C. 1221e-3; 5 U.S.C. 301; and 5 U.S.C. 553.
The purpose of this system of records is to provide the public a central online location to search, view, download, and comment on Federal rulemaking documents.
Information on individuals who voluntarily provide individually identifying information when submitting a public comment or supporting materials in response to a Department of Education (Department) rulemaking document or notice in the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) are covered by this system. Although this system may also contain information on and public comments submitted by representatives of governmental or organizational entities, the purpose for which the Department is
The categories of records in the system include: First name, last name, category (such as parent/relative, student, teacher, local educational agency, or lender), city, country, State or province, email address, organization name, submitter's representative, government agency type, government agency, additional information provided in the “General Comments” section, and other supporting documentation furnished by the submitter.
Information maintained in this system of records is obtained from anyone who chooses to voluntarily submit a public comment or supporting materials in response to a Department rulemaking document or notice, including individuals and representatives of Federal, State or local governments, businesses, and other organizations.
The Department may disclose information contained in a record in this system of records under the routine uses listed in this system of records without the consent of the individual if the disclosure is compatible with the purposes for which the record was collected. These disclosures may be made on a case-by-case basis or, if the Department has complied with the computer matching requirements of the Privacy Act, under a computer matching agreement.
(1)
Identification of an individual commenter or third party is possible only if the commenter voluntarily provides his or her name or contact information, or that of a third party. If this information is not furnished, the submitted comments or supporting documentation cannot be linked to the commenter or a third party.
(2)
(3)
(4)
(a)
(i) The Department or any of its components.
(ii) Any Department employee in his or her official capacity.
(iii) Any Department employee in his or her individual capacity if the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has been requested to or has agreed to provide or arrange for representation for the employee.
(iv) Any Department employee in his or her individual capacity where the Department has agreed to represent the employee.
(v) The United States where the Department determines that the litigation is likely to affect the Department or any of its components.
(b)
(c)
(d)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
EDFDMS security protocols meet all required security standards issued by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Records in EDFDMS are maintained in a secure, password protected electronic system that utilizes security hardware and software to include multiple firewalls, active intruder detection, and role-based access controls.
EDFDMS enables record retrieval by various data elements and key word searches. These data elements are: Document identification number, comment tracking number, document title, Code of Federal Regulation (CFR) (search for a specific title within the CFR), CFR citation (search for the part or parts within the CFR title being searched), document type, document sub type, date posted, and comment period end date.
The records in this system will be retained and disposed of in accordance with the Department's Record Schedule ED 253—Rulemaking Case Files. Under ED 253 part C, Notices of Proposed Rulemaking, Public Comments, and Negotiated Rulemaking Records, records are temporary. The date to start the clock for record-keeping purposes is December 31 of the year in which the final rule was published. Records in this system will be destroyed/deleted five years after publication.
As discussed above in routine use (1),
To the extent paper records from this system of records are maintained, they will be maintained in a controlled facility where physical entry is restricted by locks, guards, and administrative procedures.
Access to electronic and paper EDFDMS records that are not otherwise available to the public through FDMS is limited to those Department and contract staff who require the records to perform their official duties consistent with the purposes for which the information was collected. Personnel whose official duties require access to either electronic or written EDFDMS records that are not otherwise available to the public through FDMS are trained in the proper safeguarding and use of the information.
If you wish to request access to your records, you should contact the system manager at the address listed under SYSTEM MANAGER AND ADDRESS. Requests should contain your full name, address, and telephone number. Your request must meet the requirements of regulations in 34 CFR 5b.5, including proof of identity.
If you wish to contest the content of a record regarding you in the system of records, contact the system manager. Your request must meet the requirements of the regulations in 34 CFR 5b.7, including proof of identity.
If you wish to inquire whether a record exists regarding you in this system, you should contact the system manager at the address listed above. You must provide your full name, address, and telephone number. Your request must meet the requirements of the Department's Privacy Act regulations at 34 CFR 5b.5, including proof of identity.
None.
The Department of Education Federal Docket Management System (EDFDMS) (18-09-05) system of records was last published in the
Department of Education (ED), Office of Innovation and Improvement (OII).
Notice.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, ED is proposing a revision of an existing information collection.
Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before June 2, 2017.
To access and review all the documents related to the information collection listed in this notice, please use
For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact Tyra Stewart, 202-260-1847.
The Department of Education (ED), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. ED is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.
Department of Energy.
Notice of open meeting.
This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), Savannah River Site. The Federal Advisory Committee Act requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in the
Hilton Garden Inn, 1065 Stevens Creek Road, Augusta, GA 30907.
Susan Clizbe, Office of External Affairs, Department of Energy, Savannah River Operations Office, P.O. Box A, Aiken, SC 29802; Phone: (803) 952-8281.
U.S. Department of Energy.
Notice and Request for Comments.
The Department of Energy (DOE) invites public comment on a proposed extension of a collection of information that DOE is developing for submission to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
Comments regarding this proposed information collection extension must be received on or before July 3, 2017. If you anticipate difficulty in submitting comments within that period, contact the person listed in
Written comments may be sent to Dr. Kenneth Friedman, U.S. Department of Energy, OE-30, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585 or by fax at 202-586-2623, or by email at
Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to Dr. Kenneth Friedman, U.S. Department of Energy, OE-30, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585.
This information collection request contains: (1) OMB No. 1910-5159; (2) Information Collection Request Title: Energy Priorities and Allocations System; (3) Type of Request: Extension; (4) Purpose: To meet requirements of the Defense Production Act (DPA) priorities and allocations authority with respect to all forms of energy necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense. Data supplied will be used evaluate applicants requesting special priorities assistance to fill a rated order issued in accordance with the DPA and DOE's implementing regulations. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
This data will also be used to conduct audits and for enforcement purposes. This collection will only be used if the Secretary of Energy determines that his authority under the DPA is necessary to prevent or address an energy shortage or energy reliability concern. The last collection by DOE under this authority was in 2001; (5) Annual Estimated Number of Respondents: 10, as this collection is addressed to a substantial majority of the energy industry; (6) Annual Estimated Number of Total Responses: 10, as this collection is addressed to a substantial majority of the energy industry; (7) Annual Estimated Number of Burden Hours: 32 minutes per response; (8) Annual Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Burden: $0.
Defense Production Act of 1950 as amended (50 U.S.C. 4501,
Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, DOE.
Notice of filing.
On March 20, 2017, PSEG Fossil, LLC, as owner and operator of a new baseload electric generating powerplant, submitted a coal capability self-certification to the Department of Energy (DOE) pursuant to § 201(d) of the Powerplant and Industrial Fuel Use Act of 1978 (FUA), as amended, and DOE regulations. The FUA and regulations thereunder require DOE to publish a notice of filing of self-certification in the
Copies of coal capability self-certification filings are available for public inspection, upon request, in the Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, Mail Code OE-20, Room 8G-024, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585.
Christopher Lawrence at (202) 586-5260.
On March 20, 2017, PSEG Fossil, LLC, as owner and operator of a new baseload electric generating powerplant, submitted a coal capability self-certification to the Department of Energy (DOE) pursuant to § 201(d) of the Powerplant and Industrial Fuel Use Act of 1978 (FUA), as amended, and DOE regulations in 10 CFR 501.60, 61. The FUA and regulations thereunder require DOE to publish a notice of filing of self-certification in the
The following owner of a proposed new baseload electric generating powerplant has filed a self-certification of coal-capability with DOE pursuant to FUA section 201(d) and in accordance with DOE regulations in 10 CFR 501.60, 61:
Farm Credit Administration.
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the Government in the Sunshine Act, of the regular meeting of the Farm Credit Administration Board (Board).
The regular meeting of the Board will be held at the offices of the Farm Credit Administration in McLean, Virginia, on May 11, 2017, from 9:00 a.m. until such time as the Board concludes its business.
Farm Credit Administration, 1501 Farm Credit Drive, McLean, Virginia 22102-5090. Submit attendance requests via email to
Dale L. Aultman, Secretary to the Farm Credit Administration Board, (703) 883-4009, TTY (703) 883-4056.
Parts of this meeting of the Board will be open to the public (limited space available), and parts will be closed to the public. Please send an email to
* Session Closed—Exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C. Section 552b(c)(8) and (9).
Federal Communications Commission.
Notice and request for comments.
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or the Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
The Commission may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.
Written comments should be submitted on or before June 2, 2017. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contacts listed below as soon as possible.
Direct all PRA comments to Nicholas A. Fraser, OMB, via email
For additional information or copies of the information collection, contact Nicole Ongele at (202) 418-2991. To view a copy of this information collection request (ICR) submitted to OMB: (1) Go to the Web page
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or the Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
Federal Communications Commission.
Notice and request for comments.
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.
Written comments should be submitted on or before July 3, 2017. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contacts below as soon as possible.
Direct all PRA comments to Cathy Williams, FCC, via email:
For additional information about the information collection, contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918.
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520, the FCC invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
In 2003, the Commission released the
In 2007, the Commission released the
In 2007, the Commission released the
The Commission hereby gives notice of the filing of the following agreements under the Shipping Act of 1984. Interested parties may submit comments on the agreement to the Secretary, Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, DC 20573, within twelve days of the date this notice appears in the
The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841
The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications will also be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States.
Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than May 30, 2017.
1.
1.
The companies listed in this notice have given notice under section 4 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843) (BHC Act) and Regulation Y, (12 CFR part 225) to engage
Each notice is available for inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notice also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the question whether the proposal complies with the standards of section 4 of the BHC Act.
Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding the applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than May 17, 2017.
A. Federal Reserve Bank of Boston (Prabal Chakrabarti, Senior Vice President) 600 Atlantic Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02210-2204. Comments can also be sent electronically to
In addition, Plimoth has applied to acquire certain assets and assume certain liabilities from Savings Institute Bank and Trust Company, Willimantic, Connecticut.
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notice of issuance of final guidance publications.
NIOSH announces the availability of the following final 5 Skin Notation Profiles: Acrylic acid [CAS No. 79-01-7], Dichlorvos [CAS No. 62-73-7], Morpholine [CAS No. 110-91-8], Ethyl p-nitrophenyl phenylphosphorothioate (EPN) [CAS No. 2104-64-5], Dioxathion [CAS No. 78-34-2].
The final Skin Notation Profiles documents were published on April 10, 2017.
These documents may be obtained at the following link:
Naomi Hudson, Dr. P.H., NIOSH, Education and Information Division (EID), Robert A. Taft Laboratories, 1090 Tusculum Ave. MS-C32, Cincinnati, OH 45226, email:
On May 1, 2015, NIOSH published a request for public review in the
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of a meeting of the National Advisory Council on Minority Health and Health Disparities.
The meeting will be open to the public as indicated below, with attendance limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting.
The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and/or contract proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications and/or contract proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
Any member of the public interested in presenting oral comments to the committee may notify the Contact Person listed on this notice at least 10 days in advance of the meeting. Interested individuals and representatives of organizations may submit a letter of intent, a brief description of the organization represented, and a short description of the oral presentation. Only one representative of an organization may be allowed to present oral comments and if accepted by the committee, presentations may be limited to five minutes. Both printed and electronic copies are requested for the record. In addition, any interested person may file written comments with the committee by forwarding their statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person.
In the interest of security, NIH has instituted stringent procedures for entrance onto the NIH campus. All visitor vehicles, including taxis, hotel, and airport shuttles, will be inspected before being allowed on campus. Visitors will be asked to show one form of identification (for example, a government-issued photo ID, driver's license, or passport) and to state the purpose of their visit.
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of a meeting of the National Advisory Mental Health Council.
The meeting will be open to the public as indicated below, with attendance limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting.
The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and/or proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
Open: 9:00 a.m. to 12:15 p.m.
Any member of the public interested in presenting oral comments to the committee may notify the Contact Person listed on this notice at least 10 days in advance of the meeting. Interested individuals and representatives of organizations may submit a letter of intent, a brief description of the organization represented, and a short description of the oral presentation. Only one representative of an organization may be allowed to present oral comments and if accepted by the committee, presentations may be limited to five minutes. Both printed and electronic copies are requested for the record. In addition, any interested person may file written comments with the committee by forwarding their statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person.
Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page:
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is correcting a notice previously published in the
The NIH is correcting and clarifying several components of Step 2 of the Challenge competition including:
(1) The letter of intent must be submitted by August 3, 2018, at 11:59 p.m. ET, for all “Solvers” planning to submit for the Step 2 (Delivery of Prototype and Analytical Data) stage of the competition.
(2) The prototype in vitro diagnostic device is not to be provided with the submission. The September 8, 2016, announcement incorrectly stated that the device was to be included as part of the submission for Step 2.
(3) The Technical Evaluation Panel will use the following 4 criteria for evaluating the Step 2 submissions including: (a) Innovation; (b) clinical significance; (c) diagnostic performance and feasibility; and (d) sample matrix/setting and ease of use/throughput. These criteria were defined in the September 8, 2016, announcement; however, the announcement incorrectly stated that the Panel will evaluate the solutions based on eight criteria.
(4) A description sufficiently detailed and organized by sections for evaluation in the technical review and programmatic assessment of the proposed solution in 15 pages or less including the next 6 bullets, 8.5 x 11 inch page, 10-point or greater Arial, Palatino Linotype, or Georgia font and one inch margins including:
• A title of the proposed solution;
• A detailed description of the proposed in vitro diagnostic, and the development approach, challenges, and risks;
• One section addressing each of the 4 criteria listed above;
• One section providing a summary of the data, using the in vitro diagnostic device and the Standard Operating Procedures described in Appendix B, generated with either clinical or contrived samples compared to existing standard techniques demonstrating the performance characteristics (
• Photographs of the in vitro diagnostic prototype device and a video not to exceed 5 minutes (in accordance with the NIH interim policy for submitting a video as NIH application materials
• Address the NIH Human Subjects Protections and Inclusion of Women, Children, and Minorities policies, as well as biohazards policies (
(5) An Appendix A, provide additional data and tables to support the data summary and performance claims based on the use of the proposed
(6) An Appendix B with the standard operating procedures for the use of the solution submitted for Step 2 of the Challenge competition must be limited to 10 pages or less in length. If a longer Appendix is submitted, only the first 10 pages will be considered by the Technical Evaluation Panel and the Judging Panel.
(7) Submissions for Step 2 of the Challenge competition can be submitted to
(8) Solvers may submit corrections or additional materials in support of their Step 2 submissions so long as the NIH receives the materials by the deadline of September 4, 2018, at 11:59 p.m. ET. Corrections or additional materials for Step 2 will not be accepted or evaluated by the Technical Evaluation Panel or Judging Panel if they are received after September 4, 2018, at 11:59 p.m. ET.
(9) The NIH will perform an initial review of all submissions to ensure they are complete and within the scope of the Challenge competition. Submissions that are incomplete will be administratively disqualified and will not be evaluated by the Technical Evaluation Panel or the Judging Panel.
(10) A Solver may not be a federal employee of HHS (or any component of HHS) acting in their personal capacity.
(11) A Solver employed by a federal agency or entity other than HHS (or any component of HHS), should consult with an agency Ethics Official to determine whether the federal ethics rules will limit or prohibit the acceptance of a prize under this challenge.
(12) The NIH and Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response/Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority may determine that based on the number of submissions received for Step 2 that less competitive submissions will not be discussed by the Technical Evaluation Panel during the Panel's meeting.
(13) Members of the Technical Evaluation Panel for Step 1 are not eligible to participate in or contribute to any proposal for Step 2 and Step 3 of the Challenge competition.
(14) Any Solver is eligible for Step 2 of this Challenge competition. For example, if a Step 1 “Solver” was not identified as a semifinalist, he/she may still submit for Step 2 of this competition and those who did not submit a Step 1 proposal may still submit a proposal for Step 2.
(15) All submissions for Step 2 and 3 must be in English.
For further information about the Antimicrobial Resistance Diagnostic Challenge competition, please contact Robert W. Eisinger, Ph.D., NIH, 301-496-2229 or by email
Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.
Committee management; notice of Open Federal Advisory Committee meeting.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) National Advisory Council (NAC) will meet in person on May 23-25, 2017 in Tampa, FL. The meeting will be open to the public.
The NAC will meet Tuesday, May 23, 2017 from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Wednesday, May 24, 2017 from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., and Thursday, May 25, 2017 from 8:30 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT). Please note that the meeting may close early if the NAC has completed its business.
The meeting will be held at The Barrymore Hotel Tampa Riverwalk located at 111 W. Fortune St., Tampa, FL 33602. It is recommended that attendees register with FEMA prior to the meeting by providing your name, telephone number, email address, title, and organization to the person listed in
For information on facilities or services for individuals with disabilities or to request special assistance at the meeting, contact the person listed in
To facilitate public participation, members of the public are invited to provide written comments on the issues to be considered by the NAC listed in the agenda. The “Agenda” section below outlines these issues. The full agenda and any related documents for this meeting will be posted by Friday, May 19 on the NAC Web site at
•
•
•
•
A public comment period will be held on Wednesday, May 24 from 1:30 p.m. to 1:45 p.m. EDT. All speakers must limit their comments to 5 minutes. Comments should be addressed to the NAC. Any comments not related to the agenda topics will not be considered by the NAC. To register to make remarks during the public comment period, contact the individual listed in
Deana Platt, Designated Federal Officer, Office of the National Advisory Council, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472-3184, telephone (202) 646-2700, fax (540) 504-2331, and email
Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. Appendix.
The NAC advises the FEMA Administrator on all aspects of emergency management. The NAC incorporates state, local, and tribal government, and private sector input in the development and revision of FEMA plans and strategies. The NAC includes a cross-section of officials, emergency managers, and emergency response providers from state, local, and tribal governments, the private sector, and nongovernmental organizations.
On Wednesday, May 24, the NAC will hear from the Office of Response and Recovery, and will engage in an open discussion with the Acting FEMA Administrator. The three NAC subcommittees (Federal Insurance and Mitigation Subcommittee, Preparedness and Protection Subcommittee, and Response and Recovery Subcommittee) and the GIS Ad Hoc Subcommittee will provide reports to the NAC about their work, whereupon the NAC will deliberate on any recommendations presented in the subcommittees' reports, and, if appropriate, vote on recommendations for the FEMA Administrator. Potential recommendation topics include (1) more effective use of technology in emergency management, (2) better incorporating access and functional needs and others with disabilities into emergency management training, (3) incorporating local mitigation investments into the state credit under the disaster deductible concept, and (4) better data standards, especially for geospatial data.
On Thursday, May 25, the NAC will review potential topics for research before the next in-person meeting, review agreed upon recommendations and confirm charges for the subcommittees, and receive a briefing on the National Incident Management System.
The full agenda and any related documents for this meeting will be posted by Friday, May 19 on the NAC Web site at
Office of Natural Resources Revenue, Interior.
Notice.
On April 3, 2017, the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) published a notice establishing the Royalty Policy Committee (Committee) and requesting nominations and comments. This notice extends the nomination period end date by 30 additional days.
Nominations for the Committee must be submitted by June 2, 2017.
You may submit nominations by any of the following methods:
•
•
Ms. Judy Wilson, Office of Natural Resources Revenue; telephone (202) 208-4410; email:
The Committee is established under the authority of the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) and regulated by the Federal Advisory Committee Act. The purpose of the Committee is to ensure that the public receives the full value of the natural resources produced from Federal lands. The duties of the Committee are solely advisory in nature.
The Committee will not exceed 28 members and will be composed of Federal and non-Federal members in order to ensure fair and balanced representation.
The Secretary will appoint non-Federal members in the following categories:
• Up to six members representing the Governors of States that receive more than $10,000,000 annually in royalty revenues from onshore and offshore Federal leases.
• Up to four members representing the Indian Tribes that are engaged in activities subject to laws relating to mineral development that is specific to one or more Indian Tribes.
• Up to six members representing various mineral and/or energy stakeholders in Federal and Indian royalty policy.
• Up to four members representing academia and public interest groups.
Nominations should include a resume providing an adequate description of the nominee's qualifications, including information that would enable DOI to make an informed decision regarding meeting the membership requirements of the Committee and to permit DOI to contact a potential member.
5 U.S.C. Appendix 2.
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice; correction.
The Field Museum of Natural History has corrected an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects, published in a Notice of Inventory Completion in the
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to the Field Museum of Natural History at the address in this notice by June 2, 2017.
Helen Robbins, Repatriation Director, Field Museum of Natural History, 1400 South Lake Shore Drive, Chicago, IL 60605-2496, telephone (312) 665-7317, email
Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the correction of an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects under the control of the Field Museum of Natural History. The human remains and associated funerary objects were removed from various locations on the Hopi Indian Reservation, Coconino and Navajo Counties, AZ.
This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.
This notice corrects the minimum number of individuals and the number of associated funerary objects published in a Notice of Inventory Completion in the
In the
In 1900, human remains representing a minimum of 83 individuals were removed from Awatobi, Burned Corn House, Chukubi, Mishongnovi, Old Mishongnovi, Payupki, Kishuba, Shongopovi, Sikyatki, and First Mesa on the Hopi Indian Reservation, Coconino and Navajo County, AZ, by Charles L. Owen for the Field Museum of Natural History (Field Museum accession number 709). No known individuals were identified. The 65 associated funerary objects are 4 ceramic jars, 31 bowls, 5 pots, 11 ladles, 1 vase, 3 mugs, 2 beads, 1 figure, 1 lithic flake, 1 lot of paint, 1 piki stone, 1 colander, 1 shell ornament, and 2 vessels.
In the
In 1901, human remains representing a minimum of 204 individuals were removed from Old Walpi on the Hopi Indian Reservation, Coconino and Navajo County, AZ, by Charles L. Owen for the Field Museum of Natural History (Field Museum accession numbers 769, 780). No known individuals were identified. The 113 associated funerary objects are 25 ceramic jars, 22 bowls, 10 bahos, 7 ladles, 2 mugs, 2 stone images, 5 stone slabs, 1 bean, 2 vessels, 25 pots, 1 cup, 1 medicine bowl, 1 pitcher, 1 water vessel, 4 non-human remains, 2 pipes, 1 ear pendant, and 1 possible seed.
In the
In 1900 or 1901, fragmentary human remains representing a minimum of 19 individuals were removed from unknown sites on the Hopi Indian Reservation, Coconino and Navajo County, AZ, by Charles L. Owen for the Field Museum of Natural History (Field Museum accession numbers 769, 780, and 709).
In the
In the
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Helen Robbins, Repatriation Director, Field Museum of Natural History, 1400 South Lake Shore Drive, Chicago, IL 60605-2496, telephone (312) 665-7317, email
The Field Museum of Natural History is responsible for notifying the Hopi Tribe of Arizona that this notice has been published.
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice.
The Peabody Museum of Natural History has completed an inventory of human remains, in consultation with the appropriate Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, and has determined that there is a cultural affiliation between the human remains and present-day Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request to the Peabody Museum of Natural History. If no additional requestors come forward, transfer of control of the human remains to the lineal descendants, Indian tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request with information in support of the request to the Peabody Museum of Natural History at the address in this notice by June 2, 2017.
Professor David Skelly, Director, Yale Peabody Museum of Natural History, P.O. Box 208118, New Haven, CT 06520-8118, telephone (203) 432-3752.
Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains under the control of the Peabody Museum of Natural History, Yale University, New Haven, CT. The human remains were removed from multiple sites in the State of North Dakota.
This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains. The National
A detailed assessment of the human remains was made by the Peabody Museum of Natural History professional staff in consultation with a representative of the Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation, North Dakota (hereafter the “Three Affiliated Tribes”).
In 1904, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from the On-A-Slant Village site (32-Mo-0026) in Morton County, ND, by a private individual. In 1915, the human remains were donated to the Peabody Museum of Natural History. The human remains represent one adult, probably male. No known individual was identified. No associated funerary objects are present.
Between 1903 and 1906, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from the Scattered Village site (32-Mo-0031) in Morton County, ND, by a private individual. In 1915, the human remains were donated to the Peabody Museum. The human remains represent one subadult 12-15 years old, sex indeterminate. No known individual was identified. No associated funerary objects are present.
Located near the mouth of the Heart River, On-A-Slant Village is recognized as a late prehistoric and protohistoric earth lodge village of the Mandan whose descendants are today members of the Three Affiliated Tribes. Scattered Village was a large prehistoric and historic settlement located on the north side of the Heart River on the eastern side of the modern city of Mandan, ND. The inhabitants of Scattered Village have been identified as either Hidatsa or Mandan whose descendants are today members of the Three Affiliated Tribes.
Officials of the Peabody Museum of Natural History have determined that:
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of two individuals of Native American ancestry.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and the Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation, North Dakota.
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Professor David Skelly, Director, Yale Peabody Museum of Natural History, P.O. Box 208118, New Haven, CT 06520-8118, telephone (203) 432-3752, by June 2, 2017. After that date, if no additional requestors have come forward, transfer of control of the human remains to the Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation, North Dakota may proceed.
The Peabody Museum of Natural History is responsible for notifying the Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation, North Dakota that this notice has been published.
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice.
The Human Remains Repository, Department of Anthropology, University of Wyoming, has completed an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects, in consultation with the appropriate Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, and has determined that there is no cultural affiliation between the human remains and associated funerary objects and any present-day Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. Representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request to the Human Remains Repository, Department of Anthropology, University of Wyoming. If no additional requestors come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.
Representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to the Human Remains Repository, Department of Anthropology, University of Wyoming, at the address in this notice by June 2, 2017.
Dr. Rick L. Weathermon, Curator, Human Remains Repository, Department 3431, Anthropology, 1000 East University Avenue, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY 82071, telephone (307) 314-2035, email
Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects under the control of the Human Remains Repository, Department of Anthropology, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY. The human remains and associated funerary objects were removed from multiple locations in multiple counties in Wyoming.
This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3) and 43 CFR 10.11(d). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.
A detailed assessment of the human remains was made by the Human Remains Repository, Department of Anthropology, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY, professional staff in consultation with representatives of the Arapaho Tribe of the Wind River Reservation, Wyoming. The following tribes were invited to consult but did not participate in consultation: Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes, Oklahoma (previously listed as the Cheyenne-Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma); and Northern Cheyenne Tribe of the Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation, Montana.
In 1968, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from site 48AB6, located east of Laramie in Albany County, WY, near the City Springs wells, by members of the University of Wyoming Department of Anthropology. The human remains represent a Native American female 21-25 years old. No known individual was identified. The human remains and associated funerary objects are recorded together as HR006 in the Human Remains Repository records. Sediment samples from the grave area are also present. The 8 associated funerary objects include one lot of brass wire bracelet fragments; one lot of rusted metal fragments; one lot of blue glass seed trade beads; one lot of white glass seed trade beads; one lump of red ocher; one lot of small disintegrating leather fragments; one lot of debitage; and one lot of decaying wood fragments that may represent a grave cover or collapsed scaffold.
In 1974, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from the Bell Cave site (48AB304), located 18 miles north-northeast of Laramie in Albany County, WY, by members of the Wyoming State Archaeology Survey Office. The fragmentary human remains represent a Native American individual 21-24 years old, of undetermined sex. No known individual was identified. The human remains and associated funerary objects are recorded together as HR011 in the Human Remains Repository records. The 2 associated funerary objects include one lot of small blue and white glass seed trade beads and one lot of larger red, blue, and white lamp-wound glass trade beads.
In 1974, human remains representing, at minimum, two individuals, were removed from an unknown site, located southwest of Laramie, Albany County, WY, by members of the University of Wyoming Department of Anthropology. The fragmentary human remains represent two Native American adults, one male (HR021) and one female (HR022), each approximately 50 years old. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.
At an unknown date, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual, were removed from an unknown site, located near Rock River in Albany County, WY. They have been housed at the Human Remains Repository since the mid-1980s. The human remains (HR096), which represent a Native American male, 35-40 years old, were found covered with a red pigment, possibly ocher. No known individual was identified. No associated funerary objects are present.
In 1959, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from site 48AB5, located approximately three miles southwest of Laramie, Albany County, WY, by personnel of the Wyoming Archaeological Survey Office. The human remains (HR097) were initially taken to the Wyoming State Museum and, in 1983, they were transferred to the Human Remains Repository. The fragmentary human remains represent a Native American male over the age of 50. No known individual was identified. No associated funerary objects are present. Based on fluorine dating performed in the 1960s, the individual probably dates to the Late Plains Archaic (3,000-2,000 years before present).
In 1986, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from site 48AB458, located approximately 10 miles south-southwest of Laramie, Albany County, WY, by personnel of the Wyoming Archaeological Survey Office and the University of Wyoming Department of Anthropology. The fragmentary human remains (HR115) represent a Native American male 19-24 years old. No known individual was identified. The 9 associated funerary objects include nine shell beads.
In 1986, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from site 48AB459, located about three miles northeast of Woods Landing, Albany County, WY, by personnel of the Wyoming Archaeological Survey Office and the University of Wyoming Department of Anthropology. The site had been disturbed in 1984 by looters, who reportedly collected corner notched arrow points, bone beads, and a shell pendant from the site. The fragmentary human remains (HR136) represent a Native American female 50-69 years old. No known individual was identified. No associated funerary objects are present.
At some time in the 1960s, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual, were removed from an unknown site, located approximately 25 miles southwest of Laramie, Albany County, WY, near Jelm Mountain, by the landowner. The human remains (HR197) were given to the University of Wyoming Department of Anthropology in 1996. The fragmentary human remains represent a Native American child between the ages of two and three. No known individual was identified. The 4 associated funerary objects include one lot of black, blue, white and red glass seed trade beads; one lot of white lamp-wound glass trade beads; one large abalone shell pendant; and one small abalone shell pendant.
At an unknown date, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from site 48AB458, located approximately 24 miles north-northeast of Laramie, Albany County, WY. In 2010, the human remains were recovered by law enforcement from the individual who had excavated them illegally. The human remains (HR318) were released to the Human Remains Repository in 2016. The fragmentary human remains represent a Native American male approximately 45 years old. No known individual was identified. No associated funerary objects are present. Additional remains belonging to the individual were later recovered by personnel of the Albany County Coroner's Office and the University of Wyoming Anthropology Department and the presence of other Native American graves in the vicinity was noted.
At an unknown date, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from site 48CR105, located southeast of Saratoga, Carbon County, WY. The individuals who removed the human remains also reported finding glass trade beads and projectile points at the site. In approximately 1978, the human remains (HR009) were given to the Human Remains Repository. The fragmentary human remains represent a Native American male over the age of 50. No known individual was identified. No associated funerary objects are present.
In 1977, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from site 48CR933, located approximately 16 miles northeast of Sinclair, Carbon County, WY, by the Office of the Wyoming State Archaeologist and relatives of the landowner. The human remains (HR057), within a bundle burial, were given to the Human Remains Repository by the landowner in 2004. The fragmentary human remains represent a Native American female over the age of 24. No known individual was identified. The 2 associated funerary objects include one lot of debitage and one lot of bone beads and bone bead fragments.
Between 1960 and 1980, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from an unknown site, located near the town of McFadden, Carbon County, WY. The human remains (HR133) were given to the Human Remains Repository in 1986. The fragmentary human remains represent a Native American male 24-35
In 1994, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from site 48CR5718, located approximately 10.5 miles northwest of the town of Medicine Bow, Carbon County, WY, by personnel of the Office of the Wyoming State Archaeologist and the University of Wyoming Department of Anthropology. The human remains (HR213) have been housed at the Human Remains Repository since that time. The fragmentary human remains represent a Native American male 45-55 years old. No known individual was identified. No associated funerary objects are present.
In 2012, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from an unknown site, located approximately three miles northwest of the town of Sinclair, Carbon County, WY, by the Carbon County Coroner's Office and the University of Wyoming Department of Anthropology. The human remains, probably belonging to a secondary bundle burial under a small cairn, washed out of the site where they had been interred when a flash flood caused an arroyo wall to collapse. The human remains (HR319) have been housed at the Human Remains Repository since that time. The fragmentary human remains represent a Native American male approximately 50 years old. No known individual was identified. No associated funerary objects are present.
In 1986, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from site 8CO1829, located approximately 11 miles due south of Douglas, Converse County, WY. The human remains and associated funerary objects were given to the Pioneer Museum in Douglas, which transferred them to the Human Remains Repository in 1992. The fragmentary human remains (HR188) represent a Native American female 30-40 years old. No known individual was identified. The 83 funerary objects include 1 lot of thousands of blue, white, black, light yellow and red-white heart glass trade seed beads; 2 blue glass pony beads; 20 white opaque lamp-wound glass beads; 4 shell beads and shell fragments; 2 gilded metal buttons; 1 broken glass bottle stopper; 4 spring-like coils of brass or copper wire; 19 brass or copper wire bracelets; 1 metal circular trade mirror back; 3 drilled and incised deer/antelope phalanges; 4 elk canine teeth; 1 fragmentary bison tooth; 3 baculite `buffalo stone' fossils; 1 elk horn hide scraper with metal bit; 1 abalone shell pendant; 3 fragmentary metal knife blades; 1 complete metal knife without scales; 1 metal arrow point; 1 metal bridle buckle; 1 metal bridle ring; 1 brass tube; 1 brass decorative metal piece; 1 bone spatula; 2 flat hide burnishing stones; 1 metaquartzite hammer stone; 1 small ball-shaped stone; 1 lot broken bifaces and debitage; and 1 small lot of red, yellow, white, and black ocher.
In 1974, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from site 48PL57, near the community of Shawnee in Platte County, WY, by personnel of the University of Wyoming Department of Anthropology. The human remains were at the Glendo Museum until 1996, when they were transferred to the Human Remains Repository. The fragmentary human remains (FC005) represent a Native American female 60-70 years old. No known individual was identified. No associated funerary objects are present.
In the 1930s, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from site 48GO6, located on the south side of the North Platte River near the town of Lingle, Goshen County, WY. At that time, some of the remains of the individual were sent to the Wyoming State Museum, and the remainder were sent to the University of Wyoming Geology Department. In 1963, the Geology Department sent the remains of the individual under its control to the Anthropology Department and, in 1996, the Wyoming State Museum transferred the remains of the individual under its control to the Human Remains Repository. In 2006, the remains of the individual were reunited. The fragmentary human remains (HR004) represent a Native American female 16-24 years old. No known individual was identified. The 15 funerary objects include 1 lot of blue, turquoise, red, white, green and red-white heart glass trade seed beads; 1 lot of olivella shell beads; 1 lot of dentalia shell beads; 2 abalone shell fragments; 1 glass button; 1 lot of fabric and leather fragments; 1 lot of wood fragments; 1 iron buckle; 1 lot of rusted iron fragments; 2 black leather strap fragments; 1 lot of wire bracelets and bracelet fragments; 1 lot of copper or brass plate fragments; and 1 of lot brass buttons.
In the 1970s, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from a crevasse burial site located approximately one half mile southeast of Crimson Dawn Butte on Casper Mountain, Natrona County, WY, by personnel of the Wyoming Archaeological Society. The human remains were transferred to the Human Remains Repository in the 1980s. The fragmentary human remains (HR200) represent a Native American female approximately 50 years old. No known individual was identified. The 2 funerary objects include 1 lot of slate heishi-style beads and 1 lot of bone beads.
In 1972 or 1973, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from an unknown site located on the south side of the North Platte River in Natrona County, WY, by personnel of the Natrona County Sheriff's Office. The human remains (FC002) were transferred to the University of Wyoming Anthropology Department Human Remains Repository in 1973. The human remains represent a Native American male 40-50 years old. No known individual was identified. No associated funerary objects are present.
In 1978 or 1979, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from site 48PL66, located approximately one half mile east of Gray Rocks Reservoir in Platte County, WY, by personnel of the Wyoming State Archaeologist's Office. The fragmentary human remains were transferred to the Human Remains Repository in the early 1980s. The fragmentary human remains represent a Native American male adult of indeterminate age. No known individual was identified. No associated funerary objects are present.
In the 1920s, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from a cairn site located on the south side of the Platte River in Platte or Converse County, WY. The human remains (HR139) were housed at the Wyoming State Museum and, in 1992, were transferred to the Human Remains Repository. The human remains represent a Native American female 2.5 to 3.5 years old. No known individual was identified. The 1 funerary object includes one cotton print dress with a beaded neckline of white glass trade seed beads.
In 1985, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from a rock shelter located on the North Platte River in Platte County, WY, by personnel of the University of Wyoming Department of Anthropology. The fragmentary human remains (FC071) represent a Native American female approximately 50 years old. No known individual was identified. No associated funerary objects are present.
At an unknown date, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from an
In the 1930s, human remains representing, at minimum, four individuals were removed from an unknown location near Torrington, Goshen County, WY. The human remains were given to the North Platte Police Department in Nebraska in 1994. The human remains were transferred to the Human Remains Repository in 1995 by the Lincoln County, NE., Coroner's office. The fragmentary human remains represent a Native American female 28-35 years old (DB145a); a Native American male, 28-35 years old (DB145b); a Native American child of indeterminate sex 3.5-6.5 years old (DB145c); and a Native American adult of indeterminate sex and age (DB145d). No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.
Officials of the Human Remains Repository, Department of Anthropology, University of Wyoming have determined that:
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice are Native American based on features of the skeletal elements or their archeological contexts.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of 28 individuals of Native American ancestry.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(A), the 126 funerary objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), a relationship of shared group identity cannot be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects and any present-day Indian tribe.
• According to final judgments of the Indian Claims Commission or the Court of Federal Claims, the land from which the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects were removed is the aboriginal land of the Arapaho Tribe of the Wind River Reservation, Wyoming.
• Treaties, Acts of Congress, or Executive Orders, indicate that the land from which the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects were removed is the aboriginal land of the Arapaho Tribe of the Wind River Reservation, Wyoming.
• Pursuant to 43 CFR 10.11(c)(1), the disposition of the human remains and associated funerary objects may be to the Arapaho Tribe of the Wind River Reservation, Wyoming.
Representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Dr. Rick L. Weathermon, Curator, Human Remains Repository, Department 3431, Anthropology, 1000 East University Avenue, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY 82071, telephone (307) 314-2035, email
The Human Remains Repository, Department of Anthropology, University of Wyoming, is responsible for notifying the Arapaho Tribe of the Wind River Reservation, Wyoming, that this notice has been published.
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice.
The Robert S. Peabody Museum of Archaeology, in consultation with the appropriate Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, has determined that the cultural items listed in this notice meet the definition of sacred objects. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request to the Robert S. Peabody Museum of Archaeology. If no additional claimants come forward, transfer of control of the cultural items to the lineal descendants, Indian tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to the Robert S. Peabody Museum of Archaeology at the address in this notice by June 2, 2017.
Dr. Ryan J. Wheeler, Director, The Robert S. Peabody Museum of Archaeology, Phillips Academy, 180 Main Street, Andover, MA 01810, (978) 749-4494, email
Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3005, of the intent to repatriate cultural items under the control of the Robert S. Peabody Museum of Archaeology, Andover, MA, that meet the definition of sacred objects under 25 U.S.C. 3001.
This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American cultural items. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.
About August 1909, seven items of cultural and spiritual significance were removed from the White Earth Reservation in Becker County, MN, by Warren K. Moorehead, Curator of the Robert S. Peabody Museum of Archaeology. The seven sacred objects are one owl feather war flag (144/18739) made by Ne-gah-ne-bin-ace in the mid-nineteenth century and presented to Moorehead by Me-shuck-ke-gee-shig and Mah-in-gonce; one beaded altar cloth (144/18737); one circular soapstone pipe and associated wooden stem (42293) that had been smoked by Way-ge-chaw-bow-e-quay; two beaded buckskin bags (144/18722 and 144/18721); and one pipe stem with pileated woodpecker skull and feathers (144/
On an unknown date, two cultural items were removed from the White Earth Reservation in Becker County, MN, by Major John R. Howard, Bureau of Indian Affairs Superintendent at the White Earth Agency from 1908 to 1916, and given to Warren K. Moorehead. The two sacred objects are one large granite pipe and associated long wooden stem (object ID number 29661) that had been made and smoked by Bay-bah-daum-ay-aush in 1898; and one small effigy pipe (object ID number 29662) belonging to No-de-na-qua-um (also known as Temperance Chief).
In 1908, President Theodore Roosevelt appointed Warren K. Moorehead to the Board of Indian Commissioners. After his appointment, Moorehead learned from his colleagues at the Smithsonian Institution “of the dreadful situation on a dozen different reservations,” including the White Earth Reservation. He requested permission and funds to investigate, which were granted by Commissioner of Indian Affairs Francis Leupp. Moorehead spent time at the White Earth Reservation investigating various forms of land and other theft during a period of significant economic, cultural, and religious oppression. It was during this time that numerous objects of cultural and spiritual significance were removed from Anishinaabeg communities.
Consultations were held during a January 12-13, 2017, visit by officials from the White Earth Band of the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe who affirmed cultural affiliation to these nine sacred objects. In a letter dated February 14, 2017, the White Earth Band of the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe requested the return of the nine sacred objects due to their substantial cultural and religious significance.
Officials of the Robert S. Peabody Museum of Archaeology have determined that
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(C), the nine cultural items described above are specific ceremonial objects needed by traditional Native American religious leaders for the practice of traditional Native American religions by their present-day adherents.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the nine sacred objects and the White Earth Band of the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe.
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to Dr. Ryan J. Wheeler, Director, The Robert S. Peabody Museum of Archaeology, Phillips Academy, 180 Main Street, Andover, MA 01810, (978) 749-4494, email
The Robert S. Peabody Museum of Archaeology is responsible for notifying the White Earth Band of the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe that this notice has been published.
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice.
The Worcester Society of Natural History d.b.a. EcoTarium, in consultation with the appropriate Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, has determined that the cultural items listed in this notice meet the definition of sacred objects. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request to the Worcester Society of Natural History d.b.a. EcoTarium. If no additional claimants come forward, transfer of control of the cultural items to the lineal descendants, Indian tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to the Worcester Society of Natural History d.b.a. EcoTarium at the address in this notice by June 2, 2017.
Shana Hawrylchak, Manager of Exhibits and Collections, EcoTarium, 222 Harrington Way, Worcester, MA 01604, telephone (508) 929-2733, email
Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3005, of the intent to repatriate cultural items under the control of the Worcester Society of Natural History d.b.a. EcoTarium, Worcester, MA, that meet the definition of sacred objects under 25 U.S.C. 3001.
This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American cultural items. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.
At an unknown date, one cultural item was removed from an unknown location. The one sacred object is a fan made of eagle feathers, hide, and small beadwork. In 2016, the fan was found in the collections storage facilities of the EcoTarium together with an associated exhibit label which read “Fan used in the peyote ceremony”. No information on the fan was found in the Museum's accession files or internal archives indicating either the provenience or the provenance of the fan. Based on the age of other materials in the Museum's anthropology collection, it is likely that the fan entered the collection in the 1950s. In the opinion of Douglas Diehl, Director of American Indian & Ethnographic Art at Skinner Auction House, the piece was Kiowa or Comanche, based on the design.
In consultation with Margaret Murrow, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer for the Comanche Nation, further details of the design were identified as being in the Comanche style. In particular, the feathers were cut, or “narrowed”, in a manner that is similar to traditional Comanche treatment of feathers and distinct from the fuller feather treatments seen in most Kiowa fans. The beadwork also follows traditional Comanche color schemes and patterns.
Officials of the Worcester Society of Natural History d.b.a. EcoTarium have determined that
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(C), the one cultural item described above is a specific ceremonial object needed by traditional Native American religious leaders for the practice of traditional Native American religions by their present-day adherents.
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to Shana Hawrylchak, Manager of Exhibits and Collections, EcoTarium, 222 Harrington Way, Worcester, MA 01604, telephone (508) 929-2733, email
The Worcester Society of Natural History d.b.a. EcoTarium is responsible for notifying the Comanche Nation, Oklahoma, that this notice has been published.
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice.
The Office of the State Archaeologist Bioarchaeology Program, previously listed as the Office of the State Archaeologist Burials Program, has completed an inventory of human remains, in consultation with the appropriate Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, and has determined that there is a cultural affiliation between the human remains and present-day Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request to the Office of the State Archaeologist Bioarchaeology Program. If no additional requestors come forward, transfer of control of the human remains to the lineal descendants, Indian tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request with information in support of the request to the Office of the State Archaeologist Bioarchaeology Program at the address in this notice by June 2, 2017.
Dr. Lara Noldner, Office of the State Archaeologist Bioarchaeology Program, University of Iowa, 700 South Clinton Street, Iowa City, IA 52242, telephone (319) 384-0740, email
Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains under the control of the Office of the State Archaeologist Bioarchaeology Program, Iowa City, IA. The human remains were removed from the Blood Run site (13LO2), Lyon County, IA.
This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.
A detailed assessment of the human remains was made by the Office of the State Archaeologist Bioarchaeology Program professional staff in consultation with representatives of the Ho-Chunk Nation of Wisconsin; Iowa Tribe of Kansas and Nebraska; Iowa Tribe of Oklahoma; Omaha Tribe of Nebraska; Otoe-Missouria Tribe of Indians, Oklahoma; Ponca Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma; Ponca Tribe of Nebraska; and Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska, (hereafter, “The Tribes”).
At an unknown date, human remains representing, at minimum, six individuals were removed from the Blood Run site (13LO2), in Lyon County, IA. The human remains were part of the Amy Harvey collection. Amy Harvey collected Oneota materials while doing doctoral research at the University of Wisconsin-Madison in the early 1960s, and retained the materials when she began teaching at Stephens College in Columbia, MO, in 1965. The human remains were transferred to the Office of the State Archaeologist Bioarchaeology Program in 2010 and 2013 (Burial Project 3102). The human remains represent one adult of indeterminate age and sex; and five subadults of indeterminate sex, as follows: One child two years old, one child 2.5 to 3.5 years old, one child 3.5 to 4.5 years old, one child 5.0 to 6.5 years old, and one child 7 to 15 years old. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.
The Blood Run site (13LO2) is a large Oneota tradition village located in Iowa and South Dakota, straddling the Big Sioux River southeast of Sioux Falls, SD. Archeological evidence, including radiocarbon dates and trade artifacts, suggests that the site was occupied from A.D. 1500 to 1700. Tribal histories, supported by French historical maps and documents, suggest that the Omaha, Ponca, Iowa, and Oto tribes were present in the area at that time and were the probable residents of the site. The Ho-Chunk and Winnebago are also ethno-historically linked to these tribes. Based on this contextual information, it has been determined that there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between these Native American human remains and The Tribes.
Officials of the Office of the State Archaeologist Bioarchaeology Program have determined that:
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of six individuals of Native American ancestry.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and The Tribes.
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian
The Office of the State Archaeologist Bioarchaeology Program is responsible for notifying The Tribes that this notice has been published.
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice.
The Nebraska State Historical Society (NSHS) has completed an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects, in consultation with the appropriate Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, and has determined that there is no cultural affiliation between the human remains and associated funerary objects and any present-day Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. Representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request to the NSHS. If no additional requestors come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.
Representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to the NSHS at the address in this notice by June 2, 2017.
Rob Bozell, Nebraska State Historical Society, P.O. Box 82554, Lincoln, NE 68501, telephone (402) 471-4789, email
Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects under the control of the NSHS, Lincoln, NE. The human remains and associated funerary objects were removed from Custer and Franklin Counties, NE.
This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3) and 43 CFR 10.11(d). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.
A detailed assessment of the human remains and associated funerary objects was made by the NSHS professional staff in consultation with representatives of: The Arapaho Tribe of the Wind River Reservation, Wyoming; Iowa Tribe of Kansas and Nebraska; Kiowa Indian Tribe of Oklahoma; Northern Cheyenne Tribe of the Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation, Montana; Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma; and Ponca Tribe of Nebraska.
On an unknown date, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from a ranch in rural Custer County, NE. On July 1, 2014, the human remains were donated to the NSHS by the private individual who had initially removed them. The human remains include the partial cranium and ten post-cranial bones of an individual of Native American ancestry. No known individual was identified. No associated funerary objects are present.
On October 28, 2014, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from a private yard in the City of Broken Bow in Custer County, NE. The human remains were given to the City of Broken Bow Police Department and subsequently donated to the NSHS. The human remains include the partial cranium of an individual of possible Native American ancestry. No known individual was identified. No associated funerary objects are present.
On October 1, 2014, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from an abandoned building in Custer County, NE. The human remains were given to the Custer County Sheriff's Office and subsequently donated to the NSHS. The human remains include the cranium of an individual of Native American ancestry and 13 post-cranial bones. No known individual was identified. The 13 associated funerary objects are: One metal button, one metal ring, one metal hook or flint steel, one animal bone, five flint flakes, one chalky concretion, two glass trade beads, and one mussel shell.
Between November 5 and 7, 2014, human remains representing, at minimum, one adult individual were removed from a steep slope in Franklin County, NE, by the NSHS. The human remains were discovered eroding from the slope by an archeological survey crew. The human remains include: Two femora (l/r), two tibiae (l/r), two fibulae (l/r), one pelvis (l), two humeri (l/r), one radius (l), one ulna (l), one 5th metacarpal (r), several fragments of vertebrae, and several fragments of unidentifiable long bones. The human remains were those of an individual of Native American ancestry. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.
Officials of the Nebraska State Historical Society have determined that:
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice are Native American based on associated funerary objects and examination by a physical anthropologist of cranial, dental, and femoral features and measurements.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of four individuals of Native American ancestry.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(A), the 13 objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), a relationship of shared group identity cannot be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects and any present-day Indian tribe.
• According to final judgments of the Indian Claims Commission or the Court of Federal Claims, the land from which the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects were removed is the aboriginal land of the Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma.
• Pursuant to 43 CFR 10.11(c)(1), the disposition of the human remains and associated funerary objects may be to the Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma.
Representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Rob Bozell, Nebraska State Historical Society, P.O. Box 82554, Lincoln, NE 68501, (402) 471-4789, email
The Nebraska State Historical Society is responsible for notifying the Arapaho Tribe of the Wind River Reservation, Wyoming; Iowa Tribe of Kansas and Nebraska; Kiowa Indian Tribe of Oklahoma; Northern Cheyenne Tribe of the Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation, Montana; Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma; and Ponca Tribe of Nebraska that this notice has been published.
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice.
The Placer County Museums, in consultation with the appropriate Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, has determined that the cultural items listed in this notice meet the definition of objects of cultural patrimony. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request to the Placer County Museums. If no additional claimants come forward, transfer of control of the cultural items to the lineal descendants, Indian tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to the Placer County Museums at the address in this notice by June 2, 2017.
Ralph Gibson, Museums Administrator, Placer County Museums, 101 Maple Street, Auburn, CA 95603, telephone (530) 889-6500, email
Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3005, of the intent to repatriate cultural items under the control of the Placer County Museums, Auburn, CA, that meet the definition of objects of cultural patrimony under 25 U.S.C. 3001.
This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American cultural items. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.
At an unknown date, one cultural item was removed from an unknown location and donated to the Placer County Museums by Guy L. Gilchrist of Dutch Flat, CA, in 1949. It is unclear where he acquired the object. The one object of cultural patrimony is a water jar.
At an unknown date, two cultural items were removed from an unknown location and donated to the Placer County Museums by Maude E. Denney of Roseville, CA, in 1949. It is unclear where she acquired the objects. The two objects of cultural patrimony are a water jar and a winnowing tray,
At an unknown date, six cultural items were removed from an unknown location and donated to the Placer County Museums by Berenice Pate of Auburn, CA, in 1986. Pate's husband, Waldo Pate, was a physician who treated local Indians. He often received baskets as payment for medical services and the couple continued collecting through purchases and gifts. In the 1960s, Berenice Pate served as the executive director of the California Indian Commission. A large part of their collection was acquired in Modoc County, CA. The six objects of cultural patrimony are four water jars, one parching tray, and one burden basket.
The tribe affiliation was determined by Foley C. Benson, M. A, A. S.A. Certified Appraiser, and Norman Wilson, Museum Consultant. The affiliation was confirmed through consultation with the Reno-Sparks Indian Colony, Nevada, who recognized methods and materials used in the construction of the items that were consistent with traditional Paiute weavings.
Officials of the Placer County Museums have determined that
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(D), the 9 cultural items described above have ongoing historical, traditional, or cultural importance central to the Native American group or culture itself, rather than property owned by an individual.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the objects of cultural patrimony and the Reno-Sparks Indian Colony, Nevada.
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to Ralph Gibson, Placer County Museums, 101 Maple Street, Auburn, CA 95603, telephone (530) 889-6500, email
The Placer County Museums is responsible for notifying the Reno-Sparks Indian Colony, Nevada, Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians, Shingle Springs Rancheria (Verona Tract), California, United Auburn Indian Community of the Auburn Rancheria of California, Washoe Tribe of Nevada & California (Carson Colony, Dresslerville Colony, Woodfords Community, Stewart Community & Washoe Ranches), and Wilton Rancheria, California, that this notice has been published.
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice.
The Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Archaeology, has completed an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects in consultation with the appropriate Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, and has determined that there is a cultural affiliation between the human remains and associated funerary objects and present-day Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request to the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Archaeology. If no additional requestors come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the lineal descendants, Indian tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Archaeology, at the address in this notice by June 2, 2017.
Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Archaeology, Michael C. Moore, 1216 Foster Avenue, Cole Bldg 3, Nashville, TN 37243, telephone 615-741-1588, ext. 109, email
Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects under the control of the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Archaeology, Nashville, TN. The human remains and associated funerary objects were removed from Elizabethton, Carter County, TN.
This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.
A detailed assessment of the human remains was made by the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Archaeology, professional staff in consultation with representatives of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians.
In 1977, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from the Carter Mansion site (40CR5) in Carter County, TN, by personnel of the Tennessee Division of Archaeology. The Carter Mansion site in Elizabethton, TN, is comprised of the late 18th century home and grounds of John and Landon Carter. Archeological investigations conducted during the 1970s by the Tennessee Division of Archaeology (TDOA) revealed prehistoric and protohistoric Native American components near the structure and along the grounds. The TDOA discovered the human remains and associated funerary objects during a structure restoration project (Smith 1979). During the course of excavation along the front exterior of the house, a burial pit containing the human remains was encountered immediately adjacent to the foundation base. The human remains and associated funerary objects have been curated by the TDOA since excavation. The human remains represent an adult male approximately 20-30 years old. No known individual was identified. Based on analysis of the associated funerary objects, the human remains were considered to be of a protohistoric Native American component. The 580 associated funerary objects are 381 marine gastropod beads; 164 marginella shell beads; 1 leptoxis shell bead; 5 bone beads; 2 Busycon shell ear pins; 2 split turkey bone pins; 15 Busycon shell beads; 1 pounded copper sheet; 1 fragmented woven bark matting (for copper sheet); 1 ceramic platter/bowl with rim notching on one side; 1 miniature incised ceramic vessel; 1 basal portion of an incised ceramic vessel; 1 smooth stone; 3 lithic debitage; and 1 pumpkin seed. The associated funerary objects are protohistoric to early historic Native American based upon the range and style of artifacts.
Officials of the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Archaeology have determined that:
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of one individual of Native American ancestry.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(A), the 580 objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects and Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians.
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Michael C. Moore, Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Archaeology, 1216 Foster Avenue, Cole Bldg 3, Nashville, TN 37243, telephone 615-741-1588, ext. 109, email
The Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Archaeology is responsible for notifying the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians that this notice has been published.
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice; correction.
The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) has corrected an inventory of human remains published in a Notice of Inventory Completion in the
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request with information in support of the request to at the address in this notice by June 2, 2017.
Dr. Thomas O. Maher, TVA, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, WT11D, Knoxville, TN 37902-1401, telephone (865) 632-7458, email
Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the correction of an inventory of human remains under the control of the TVA, Knoxville, TN. The human remains were removed from the Long Branch site (1LU67) in Lauderdale County, AL.
This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.
This notice corrects the minimum number of individuals published in a Notice of Inventory Completion in the
In the
In the
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Dr. Thomas O. Maher, TVA, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, WT11D, Knoxville, TN 37902-1401, telephone (865) 632-7458, email
TVA is responsible for notifying the Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas (previously listed as the Alabama-Coushatta Tribes of Texas); Alabama-Quassarte Tribal Town; Cherokee Nation; Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana; Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians; Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma; Poarch Band of Creeks (previously listed as the Poarch Band of Creek Indians of Alabama); The Chickasaw Nation; The Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma; The Muscogee (Creek) Nation; Thlopthlocco Tribal Town; and United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma that this notice has been published.
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice.
The Peabody Museum of Natural History, in consultation with the appropriate Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, has determined that the cultural item listed in this notice meets the definition of unassociated funerary object. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim this cultural item should submit a written request to the Peabody Museum of Natural History. If no additional claimants come forward, transfer of control of the cultural item to the lineal descendants, Indian tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim this cultural item should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to the Peabody Museum of Natural History at the address in this notice by June 2, 2017.
Professor David Skelly, Director, Yale Peabody Museum of Natural History, P.O. Box 208118, New Haven, CT 06520-8118, telephone (203) 432-3752.
Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3005, of the intent to repatriate a cultural item under the control of the Peabody Museum of Natural History, Yale University, New Haven, CT, that meets the definition of unassociated funerary object under 25 U.S.C. 3001.
This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American cultural items. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.
In 1904, one cultural item was removed from a grave near Fort Clark, Mercer County, ND, and donated to the Peabody Museum of Natural History in 1915. The one unassociated funerary object is a swan bone whistle.
Museum documentation identifies the provenience as an Arikara grave near Fort Clark, ND. In 1830, the Fort Clark Trading Post was established in an area south of a Mandan village by James Kipp, an employee of the American Fur Company. The Mandan occupied the village until 1837, when a disastrous smallpox epidemic forced their removal. Before the Mandan could return, a group of Arikara moved into the village and remained until about 1861. Descendants of the Arikara and Mandan of the Fort Clark, ND, region are today members of the Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation, North Dakota.
Officials of the Peabody Museum of Natural History have determined that:
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(B), the one cultural item described above is reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony and are believed, by a preponderance of the evidence, to have been removed from a specific burial site of a Native American individual.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the unassociated funerary object and the Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation, North Dakota.
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim this cultural item should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to Professor David Skelly, Director, Yale Peabody Museum of Natural History, P.O. Box 208118, New Haven, CT 06520-8118, telephone (203) 432-3752, by June 2, 2017. After that date, if no additional claimants have come forward, transfer of control of the unassociated funerary object to the Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation, North Dakota, may proceed.
The Peabody Museum of Natural History is responsible for notifying the Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation, North Dakota, that this notice has been published.
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice.
History Colorado, formerly Colorado Historical Society, has completed an inventory of human remains, in consultation with the appropriate Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, and has determined that there is no cultural affiliation between the human remains and any present-day Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. Representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request to History Colorado. If no additional requestors come forward, transfer of control of the human remains to the Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.
Representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request with information in support of the request to History Colorado at the address in this notice by June 2, 2017.
Sheila Goff, NAGPRA Liaison, History Colorado, 1200 Broadway, Denver, CO 80203, telephone (303) 866-4531, email
Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains under the control of History Colorado, Denver, CO. The human remains were removed from an unknown location in Pueblo County, CO.
This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3) and 43 CFR 10.11(d). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.
A detailed assessment of the human remains was made by History Colorado professional staff in consultation with representatives of the Arapaho Tribe of the Wind River Reservation, Wyoming; Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes, Oklahoma (previously listed as the Cheyenne-Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma); Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe of the Cheyenne River Reservation, South Dakota; Comanche Nation, Oklahoma; Crow Tribe of Montana; Eastern Shoshone Tribe of the Wind River Reservation, Wyoming (previously listed as the Shoshone Tribe of the Wind River Reservation, Wyoming); Fort Sill Apache Tribe of Oklahoma; Jicarilla Apache Nation, New Mexico; Kiowa Indian Tribe of Oklahoma; Mescalero Apache Tribe of the Mescalero Reservation, New Mexico; Northern Cheyenne Tribe of the Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation, Montana; Ohkay Owingeh, New Mexico (previously listed as the Pueblo of San Juan); Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma; Pueblo of San Felipe, New Mexico; Pueblo of San Ildefonso, New Mexico; Pueblo of Santa Clara, New Mexico; Southern Ute Indian Tribe of the Southern Ute Reservation, Colorado; Standing Rock Sioux Tribe of North & South Dakota; Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation, North Dakota; Ute Mountain Ute Tribe (previously listed as the Ute Mountain Tribe of the Ute Mountain Reservation, Colorado, New Mexico & Utah); and Zuni Tribe of the Zuni Reservation, New Mexico. The following tribes were invited to consult but did not participate: the Apache Tribe of Oklahoma; Crow Creek Sioux Tribe of the Crow Creek Reservation, South Dakota; Oglala Sioux Tribe (previously listed as the Oglala Sioux Tribe of the Pine Ridge Reservation, South Dakota); and Rosebud Sioux Tribe of the Rosebud Indian Reservation, South Dakota. Hereafter all tribes listed above are referred to as “The Consulted and Invited Tribes.”
In the 1950s, human remains representing, at minimum, three
At the time of the excavation and removal of these human remains, the land from which the human remains were removed was not the tribal land of any Indian tribe. In January and February 2017, History Colorado consulted with all Indian tribes who are recognized as aboriginal to Pueblo County, CO, where these Native American human remains were removed. These tribes are the Arapaho Tribe of the Wind River Reservation, Wyoming; Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes, Oklahoma (previously listed as the Cheyenne-Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma); and the Northern Cheyenne Tribe of the Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation, Montana. None of these Indian tribes agreed to accept control of the human remains. The aboriginal land tribes requested in writing that the human remains be transferred according to the
History Colorado, in partnership with the Colorado Commission of Indian Affairs, Southern Ute Indian Tribe of the Southern Ute Reservation, Colorado, and the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe (previously listed as the Ute Mountain Tribe of the Ute Mountain Reservation, Colorado, New Mexico & Utah), conducted tribal consultations among the tribes with ancestral ties to the State of Colorado to develop the process for disposition of culturally unidentifiable Native American human remains and associated funerary objects originating from inadvertent discoveries on Colorado State and private lands. As a result of the consultation, the
The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Review Committee (Review Committee) is responsible for recommending specific actions for disposition of culturally unidentifiable human remains. On November 3-4, 2006, the
43 CFR 10.11 was promulgated on March 15, 2010, to provide a process for the disposition of culturally unidentifiable Native American human remains recovered from tribal or aboriginal lands as established by the final judgment of the Indian Claims Commission or U.S. Court of Claims, a treaty, Act of Congress, or Executive Order, or other authoritative governmental sources. As there is no evidence to suggest that the human remains originated from tribal land and the tribes with aboriginal land did not wish to accept transfer of control, the human remains listed in this notice are eligible for transfer of control under the
Officials of History Colorado have determined that:
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice are Native American based on osteological analysis.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of three individuals of Native American ancestry.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), a relationship of shared group identity cannot be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and any present-day Indian tribe.
• Pursuant to 43 CFR 10.11(c)(2)(i) and the
Representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Sheila Goff, NAGPRA Liaison, History Colorado, 1200 Broadway, Denver, CO 80203, telephone (303) 866-4531, email
History Colorado is responsible for notifying The Consulted and Invited Tribes that this notice has been published.
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice.
The Museum of Northern Arizona, in consultation with the appropriate Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, has determined
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to the Museum of Northern Arizona at the address in this notice by June 2, 2017.
Elaine Hughes, Museum of Northern Arizona, 3101 North Fort Valley Road, Flagstaff, AZ 86001, telephone (928) 774-5211 x228, email
Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3005, of the intent to repatriate cultural items under the control of the Museum of Northern Arizona, Flagstaff, AZ, that meet the definition of unassociated funerary objects under 25 U.S.C. 3001.
This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American cultural items. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.
In 1978 and 1979, 105 cultural items were removed from the Cashion site (NA14690) in Maricopa County, AZ, during authorized archeological investigations conducted by the Museum of Arizona on behalf of the Arizona Nuclear Power Project, prior to the construction of a wastewater conveyance system that was to provide water to cool the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station. The 105 unassociated funerary objects are 14 pottery and ceramic fragments, 30 jewelry items and fragments, 2 pollen samples, 2 faunal bone fragments, 51 projectile points, and 6 tools and implements. The cultural items are associated with seven features identified by the field archeologists as secondary human cremations. No human bone was recovered.
Based on archeological evidence, geographic location, and object classification, these cultural items were made by Native Americans. Archeological evidence indicates that the Cashion site (NA14690), within the Salt River area of central Arizona, was occupied during the period A.D. 700-900 by the Hohokam people, for whom cremation was a common mortuary practice. Hopi and Zuni oral traditions also indicate that segments of the prehistoric Hohokam population migrated to areas occupied by the ancestors of the Hopi and Zuni and were assimilated into the resident populations. Archeological, historical, and oral tradition evidence indicate that there is a relationship of shared group identity between the Hohokam people and the present-day Piman and O'odham cultures, represented by the Ak-Chin Indian Community of the Maricopa (Ak Chin) Indian Reservation, Arizona; Gila River Indian Community of the Gila River Indian Reservation, Arizona; Hopi Tribe of Arizona; Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community of the Salt River Reservation, Arizona; Tohono O'odham Nation of Arizona; and Zuni Tribe of the Zuni Reservation, New Mexico.
Officials of the Museum of Northern Arizona have determined that
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(B), the 105 cultural items described above are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony, and are believed, by a preponderance of the evidence, to have been removed from a specific burial site of a Native American individual.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the unassociated funerary objects and the Ak-Chin Indian Community of the Maricopa (Ak Chin) Indian Reservation, Arizona; Gila River Indian Community of the Gila River Indian Reservation, Arizona; Hopi Tribe of Arizona; Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community of the Salt River Reservation, Arizona; Tohono O'odham Nation of Arizona; and Zuni Tribe of the Zuni Reservation, New Mexico.
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to Elaine Hughes, Museum of Northern Arizona, 3101 North Fort Valley Road, Flagstaff, AZ 86001, telephone (928) 774-5211 x228, email
After that date, if no additional claimants have come forward, transfer of control of the unassociated funerary objects to the Ak-Chin Indian Community of the Maricopa (Ak Chin) Indian Reservation, Arizona; Gila River Indian Community of the Gila River Indian Reservation, Arizona; Hopi Tribe of Arizona; Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community of the Salt River Reservation, Arizona; Tohono O'odham Nation of Arizona; and Zuni Tribe of the Zuni Reservation, New Mexico may proceed.
The Museum of Northern Arizona is responsible for notifying the Ak-Chin Indian Community of the Maricopa (Ak Chin) Indian Reservation, Arizona; Gila River Indian Community of the Gila River Indian Reservation, Arizona; Hopi Tribe of Arizona; Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community of the Salt River Reservation, Arizona; Tohono O'odham Nation of Arizona; and Zuni Tribe of the Zuni Reservation, New Mexico that this notice has been published.
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice.
The Department of Anthropology at Indiana University has completed an inventory of human remains in consultation with the appropriate Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, and has determined that there is a cultural affiliation between the human remains and present-day Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request with information in support of the request to the Indiana University NAGPRA Office at the address in this notice by June 2, 2017.
Dr. Jayne-Leigh Thomas, NAGPRA Director, Indiana University, NAGPRA Office, Student Building 318, 701 East Kirkwood Avenue, Bloomington, IN 47405, telephone (812) 856-5315, email
Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects under the control of the Department of Anthropology at Indiana University, Bloomington, IN. The human remains were removed from multiple counties in the State of Louisiana.
This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.
A detailed assessment of the human remains was made by Indiana University professional staff in consultation with representatives of the Caddo Nation of Oklahoma.
On an unknown date, human remains representing, at minimum, 5 individuals were removed from the Hogg Place site in the State of Louisiana, and donated to the Department of Anthropology at Indiana University. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present. The Hogg Place site was a village with an associated cemetery that was culturally affiliated with the Caddo Nation of Oklahoma, based on material culture and mortuary practices.
On an unknown date, human remains representing, at minimum, 19 individuals were removed from the Allen Place site in Nachitoches County, LA, and donated to the Department of Anthropology at Indiana University. No known individuals were identified. The 7 associated funerary objects are 1 raccoon ulna, 1 piece of red ocher, 1 faunal bone, 1 deer metapodial, and 3 mammal bones. The Allen Place site was culturally affiliated with the Caddo Nation of Oklahoma. In addition, notes associated with the human remains and funerary objects indicate the collection is culturally affiliated with the Caddo Nation of Oklahoma.
On an unknown date, human remains representing, at minimum, 1 individual were removed from the Wilkinson Place site in Nachitoches County and donated to the Department of Anthropology at Indiana University. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present. The Wilkinson Place site was culturally affiliated with the Caddo Nation of Oklahoma. In addition, notes associated with the collection indicate it is culturally affiliated with the Caddo Nation of Oklahoma.
Officials of the Department of Anthropology at Indiana University have determined that:
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of 25 individuals of Native American ancestry.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(A), the 7 objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and the Caddo Nation of Oklahoma.
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Dr. Jayne-Leigh Thomas, NAGPRA Director, Indiana University, NAGPRA Office, Student Building 318, 701 East Kirkwood Avenue, Bloomington, IN 47405, telephone (812) 856-5315, email
The Department of Anthropology at Indiana University is responsible for notifying the Caddo Nation of Oklahoma that this notice has been published.
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice.
The Fowler Museum at UCLA has completed an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects, in consultation with the appropriate Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, and has determined that there is no cultural affiliation between the human remains and associated funerary objects and any present-day Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. Representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request to the Fowler Museum at UCLA. If no additional requestors come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.
Representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to the Fowler Museum at UCLA at the address in this notice by June 2, 2017.
Wendy G. Teeter, Ph.D., Fowler Museum at UCLA, Box 951549, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1549, telephone
Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects under the control of the Fowler Museum at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA. The human remains and associated funerary objects were removed from multiple sites in Orange County, CA.
This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3) and 43 CFR 10.11(d). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.
A detailed assessment of the human remains was made by the Fowler Museum at UCLA professional staff in consultation with representatives of the La Jolla Band of Luiseno Indians, California (previously listed as the La Jolla Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of the La Jolla Reservation); Pala Band of Mission Indians (previously listed as the Pala Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of the Pala Reservation, California); Pauma Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of the Pauma & Yuima Reservation, California; Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of the Pechanga Reservation, California; Rincon Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of the Rincon Reservation, California; San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, California (previously listed as the San Manuel Band of Serrano Mission Indians of the San Manuel Reservation); and Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, California. In addition, the Fowler Museum at UCLA professional staff consulted with the Juaneno Band of Mission Indians, Acjachemen Nation, and the Traditional Council of Pimu, both non-federally recognized Indian groups.
In 1978, human remains representing, at minimum, 50 individuals were removed from site CA-ORA-469C in Orange County, CA, by Marie Cottrell and the Archaeological Resource Management Corporation prior to the development of housing and curated at UCLA. The identification of discrete burials was difficult because the area was mechanically graded, destroying nearly the entire site and heavily disturbing the burials and their associated funerary objects. A total of 12 formal burials were identified along with a large number of fragmentary human remains. Based on discrete contexts and bone fits, the human remains represent 8 male and 3 female adults; 16 adults of indeterminate sex;16 infants, and 7 sub-adults. No known individuals were identified. The 319 associated funerary objects are 82 flakes and flaked tools; 4 cobble tools; 1 fire-cracked rock; 18 stone fragments; 3 pottery sherds; 26 shell beads; 2 lots of burial soil; 61 fragments of animal bone; 2 lots of animal bone; 56 fragments of shell; 4 lots of shell; 59 fragments of fossilized bone and shell; and 1 lot of fossilized bone and shell.
At some unknown time, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual was removed from San Joaquin Hills in Orange County, CA. No provenience information was provided for the location. Archeological sites from the San Joaquin Hills date between BC 860-1800 A.D. The human remains consist of one human pelvis fragment representing an individual of indeterminate age and sex. No known individual was identified. The one associated funerary object is a deer long bone fragment. The human remains and associated funerary object assume the same lab number (1690).
Consultation has identified site CA-ORA-469C and the San Joaquin Hills site to be within the traditional territories of the Acjachemen/Juaneno and Tongva/Gabrielino people. Linguistic and ethnohistoric evidence shows that these Takic-speaking peoples moved into the area by at least 4,500 B.P. These groups have a common heritage, but began to diverge by the beginning of the Middle period. Analysis of historical records from missions in the Greater Los Angeles area shows that at the time of mission recruitment, in the 18th and 19th centuries, the occupants of the area were descended from the populations living in the area.
Associated funerary objects from these sites are consistent with those of groups ancestral to the present-day Acjachemen/Juaneno and Tongva/Gabrielino people. The same range of artifact types and materials were used from the pre-contact period until historic times. Native consultants state that population mixing would not alter the continuity of the shared group identities of people associated with specific locales. Based on this evidence, continuity through time can be traced for these sites with present-day Acjachemen/Juaneno and Tongva/Gabrielino.
At the time of the excavation and removal of these human remains and associated funerary objects, the land from which the remains and objects were removed was not the tribal land of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization. In 2016, the Fowler Museum at UCLA consulted with Indian tribes who are recognized as aboriginal to the area from which these Native American human remains and associated funerary objects were removed. None of these Indian tribes agreed to accept control of the human remains and associated funerary objects. In October 2016, the Fowler Museum at UCLA agreed to transfer control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of the Pechanga Reservation, California.
Officials of the Fowler Museum at UCLA have determined that:
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of 51 individuals of Native American ancestry.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(A), the 320 objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), a relationship of shared group identity cannot be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects and any present-day Indian tribe.
• Pursuant to 43 CFR 10.11(c)(2)(i), the disposition of the human remains and associated funerary objects may be to Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of the Pechanga Reservation, California.
Representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Wendy G. Teeter, Ph.D., Fowler Museum at UCLA, Box 951549, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1549, telephone (310) 825-1864, email
The Fowler Museum at UCLA is responsible for notifying Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of the Pechanga Reservation, California, that this notice has been published.
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice.
The Kansas State Historical Society has completed an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects, in consultation with the appropriate Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, and has determined that there is a cultural affiliation between the human remains and associated funerary objects and present-day Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request to the Kansas State Historical Society. If no additional requestors come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the lineal descendants, Indian tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to the Kansas State Historical Society at the address in this notice by June 2, 2017.
Dr. Robert J. Hoard, Kansas State Historical Society, 6425 SW 6th Avenue, Topeka, KS 66615-1099, telephone 785-272-8681, extension 269, email
Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects under the control of the Kansas State Historical Society, Topeka, KS. The human remains and associated funerary objects were removed from a creek bank in Cherokee County, KS.
This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.
A detailed assessment of the human remains was made by the Kansas State Historical Society professional staff in consultation with representatives of the Cherokee Nation; Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians; Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma; Miami Tribe of Oklahoma; Ottawa Tribe of Oklahoma; Peoria Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma; Seneca Nation of Indians (previously listed as the Seneca Nation of New York); The Osage Nation (previously listed as the Osage Tribe), The Quapaw Tribe of Indians; Tonawanda Band of Seneca (previously listed as the Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians of New York); Wichita and Affiliated Tribes (Wichita, Keechi, Waco & Tawakonie), Oklahoma; and Wyandotte Nation.
On October 3, 2015, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from Cherokee County, KS. Four 15 year-old boys were camping in rural Cherokee County, KS, when they discovered the remains of a human skull near a creek bank on a tributary of Shoal Creek. They notified the Cherokee County Attorney, Nathan Coleman, who then contacted the Cherokee County Sheriff, David Groves. Sheriff Groves contacted forensic anthropologist Dr. Michael Finnegan, who examined the remains and determined them to be, more likely than not, from an American Indian male, approximately 30-40 years old. The human remains were determined to be approximately 500 years old. The human remains were subsequently sent to the Office of the State Archaeologist, Kansas Historical Society, on December 5, 2016. No known individuals were identified. The one associated funerary object is an animal metatarsal.
Determination of cultural affiliation is based on historic maps of the territories of Kansas and Nebraska available at University of Kansas Libraries and the Kansas Historical Society, early historical accounts, and archeological evidence of the tribes known to be associated with the area.
Officials of the Kansas State Historical Society have determined that:
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of one individual of Native American ancestry.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(A), the one object described in this notice is reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects and The Osage Nation (previously listed as the Osage Tribe).
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Dr. Robert J. Hoard, Kansas State Historical Society, 6425 SW 6th Avenue, Topeka, KS 66615-1099, telephone 785-272-8681, extension 269, email
The Kansas State Historical Society is responsible for notifying the Cherokee Nation; Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians; Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma; Miami Tribe of Oklahoma; Ottawa Tribe of Oklahoma; Peoria Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma; Seneca Nation of Indians (previously listed as the Seneca Nation of New York); The Osage Nation (previously listed as the Osage Tribe), The Quapaw Tribe of Indians; Tonawanda Band of Seneca (previously listed as the Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians of New York); Wichita and Affiliated Tribes (Wichita, Keechi, Waco & Tawakonie), Oklahoma; and
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice; correction.
The U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Grand Canyon National Park, has corrected an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects, published in a Notice of Inventory Completion in the
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Grand Canyon National Park at the address in this notice by June 2, 2017.
Christine Lehnertz, Superintendent, Grand Canyon National Park, P.O. Box 129, Grand Canyon, AZ 86023, telephone (928) 638-7945, email
Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the correction of an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects under the control of the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Grand Canyon National Park, Grand Canyon, AZ. The human remains and associated funerary objects were removed from AZ A:13:0007, Mohave County, AZ.
This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the Superintendent, Grand Canyon National Park.
This notice corrects the location from which remains and objects were removed published in a Notice of Inventory Completion in the
In the
In the
In 1965, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from site AZ A:13:0007 in Mohave County, AZ by river runner Bill Belknap and turned in to Bob Euler, Grand Canyon National Park Anthropologist.
In the
In the
The ceramics, which date to A.D. 900-1500, and lithics found at site AZ A:13:0007 are consistent with materials identified by archeologists as being associated with the Cerbat culture.
In the
In the
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Christine Lehnertz, Superintendent, Grand Canyon National Park, P.O. Box 129, Grand Canyon, AZ 86023, telephone (928) 638-7945, email
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice.
The San Diego Museum of Man has completed an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects, in consultation with the appropriate Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, and has determined that there is a cultural affiliation between the human remains
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to the San Diego Museum of Man at the address in this notice by June 2, 2017.
Ben Garcia, Deputy Director, San Diego Museum of Man, 1350 El Prado, San Diego, CA 92101, telephone (619) 239-2001 ext. 17, email
Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects under the control of the San Diego Museum of Man, San Diego, CA. The human remains and associated funerary objects were removed from the vicinity of Larsen Bay, Kodiak Island Borough, AK.
This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.
A detailed assessment of the human remains and associated funerary objects was made by the San Diego Museum of Man professional staff in consultation with representatives of the Alutiiq Museum and Archaeological Repository on behalf of the Native Village of Larsen Bay.
In 1932, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were recovered from the vicinity of Larsen Bay, Kodiak Island Borough, AK. No other provenience information was available. The human remains were donated to the San Diego Museum of Man by Hugh Logan in 1934. An examination of the human remains by the San Diego Museum of Man physical anthropology professional staff determined the individual to be a Native Alaskan individual of indeterminate sex and age. No known individual was identified. The 30 associated funerary objects are 1 whalebone wedge with grease pit, 1 whalebone wedge, 4 modified whalebone tools, 1 oil lamp fragment, 1 split cobble scraper, 1 stone hone, 6 sinkers, 1 stone tool, 3 hammerstones, 1 oil lamp preform, 1 tri-notched cobble pounder, and 9 stone knives.
Archeological data indicates that modern Alutiiq people evolved from prehistoric societies of the Kodiak region, and can trace their ancestry back over 7,500 years in the region. The cultural affiliation of this individual is determined to be to the Native Village of Larsen Bay.
Officials of the San Diego Museum of Man have determined that:
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of one individual of Native American ancestry.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(A), the 30 objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects and the Native Village of Larsen Bay.
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and two associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Ben Garcia, Deputy Director, San Diego Museum of Man, 1350 El Prado, San Diego, CA 92101, telephone (619) 239-2001 ext. 17, email
The San Diego Museum of Man is responsible for notifying the Native Village of Larsen Bay that this notice has been published.
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice; correction.
The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) has corrected an inventory of human remains published in a Notice of Inventory Completion in the
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request with information in support of the request to the TVA at the address in this notice by June 2, 2017.
Dr. Thomas O. Maher, TVA, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, WT11D, Knoxville, TN 37902-1401, telephone (865) 632-7458, email
Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the correction of an inventory of human remains under the control of the TVA, Knoxville, TN. The human remains were removed from Flint River site 1MA48 in Madison County, AL.
This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.
This notice corrects the minimum number of individuals published in a Notice of Inventory Completion in the
In the
In the
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Dr. Thomas O. Maher, TVA, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, WT11D, Knoxville, TN 37902-1401, telephone (865) 632-7458, email
TVA is responsible for notifying the Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas (previously listed as the Alabama-Coushatta Tribes of Texas); Alabama-Quassarte Tribal Town; Cherokee Nation; Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana; Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians; Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma; Poarch Band of Creeks (previously listed as the Poarch Band of Creek Indians of Alabama); The Chickasaw Nation; The Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma; The Muscogee (Creek) Nation; Thlopthlocco Tribal Town; and the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma that this notice has been published.
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Alaska Region, Anchorage, AK (Alaska Region USFWS), in consultation with the appropriate Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, has determined that the cultural items listed in this notice meet the definition of unassociated funerary objects. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request to the Alaska Region USFWS. If no additional claimants come forward, transfer of control of the cultural items to the lineal descendants, Indian tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to the Alaska Region USFWS, at the address in this notice by June 2, 2017.
Edward J. DeCleva, Regional Historic Preservation Officer, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Alaska Region, 1011 East Tudor Road, MS-235, Anchorage, AK 99503, telephone (907) 786-3399, email
Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3005, of the intent to repatriate cultural items under the control of the USFWS Alaska Region that meet the definition of unassociated funerary objects under 25 U.S.C. 3001.
This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American cultural items. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.
In 1967, 42 cultural items were removed from site NH-1, now identified as 49-XNI-003, in Nash Harbor, Nunivak Island, AK. They were transferred to the University of Oregon Museum of Natural and Cultural History in 2005. The 42 unassociated funerary objects are 1 girl's triangular wooden bowl; 2 fragments of a bone sled runner; 1 bone arrow shaft; 1 plain Nash Harbor ceramic vessel with grass and gravel temper; 1 ground slate whetstone; 1 piece of slate debitage; 33 pieces of Nash ceramics (some conjoined); and 2 matching fragments of a wood shaft.
In 1973, two cultural items were removed from site EN-1, now identified as 49-XNI-015, at Cape Etolin, Nunivak Island, AK. They were transferred to the University of Oregon Museum of Natural and Cultural History in 2005. The two unassociated funerary objects are 2 shotgun shells including shot and one bead.
Nunivak Island is traditional territory of the Central-Yup'ik-speaking Nunivak Eskimo or Nuniwarmiut people. Oral tradition and archeological investigations indicate that Nunivak Island was inhabited at least 2600 years ago and most likely continuously occupied by descendants of the initial population. The nature of the funerary artifacts suggests a post-contact age.
Officials of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Alaska Region, have determined that:
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(B), the 44 cultural items described above are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony and are believed, by a preponderance of the evidence, to have been removed from a specific burial site of a Native American individual.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the unassociated funerary objects and the Nuniwarmiut people of Alaska, today represented by the Native Village of Mekoryuk.
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to Edward J. DeCleva, Regional Historic Preservation Officer, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Alaska Region, 1011 East Tudor Road, MS-235, Anchorage AK 99503, telephone (907) 786-3399, email
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Alaska Region, is responsible for notifying the Native Village of Mekoryuk that this notice has been published.
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice.
The University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology (the Museum) has completed an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects, in consultation with the appropriate Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, and has determined that there is a cultural affiliation between the human remains and associated funerary objects and present-day Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request to the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. If no additional requestors come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the lineal descendants, Indian tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology at the address in this notice by June 2, 2017.
Dr. Julian Siggers, Williams Director, University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, 3260 South Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104, telephone (215) 898-4050.
Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects under the control of the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, Philadelphia, PA. The human remains and associated funerary objects were removed from Baranoff Island, AK.
This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.
A detailed assessment of the human remains was made by the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology professional staff in consultation with representatives of the Central Council of the Tlingit & Haida Indian Tribes; Chilkat Indian Village (Klukwan); Chilkoot Indian Association (Haines); Hoonah Indian Association; Sitka Tribe of Alaska; Yakutat Tlingit Tribe; and Sealaska Corporation, a non-federally recognized entity.
In December 1931, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from a cave, in an unknown location, on the shoreline of Baranof Island in the Peril Strait in Alaska by Louis Shotridge. The human remains (UPM no. 31-29-17) represent the intact, fully clothed body of a single individual, male, 45-50 years old. The human remains are naturally mummified from the waist to the head. The pelvis and lower limbs are fully skeletonized. The human remains are believed to be those of Kagank, a Tlingit Kaagwaantaan Shaman. The 12 associated funerary objects include one exterior woven mat, one hide wrapping, one wool blanket, one wooden frame structure over the face, one nose pin, one pair of hide gloves, one hide shirt with quill decoration, one fine woven cloth, one pair of hide boots, one bird wing, one ornament of braided hair, and one twined basket.
The positioning and ornamentation of the human remains and associated funerary objects was reviewed by the Museum staff and several Tlingit consultants. The evidence strongly suggests that this individual is from the Northwest Coast region. Louis Shotridge collected the human remains directly from their original cave setting on the shoreline of Baronoff Island in the Peril Strait and shipped them to the University of Pennsylvania Museum in early 1932. According to collector information, consultation, and ethnographic and anthropological literature, the cave is located within traditional Tlingit Sitka Territory. Collector documents and consultation information identify this individual as Kagank, a Tlingit shaman from the Kaagwaantaan clan. According to Shotridge's ethnographic field notes, the name Kagank originates with the Kagwaantaan clan at Chilkat during the early period of their occupation of the area. According to consultation information provided in 2013, the name Kagank is also attributed to a 19th century Tlingit Kaagwaantaan shaman who died en route to a Deisheetan Clan potlatch. Members of the Kaagwaantaan Clan are represented today by the Central Council of Tlingit & Haida Indian Tribes; Chilkat Indian Village (Klukwan); Chilkoot Indian Association (Haines); Hoonah Indian Association; Sitka Tribe of Alaska; and Yakutat Tlingit Tribe. During consultation in 2005, representatives of the Hoonah Indian Association indicated that these human remains were not affiliated with the village of Hoonah.
Officials of the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology have determined that:
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(A), the 12 objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects and the Central Council of the Tlingit & Haida Indian Tribes; Chilkat Indian Village (Klukwan); Chilkoot Indian Association (Haines); Sitka Tribe of Alaska; and Yakutat Tlingit Tribe.
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Julian Siggers, Director, University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, 3260 South Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104, telephone (215) 898-4050, by June 2, 2017. After that date, if no additional requestors have come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the Central Council of the Tlingit & Haida Indian Tribes; Chilkat Indian Village (Klukwan); Chilkoot Indian Association (Haines); Sitka Tribe of Alaska; and Yakutat Tlingit Tribe may proceed.
The University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology is responsible for notifying the Central Council of the Tlingit & Haida Indian Tribes; Chilkat Indian Village (Klukwan); Chilkoot Indian Association (Haines); Hoonah Indian Association; Sitka Tribe of Alaska; Yakutat Tlingit Tribe; and Sealaska Corporation, a non-federally recognized entity, that this notice has been published.
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice.
The Allen County-Fort Wayne Historical Society has completed an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects, in consultation with the appropriate Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, and has determined that there is a cultural affiliation between the human remains and associated funerary objects and present-day Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request to the Allen County-Fort Wayne Historical Society. If no additional requestors come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the lineal descendants, Indian tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to the Allen County-Fort Wayne Historical Society at the address in this notice by June 2, 2017.
Walter Font, Curator, Allen County-Fort Wayne Historical Society, 302 East Berry Street, Fort Wayne, IN 46802, telephone (260) 426-2882, email
Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects under the control of the Allen County-Fort Wayne Historical Society, Fort Wayne, IN. The human remains and associated funerary objects were removed from multiple counties in the State of Indiana.
This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.
A detailed assessment of the human remains was made by the Allen County-Fort Wayne Historical Society professional staff in consultation with the Indiana University-Purdue University, Fort Wayne, Archaeology Survey office and representatives of the Miami Tribe of Oklahoma and the Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians, Michigan and Indiana.
On an unknown date, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from the Cunison Farm in Allen County, IN. At some time prior to 1926, the human remains were donated to the Allen County-Fort Wayne Historical Society by Charles L. Cunison. The human remains consist of an ulna and bone fragments from one individual, age and sex indeterminate. No known individual was identified. The 3 associated funerary objects are 1 knife blade, 1 textile remnant, and 1 iron tomahawk.
On an unknown date, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from Swinney Park in Allen County, IN. At some time prior to 1947, the human remains were donated to the Allen County-Fort Wayne Historical Society by Charles Freese. The human remains consist of a skull and identified as a young female, age indeterminate. No known individual was identified. The 1 associated funerary object is 1 brass pot with iron bail.
At some time between 1794 and 1814, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were acquired from an unknown location during a conflict at or near Fort Wayne, IN, and were received by the Allen County-Fort Wayne Historical Society from the heirs of F. P. Randall at some time prior to 1926. The human remains consist of a length of dark hair, age and sex indeterminate. No known individual was identified. No associated funerary objects are present.
Dates for these site locations are late 1700s to early 1800s. The sites are related to the Miami Tribe of Oklahoma, whose tribal lands were located in Northeast Indiana from 1710 to the early 1800s. The principal villages were at or
Officials of the Allen County-Fort Wayne Historical Society have determined that:
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of 3 individuals of Native American ancestry.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(A), the 4 objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.
• Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects and the Miami Tribe of Oklahoma.
Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Walter Font, Curator, Allen County-Fort Wayne Historical Society, 302 East Berry Street, Fort Wayne, IN 46802, telephone (260) 426-2882, email
The Allen County-Fort Wayne Historical Society is responsible for notifying the Miami Tribe of Oklahoma and the Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians, Michigan and Indiana, that this notice has been published.
U.S. International Trade Commission.
Notice.
Notice is hereby given that a complaint was filed with the U.S. International Trade Commission on March 21, 2017, under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, on behalf of Intellectual Ventures II LLC of Bellevue, Washington. The complaint alleges violations of section 337 based upon the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain thermoplastic-encapsulated electric motors, components thereof, and products and vehicles containing same by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,154,200 (“the '200 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 7,067,944 (“the '944 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 7,067,952 (“the '952 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 7,683,509 (“the '509 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 7,928,348 (“the '348 patent”). The complaint further alleges that an industry in the United States exists or is in the process of being established as required by the applicable Federal Statute.
The complainant requests that the Commission institute an investigation and, after the investigation, issue a limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders.
The complaint, except for any confidential information contained therein, is available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Room 112, Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000. Hearing impaired individuals are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on (202) 205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at (202) 205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server at
The Office of Unfair Import Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, telephone (202) 205-2560.
(1) Pursuant to subsection (b) of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, an investigation be instituted to determine whether there is a violation of subsection (a)(1)(B) of section 337 in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation of certain thermoplastic-encapsulated electric motors, components thereof, and products and vehicles containing same by reason of infringement of one or more of claims 1-2 and 4-7 of the '200 patent; claims 24-27 of the '348 patent; claims 1-2 and 14-15 of the '509 patent; claims 3, 9, 11 of the '944 patent; claims 10 and 12 of the '952 patent, and whether an industry in the United States exists or is in the process of being established as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337;
(2) Pursuant to Commission Rule 210.50(b)(1), 19 CFR 210.50(b)(1), the presiding administrative law judge shall take evidence or other information and hear arguments from the parties and other interested persons with respect to the public interest in this investigation, as appropriate, and provide the Commission with findings of fact and a recommended determination on this issue, which shall be limited to the statutory public interest factors set forth in 19 U.S.C. 1337(d)(1), (f)(1), (g)(1);
(3) For the purpose of the investigation so instituted, the following are hereby named as parties upon which this notice of investigation shall be served:
(a) The complainant is: Intellectual Ventures II LLC, 3150 139th Avenue SE., Building 4, Bellevue, WA 98005.
(b) The respondents are the following entities alleged to be in violation of section 337, and are the parties upon which the complaint is to be served:
(c) The Office of Unfair Import Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Suite 401, Washington, DC 20436; and
(4) For the investigation so instituted, the Chief Administrative Law Judge, U.S. International Trade Commission, shall designate the presiding Administrative Law Judge.
Responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation must be submitted by the named respondents in accordance with section 210.13 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.13. Pursuant to 19 CFR 201.16(e) and 210.13(a), such responses will be considered by the Commission if received not later than 20 days after the date of service by the Commission of the complaint and the notice of investigation. Extensions of time for submitting responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation will not be granted unless good cause therefor is shown.
Failure of a respondent to file a timely response to each allegation in the complaint and in this notice may be deemed to constitute a waiver of the right to appear and contest the allegations of the complaint and this notice, and to authorize the administrative law judge and the Commission, without further notice to the respondent, to find the facts to be as alleged in the complaint and this notice and to enter an initial determination and a final determination containing such findings, and may result in the issuance of an exclusion order or a cease and desist order or both directed against the respondent.
By order of the Commission.
United States International Trade Commission.
Notice.
The Commission hereby gives notice of the institution of investigations and commencement of preliminary phase antidumping and countervailing duty investigation Nos. 701-TA-578 and 731-TA-1368 (Preliminary) pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”) to determine whether there is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is materially injured or threatened with material injury, or the establishment of an industry in the United States is materially retarded, by reason of imports of 100- to 150-seat large civil aircraft from Canada, provided for in subheading 8802.40.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, that are alleged to be sold in the United States at less than fair value and alleged to be subsidized by the Government of Canada. Unless the Department of Commerce extends the time for initiation, the Commission must reach a preliminary determination in antidumping and countervailing duty investigations in 45 days, or in this case by June 12, 2017. The Commission's views must be transmitted to Commerce within five business days thereafter, or by June 19, 2017.
Effective April 27, 2017.
Carolyn Carlson (202-205-3002), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired persons can obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server (
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).
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.
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.
By order of the Commission.
U.S. International Trade Commission.
Notice.
Notice is hereby given that a complaint was filed with the U.S. International Trade Commission on March 29, 2017, under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, on behalf of Motorola Solutions, Inc. of Chicago, Illinois. The complaint alleges violations of section 337 based upon the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain two-way radio equipment and systems, related software and components thereof by reason of infringement of U.S. Patent No. 8,116,284 (“the '284 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 8,279,991 (“the '991 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 7,369,869 (“the '869 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 8,032,169 (“the '169 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 7,729,701 (“the '701 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 9,099,972 (“the '972 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 6,591,111 (“the '111 patent”). The complaint further alleges that an industry in the United States exists as required by the applicable Federal Statute.
The complainant requests that the Commission institute an investigation and, after the investigation, issue a limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders.
The complaint, except for any confidential information contained therein, is available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Room 112, Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000. Hearing impaired individuals are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on (202) 205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at (202) 205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server at
The Office of the Secretary, Docket Services Division, U.S. International Trade Commission, telephone (202) 205-1802.
(1) Pursuant to subsection (b) of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, an investigation be instituted to determine whether there is a violation of subsection (a)(1)(B) of section 337 in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation of certain two-way radio equipment and systems, related software and components thereof by reason of infringement of one or more of claims 1, 2, 4-10, 12-16, 18, and 19 of the '284 patent; claims 1-5, 7, 8, 10, 12-16, 18, 20-25, 27, 29, and 30 of the '169 patent; claims 1-14, and 17-24 of the '869 patent; claims 1-5, 8-15, 17, and 18 of the '701 patent; claims 7 and 8 of the '991 patent; claims 1, 3, 4, and 6-8 of the '972 patent; and claims 1 and 3-16 of the '111 patent, and whether an industry in the United States exists as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337;
(2) For the purpose of the investigation so instituted, the following are hereby named as parties upon which this notice of investigation shall be served:
(a) The complainant is: Motorola Solutions, Inc., 500 W. Monroe Street, Chicago, IL 60661.
(b) The respondents are the following entities alleged to be in violation of section 337, and are the parties upon which the complaint is to be served:
(3) For the investigation so instituted, the Chief Administrative Law Judge, U.S. International Trade Commission, shall designate the presiding Administrative Law Judge.
The Office of Unfair Import Investigations will not participate as a party in this investigation.
Responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation must be submitted by the named respondents in accordance with section 210.13 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.13. Pursuant to 19 CFR 201.16(e) and 210.13(a), such responses will be considered by the Commission if received not later than 20 days after the date of service by the Commission of the complaint and the notice of investigation. Extensions of time for submitting responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation will not be granted unless good cause therefor is shown.
Failure of a respondent to file a timely response to each allegation in the complaint and in this notice may be deemed to constitute a waiver of the right to appear and contest the allegations of the complaint and this notice, and to authorize the administrative law judge and the Commission, without further notice to the respondent, to find the facts to be as alleged in the complaint and this notice and to enter an initial determination and a final determination containing such findings, and may result in the issuance of an exclusion order or a cease and desist order or both directed against the respondent.
By order of the Commission.
Bureau of Justice Statistics, Department of Justice.
60-day Notice.
The Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until July 3, 2017.
If you have additional comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Rachel Morgan, Statistician, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 810 Seventh Street NW., Washington, DC 20531 (email:
Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:
Overview of this information collection:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
If additional information is required contact: Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., 3E.405A, Washington, DC 20530.
National Endowment for the Arts, National Foundation on the Arts and Humanities.
Notice of meetings.
Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given that 16 meetings of the Arts Advisory Panel to the National Council on the Arts will be held by teleconference.
All meetings are Eastern time and ending times are approximate:
National Endowment for the Arts, Constitution Center, 400 7th St. SW., Washington, DC 20506.
Further information with reference to these meetings can be obtained from Ms. Sherry P. Hale, Office of Guidelines & Panel Operations, National Endowment for the Arts, Washington, DC 20506;
The closed portions of meetings are for the purpose of Panel review, discussion, evaluation, and recommendations on financial assistance under the National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities Act of 1965, as amended, including information given in confidence to the agency. In accordance with the determination of the Chairman of July 5, 2016, these sessions will be closed to the public pursuant to subsection (c)(6) of section 552b of title 5, United States Code.
National Mediation Board.
Notice.
The National Mediation Board (NMB) invites comments on its proposal to the information collection request as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before July 3, 2017.
Section 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) provide interested Federal agencies and the public an early opportunity to comment on information collection requests. OMB may amend or waive the requirement for public consultation to the extent that public participation in the approval process would defeat the purpose of the information collection, violate State or Federal law, or substantially interfere with any agency's ability to perform its statutory obligations. The Director, Office of Administration, publishes that notice containing proposed information collection requests prior to submission of these requests to OMB. Each proposed information collection contains the following: (1) Type of review requested, e.g. new, revision extension, existing or reinstatement; (2) Title; (3) Summary of the collection; (4) Description of the need for, and proposed use of, the information; (5) Respondents and frequency of collection; and (6) Reporting and/or
Currently, the NMB is soliciting comments concerning the Application for Investigation of Representation Dispute and is interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the agency; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the agency enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the agency minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology.
Type of Review: Revision
Title: Application for Investigation of Representation Dispute,
OMB Number: 3140-0001
Frequency: On occasion
Affected Public: Carrier and Union Officials, and employees of railroads and airlines
Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour Burden:
Responses: 68 annually
Burden Hours: 17.00
1. Abstract: When a dispute arises among a carrier's employees as to who will be their bargaining representative, the National Mediation Board (NMB) is required by Section 2, Ninth, to investigate the dispute, to determine who is the authorized representative, if any, and to certify such representative. The NMB's duties do not arise until its services have been invoked by a party to the dispute. The Railway Labor Act is silent as to how the invocation of a representation dispute is to be accomplished and the NMB has not promulgated regulations requiring any specific vehicle. Nonetheless, 29 CFR 1203.2, provides that applications for the services of the NMB under Section 2, Ninth, to investigate representation disputes may be made on printed forms secured from the NMB's Office of Legal Affairs or on the Internet at
2. The application form provides necessary information to the NMB so that it can determine the amount of staff and resources required to conduct an investigation and fulfill its statutory responsibilities. Without this information, the NMB would have to delay the commencement of the investigation, which is contrary to the intent of the Railway Labor Act.
3. There is no improved technological method for obtaining this information. The burden on the parties is minimal in completing the “Application for Investigation of Representation Dispute.”
4. There is no duplication in obtaining this information.
5. Rarely are representation elections conducted for small businesses. Carriers/employers are not permitted to request our services regarding representation investigations. The labor organizations, which are the typical requesters, are national in scope and would not qualify as small businesses. Even in situations where the invocation comes from a small labor organization, we believe the burden in completing the application form is minimal and that no reduction in burden could be made.
6. The NMB is required by Section 2, Ninth, to investigate the dispute, to determine who is the authorized representative, if any, and to certify such representative. The NMB has no ability to control the frequency, technical, or legal obstacles, which would reduce the burden.
7. The information requested by the NMB is consistent with the general information collection guidelines of CFR 1320.6. The NMB has no ability to control the data provided or timing of the invocation. The burden on the parties is minimal in completing the “Application for Investigation of Representation Dispute.”
8. No payments or gifts have been provided by the NMB to any respondents of the form.
9. There are no questions of a sensitive nature on the form.
10. The total time burden on respondents is 17.00 hours annually—this is the time required to collect information. After consulting with a sample of people involved with the collection of this information, the time to complete this information collection is estimated to average 15 minutes per response, including gathering the data needed and completion and review of the information.
Number of respondents per year 68
Estimated time per respondent 15 minutes
Total Burden hours per year 17
(68 × .25)
11. The total collection and mail cost burden on respondents is estimated at $615.40 annually ($582.08 time cost burden + $33.32 mail cost burden.)
a. The respondents will not incur any capital costs or start up costs for this collection.
b. Cost burden on respondents—detail:
The total time burden annual cost is $582.08
Time Burden Basis: The total hourly burden per year, upon respondents, is 17
Staff cost = $582.08
$34.24 per hour—based on mid level clerical salary
$34.24 × 17 hours per year = $582.08
We are estimating that a mid-level clerical person, with an average salary of $34.24 per hour, will be completing the “Application for Investigation of Representation Dispute” form. The total burden is estimated at 17 hours, therefore, the total time burden cost is estimated at $582.08 per year.
The total annual mailing cost to respondents is $33.32
Number of applications mailed by
Respondents per year 68
Total estimated cost $33.32
(68 × .49 stamp)
The collection of this information is not mandatory; it is a voluntary request from airline and railroad carrier employees seeking to invoke an investigation of a representation dispute. After consulting with a sample of people involved with the collection of this information, the time to complete this information collection is estimated to average 15 minutes per response, including gathering the data needed and completion and review of the information. However, the estimated hour burden costs of the respondents may vary due to the complexity of the specific question in dispute. The revision of the form requiring a new application for every craft or class will have little effect on the number of application submitted. In 2012 and 2013, no applications were filed that included a request for representation services for more than one craft or class.
The application form is available from the NMB's Office of Legal Affairs and is also available on the Internet at
12. The total annualized Federal cost is $889.49. This includes the costs of printing and mailing the forms upon request of the parties. The completed applications are maintained by the Office of Legal Affairs.
a. Printing cost $ 80.00
b. Mailing costs $ 10.02
Basis (mail cost): Forms are requested approximately 3 times per year and it takes 5 minutes to prepare the form for mail
Postage cost = $1.47
3 (times per year) × .49 (cost of postage)
Staff cost = $8.55
$.57 per minute (GS 9/10 $71,467 = $34.24 per hr. ÷ 60)
$.57 × 5 minutes per mailing = $2.85
$2.85 × 3 times per year = $8.55
Total Mailing Costs = $10.02
c. Processing Cost=$798.00
Basis (processing cost): Representation is requested approximately 70 times per year and it takes 20 minutes to process each application
Staff Cost = $798.00
$.57 per minute (GS 9/10 $71,467 = $34.24 per hr. ÷ 60)
$.57 × 20 minutes per mailing = $11.40
$11.40 × 70 times per year = $798.00
13. Item 13—no change in annual reporting and recordkeeping hour burden.
14. The information collected by the application will not be published.
15. The NMB will display the OMB expiration date on the form.
16(a)—the form does not reduce the burden on small entities; however, the burden is minimized and voluntary.
16 (b)—the form does not indicate the retention period for record keeping requirements.
16 (c)—the form is not part of a statistical survey.
Requests for copies of the proposed information collection request may be accessed from
Comments regarding burden and/or the collection activity requirements, as well as comments on any legal and substantive issues raised, should be directed to Samantha Williams at 202-692-5010 or via internet address
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
License amendment application; opportunity to provide comments, request a hearing, and petition for leave to intervene.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has received a license amendment application from the Department of the Air Force (the licensee) for approval of a proposed decommissioning plan (DP). Materials License 42-23539-01AF authorizes the licensee to issue permits to individual Air Force bases for use of byproduct, source, and special nuclear material as authorized by the licensee's Radioisotope Committee. The licensee is requesting approval of a DP for cleanup of residual depleted uranium inside and underneath Building 181 at Robins Air Force Base, Georgia. The NRC is currently conducting a detailed technical review of the DP. If the DP is approved by the NRC, the licensee would be authorized to remediate the building interior and subsurface area in accordance with instructions provided in the DP.
Submit comments by June 2, 2017. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the NRC is able to ensure consideration only for comments received on or before this date. A request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene must be filed by July 3, 2017.
You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
•
•
For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting comments, see “Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments” in the
Vivian Campbell, Region IV Office, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1600 E. Lamar Blvd., Arlington, Texas, 76011; telephone: 817-200-1455, email:
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2017-0095 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
Please include Docket ID NRC-2017-0095 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 will post all comment submissions at
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.
The NRC has received, by memorandum dated March 21, 2017, an application to amend Materials License No. 42-23539-01AF, which authorizes the licensee to possess, store, and use radioactive materials at various locations around the U.S. Specifically, the licensee requested NRC approval of a proposed DP for Building 181 at Robins Air Force Base, Georgia. The licensee plans to remediate the interior surfaces and subsurface soils as necessary in accordance with the instructions provided in the DP. The licensee submitted the DP, in part, to comply with the requirements of § 30.36(g) of title 10 of the
If the DP is approved by the NRC, the licensee's contractor will remediate the residual depleted uranium contamination remaining within several rooms of the building. After decommissioning of the interior areas, the licensee's contractor will conduct a final status survey of the remediated rooms in accordance with the instructions provided in the DP. When the building interior has been sufficiently remediated, the licensee plans to demolish portions of the building. As part of the demolition process, the licensee's contractor will conduct radiological surveys of the subsurface soils. Soils that exceed the site-specific cleanup criteria will be remediated at that time. The NRC staff may elect to conduct an inspection, to observe the decommissioning work. The NRC may also elect to conduct a confirmatory radiological survey to independently verify the results of the licensee's final status survey. After completion of the decommissioning process, the licensee is expected to submit the results of the final status survey to the NRC for review. In addition, the licensee is expected to ask the NRC to release the area of the former building for unrestricted use. If approved by the NRC, the staff will issue an amendment to the license, releasing the former building property from the license.
An NRC administrative completeness review found the application, including proposed DP, acceptable for a technical review (ADAMS Accession No. ML17094A481). Prior to approving the proposed action (approval of the DP), the NRC will need to make the findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the NRC's regulations. As part of the technical review, the NRC staff may submit one or more requests for additional information to the licensee. The NRC staff will also review the licensee's site-specific cleanup criteria. The NRC's findings will be documented in a safety evaluation report. In addition, the NRC staff may elect to conduct an environmental assessment of the decommissioning project, if the Air Force has not conducted a sufficient review of the environmental impacts of the proposed action. The environmental assessment will be the subject of a subsequent notice in the
In accordance with 10 CFR 20.1405, the Commission is providing notice and soliciting comments from local and State governments in the vicinity of the site and any Federally-recognized Indian Tribe that could be affected by the decommissioning. This notice and solicitation of comments is published pursuant to § 20.1405, which provides for publication in the
Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, any persons (petitioner) whose interest may be affected by this action may file a request for a hearing and petition for leave to intervene (petition) with respect to the action. Petitions shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's “Agency Rules of Practice and Procedure” in 10 CFR part 2. Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309. The NRC's regulations are accessible electronically from the NRC Library on the NRC's Web site at
As required by 10 CFR 2.309(d) the petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following general requirements for standing: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the petitioner; (2) the nature of the petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f), the petition must also set forth the specific contentions which the petitioner seeks to have litigated in the proceeding. Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner must provide a brief explanation of the bases for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner must also provide references to the specific sources and documents on which the petitioner intends to rely to support its position on the issue. The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant or licensee on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions must be limited to matters within the scope of the proceeding. The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner who fails to satisfy the requirements at 10 CFR 2.309(f) with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.
Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene. Parties have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing with respect to resolution of that party's admitted contentions, including the opportunity to present evidence, consistent with the NRC's regulations, policies, and procedures.
Petitions must be filed no later than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice. Petitions and motions for leave to file new or amended contentions that are filed after the deadline will not be entertained absent a determination by the presiding officer that the filing demonstrates good cause by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i) through (iii). The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in the “Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)” section of this document.
A State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof, may submit a petition to the Commission to participate as a party under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1). The petition should state the nature and extent of the petitioner's interest in the proceeding. The petition should be submitted to the Commission by July 3, 2017. The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in the “Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)” section of this document, and should meet the requirements for petitions set forth in this section. Alternatively, a State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof may participate as a non-party under 10 CFR 2.315(c).
If a hearing is granted, any person who is not a party to the proceeding and is not affiliated with or represented by a party may, at the discretion of the presiding officer, be permitted to make a limited appearance pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person making a limited appearance may make an oral or written statement of his or her position on the issues but may not otherwise participate in the proceeding. A limited appearance may be made at any session of the hearing or at any prehearing conference, subject to the limits and conditions as may be imposed by the presiding officer. Details regarding the opportunity to make a limited appearance will be provided by the presiding officer if such sessions are scheduled.
All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene (petition), any motion or other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a request for hearing or petition to intervene, and documents filed by interested governmental entities that request to participate under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in accordance with the NRC's E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007, as amended at 77 FR 46562, August 3, 2012). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit and serve all adjudicatory documents over the internet, or in some cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions may be found in the Guidance for Electronic Submissions to the NRC and on the NRC Web site at
To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 10 days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the Office of the Secretary by email at
Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is available on the NRC's public Web site at
A person filing electronically using the NRC's adjudicatory E-Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC's Electronic Filing Help Desk through the “Contact Us” link located on the NRC's public Web site at
Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing stating why there is good cause for not filing electronically and requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants filing adjudicatory documents in this manner are responsible for serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing the document with the provider of the service. A presiding officer, having granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a participant or party to use E-Filing if the presiding officer subsequently determines that the reason for granting the exemption from use of E-Filing no longer exists.
Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in the NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Postal Regulatory Commission.
Notice.
The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing for the Commission's consideration concerning negotiated service agreements. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.
Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at
David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.
The Commission gives notice that the Postal Service filed request(s) for the Commission to consider matters related to negotiated service agreement(s). The request(s) may propose the addition or removal of a negotiated service agreement from the market dominant or the competitive product list, or the modification of an existing product currently appearing on the market dominant or the competitive product list.
Section II identifies the docket number(s) associated with each Postal Service request, the title of each Postal Service request, the request's acceptance date, and the authority cited by the Postal Service for each request. For each request, the Commission appoints an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in the proceeding, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505 (Public Representative). Section II also establishes comment deadline(s) pertaining to each request.
The public portions of the Postal Service's request(s) can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (
The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's request(s) in the captioned docket(s) are consistent with the policies of title 39. For request(s) that the Postal Service states concern market dominant product(s), applicable statutory and regulatory requirements include 39 U.S.C. 3622, 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR part 3010, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. For request(s) that the Postal Service states concern competitive product(s), applicable statutory and regulatory requirements include 39 U.S.C. 3632, 39 U.S.C. 3633, 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comment deadline(s) for each request appear in section II.
1.
2.
3.
This Notice will be published in the
Postal Service
Notice.
The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.
Elizabeth A. Reed, 202-268-3179.
The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on April 27, 2017, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a
Postal Service
Notice.
The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.
Elizabeth A. Reed, 202-268-3179.
The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on April 27, 2017, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1)
The Exchange proposes to adopt an annual fee cap for Acquisition Companies. The proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at
In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such statements.
The Exchange proposes to adopt an annual fee cap for Acquisition Companies.
Acquisition Companies (commonly referred to in the marketplace as “special purpose acquisition companies” or “SPACs”) are listed pursuant to Section 102.06 of the NYSE Listed Company Manual (the “Manual”). Acquisition Companies typically sell units in their initial public offering, consisting of a common equity security and a whole or fractional warrant to purchase common stock.
Currently, Section 902.11 of the Manual specifies that the common shares listed as part of an Acquisition Company unit offering are subject to the annual fee schedule for common stock set forth in Section 902.03 of the Manual and the warrants are subject to the annual fee schedule set forth in Section 902.06 for short-term warrants to purchase equity securities.
An Acquisition Company's listing often lasts for a brief period of time. Under the Acquisition Company structure, the company's charter provides that it must either enter into a business combination within a specified limited period of time (typically two years or less, but no longer than three years is permitted under Section 102.06) or return the funds held in trust to the company's shareholders and dissolve the company. Acquisition Company business combinations do not always result in a continued listing of the post-business combination entity, as the resultant entity may be a private company or list on another exchange or the Acquisition Company may be acquired by another company that is already listed. In contrast to an Acquisition Company, an operating company that lists on the Exchange will typically remain listed for many years.
Acquisition Companies do not have the same right to receive services from the Exchange under Section 907.00 as operating companies do. An Acquisition Company is not deemed eligible for the services provided to an Eligible New Listing at the time of its initial listing, but becomes eligible for those services at such time as it has completed one or more business combinations having an aggregate fair market value of at least 80% of the value of the trust account as specified in Section 102.06 if it remains listed after meeting that requirement. As discussed above, many Acquisition Companies either liquidate or do not remain listed after their business combination is consummated.
The Exchange does not expect the financial impact of the proposed amendment to be material in terms of the level of listing fees collected from issuers on the Exchange. Specifically, the Exchange notes that Acquisition Companies represent a relatively small number of potential listings and therefore anticipates that only a limited number of Acquisition Companies will list. In addition, the Exchange does not anticipate that the annual fees payable by all Acquisition Companies would exceed the proposed cap, so the reduction in revenue would not be relevant to all listed Acquisition Companies. Accordingly, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will not impact the Exchange's resource commitment to its regulatory oversight of the listing process or its regulatory programs.
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Exchange Act,
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Exchange Act in that it represents an equitable allocation of fees and does not unfairly discriminate among listed companies. In particular, the Exchange notes that the proposed amendment is not unfairly discriminatory as Acquisition Companies frequently have a much shorter period of listing on the Exchange than operating companies and they are ineligible to receive services from the Exchange that are generally available to newly-listed operating companies.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change is designed to limit the amount a listed Acquisition Company pays in annual listing fees and should therefore increase competition for Acquisition Company listings by making the Exchange a more attractive listing venue.
No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change.
The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)
At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under Section 19(b)(2)(B)
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's Internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
The Options Clearing Corporation (“OCC”) filed on February 28, 2017 with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) advance notice SR-OCC-2017-802 (“Advance Notice”) pursuant to Section 806(e)(1) of the Payment, Clearing, and Settlement Supervision Act of 2010 (“Payment, Clearing and Settlement Supervision Act”)
OCC operates two Stock Loan Programs—the Hedge Program and Market Loan Program—in which a participating clearing member can lend an agreed-upon number of shares of eligible stock
OCC's Advance Notice proposes a number of changes to the Stock Loan Programs and its Rules governing those Programs.
OCC's Advance Notice proposes three amendments to the rules governing its Stock Loan Programs that are intended to improve trade certainty and transparency for clearing members and OCC.
Clearing members that participate in the Hedge Program and the Market Loan Program execute and terminate stock loans on a bilateral basis. Following execution or termination of stock loans, OCC requires clearing members to promptly report stock loans directly to OCC, or to facilitate such reporting to OCC through the Depository Trust Corporation (“DTC”), ensuring OCC accepts stock loans for clearing and records the novation or termination for margin and other purposes. Under the current trade-reporting process, clearing members may fail to report (or to have DTC report) stock loans to OCC in a timely manner, increasing uncertainty in the novation process and decreasing transparency with respect to OCC's stock loan positions and obligations as a central counterparty and guarantor. The current process thereby presents risk management risks both to OCC and clearing members.
To address these risk management risks, OCC proposes to require each clearing member to have adequate policies and procedures to perform daily reconciliations of stock loan positions against OCC's records and to resolve stock loan discrepancies, if any, by 9:30 a.m. Central Time the following business day.
To support and supplement the proposed daily reconciliation requirements for clearing member participation in the Stock Loan Programs, OCC proposes to explicitly state in its rules that OCC's stock loan records constitute the controlling records for margin and other purposes. Specifically, the proposed rules would specify that OCC's records, which OCC refers to as the “golden copy” records, prevail in the event of a conflict with clearing member records and that clearing members must continue to perform on obligations relating to open stock loan positions identified in the golden copy records.
Finally, to conform OCC's stock loan termination provisions to the proposed changes relating to controlling records described above, OCC proposes rule changes to clarify that stock loans would be considered terminated for margin and other purposes only when OCC's records reflect termination of the stock loan.
In addition to the proposals intended to improve trade certainty and transparency, the Advance Notice also proposes three amendments to address certain risks that may arise in the event that OCC suspends a clearing member participant in the Stock Loan Programs.
Under current Stock Loan Program rules, OCC may seek to close out a suspended clearing member's stock loan positions by instructing non-suspended clearing member counterparties to execute close-out transactions within a reasonable period of time.
To mitigate these risks, OCC proposes to require clearing members to execute close-out transactions within a fixed two-day trading window in the event of a clearing member suspension. More specifically, OCC proposes to require non-suspended clearing members to execute close-out transactions by the end of the business day following OCC's instruction to close out stock loans with the suspended clearing member. If a non-suspended clearing member is unable to execute the close-out transactions within that two-day timeframe, OCC itself would terminate the clearing member's relevant stock loans and effect settlement based on the market price of the underlying securities, as determined by OCC. According to OCC, the proposed changes are intended to ensure that non-suspended clearing members execute close-out transactions in a timeframe consistent with OCC' s two-day liquidation assumption for stock loan margin purposes, which should reduce OCC's credit exposure from significant differences between clearing member-effectuated close-out prices and the prices used to collect mark-to-market payments from the suspended clearing member.
Under current rules, OCC may seek to close out a suspended clearing member's stock loan positions by instructing non-suspended clearing member counterparties to execute buy-in or sell-out transactions. These close-out transactions must be executed in a “commercially reasonable manner.”
To incentivize “reasonable” pricing of close-out transactions in the event of a clearing member suspension, OCC proposes to provide itself authority to withdraw from a clearing member's account the value of any difference between clearing member-reported prices and “reasonable” close-out transaction prices, as determined by OCC based on an assessment of market conditions at the time of execution.
Under OCC's current rules, in the event of a clearing member suspension, OCC can fully unwind a suspended Hedge Clearing Member's matched-book positions
To address these operational complexities and the potential consequences for both OCC and its clearing members, OCC proposes new rules that would permit it to terminate a suspended Hedge Clearing Member's matched-book stock loans in the Hedge Program by offset and to “re-match” the positions of the non-suspended counterparties according to priorities established by OCC's matching algorithm.
Although the Payment, Clearing and Settlement Supervision Act does not specify a standard of review for an advance notice, the stated purpose of the Payment, Clearing and Settlement Supervision Act is instructive.
Section 805(a)(2) of the Payment, Clearing and Settlement Supervision Act
• To promote robust risk management;
• To promote safety and soundness;
• To reduce systemic risks; and
• To support the stability of the broader financial system.
Section 805(c) provides, in addition, that the Commission's risk management standards may address such areas as risk management and default policies and procedures, among others areas.
The Commission has adopted risk management standards under Section 805(a)(2) of the Payment, Clearing and Settlement Supervision Act and the Exchange Act (the “Clearing Agency Rules”).
The Commission believes each proposal in OCC's Advance Notice is consistent with promoting robust risk management, promoting safety and soundness, reducing systemic risks, and supporting the stability of the broader financial system, the stated objectives and principles of Section 805(b) of the Payment, Clearing and Settlement Supervision Act.
First, the Commission believes that OCC's three proposals to improve trade certainty and transparency in the Stock Loan Programs are consistent with promoting robust risk management. The Commission agrees with OCC's analysis that its proposal to require clearing members to implement adequate policies and procedures to reconcile stock loan positions with OCC's records on a daily basis could promote robust risk management by reducing financial and other risks to OCC and clearing members. The Commission also believes that OCC's proposal to provide explicitly in its rulebook that its stock loan records would prevail in the event of a conflict with clearing member records, and that clearing members must continue to perform on all stock loan positions reflected in OCC's records also promotes robust risk management by encouraging clearing members to understand, manage, and promptly report stock loan transactions. Finally, the Commission believes that OCC's proposal to provide that stock loan positions remain in effect until OCC's records reflect stock loan terminations promotes robust risk management by
Second, the Commission believes that OCC's three proposals to mitigate certain risks in the event of a clearing member suspension are consistent with promoting robust risk management. The proposal to provide a two-day trading window in which clearing members must execute close-out transactions, or opt for mandatory settlement, promotes robust risk management by requiring non-suspended clearing members to complete close-out transactions in a timeframe that is consistent with OCC's liquidation assumptions. The proposed alignment of the close-out period with OCC's liquidation assumptions reduces the risk that close-out prices vary too significantly from the prices used to mark the suspended clearing member's stock loans to market. OCC's proposed price-substitution authority also promotes robust risk management by further encouraging non-suspended clearing members to execute close-out transactions in a commercially reasonable manner, thereby reducing financial risk to OCC. Finally, the proposed rule changes in the Hedge Program to permit OCC to terminate and re-establish a suspended clearing member's positions through offset and “re-match” promotes robust risk management by facilitating orderly and efficient termination and re-establishment of stock loans involving a suspended clearing member, which mitigates operational and pricing risks that may arise for OCC and clearing members during the recall-and-return process. The Commission therefore believes that these aspects of the proposal are consistent with the promotion of robust risk management.
Based on the conclusions discussed above, the Commission also believes that OCC's proposal is consistent with promoting the safety and soundness of both OCC and clearing members who participate in the Stock Loan Programs. Accordingly, because promoting the safety and soundness of both OCC and clearing members who participate in the Stock Loan Programs, in turn, both reduces systemic risks that may arise from clearing member participation in these programs and supports the stability of the broader financial system, the Commission also believes that the proposals contained in the Advance Notice are consistent with the stated objectives and principles of Section 805(b) of the Payment, Clearing and Settlement Supervision Act.
The Commission believes OCC's proposals in the Advance Notice are consistent with Covered Clearing Agency Standards, specifically Rules (e)(13) and (e)(23) under the Exchange Act.
The Commission believes the proposed changes relating to clearing member suspension in OCC's Advance Notice are consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(13) under the Exchange Act. By proposing a fixed trading window in which clearing members must either execute close-out transactions relating to a clearing member suspension or opt for OCC-mandated settlements, OCC is seeking new authority that the Commission believes will better ensure that OCC can take timely actions to contain suspension-related losses and continue to meet stock loan-related obligations in the Stock Loan Programs. The Commission further believes that the proposed authority permitting OCC to withdraw the value of any difference between the clearing member-reported prices and OCC-determined close-out prices likewise better ensures that OCC can contain suspension-related losses, as clearing members would be further incentivized to execute timely close-out transactions at market prices. Finally, the Commission believes that the proposal relating to re-matching-in-suspension better ensures that OCC has authority and operational capacity to contain losses and meet obligations to clearing members in the Hedge Program, in particular through new rules and mechanisms that reduce the operational, credit, and re-execution risks attendant to the recall-and-return process. The Commission therefore believes OCC's proposal is consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(13) under the Exchange Act.
The Commission also believes that OCC's proposals are consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(23) under the Exchange Act. Each aspect of OCC's Advance Notice is proposed to be disclosed publicly in OCC's rules governing the Stock Loan Programs, including the key suspension-related aspects of its rules providing for close-out transaction timeframes, new price-substitution authority, and termination and re-matching-in-suspension. The Commission therefore believes that OCC's proposal is consistent with Rules 17Ad-22(e)(23) under the Exchange Act.
By the Commission.
On January 19, 2017, Investors Exchange LLC (“IEX” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”)
The Exchange proposes to adopt generic listing criteria and continued listing standards for Managed Fund Shares. The Exchange represents that the proposed rule change is substantially identical to Nasdaq Rule 5735.
IEX proposes generic listing criteria that would permit the Exchange to list and trade Managed Fund Shares pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e),
Proposed IEX Rule 16.135(b)(1)(A) establishes the criteria applicable to the equity securities included in a Portfolio. Equity securities include the following kinds of securities: U.S. Component Stock (defined in IEX Rule 16.105); Non-U.S. Component Stock, (defined in IEX Rule 16.105); Exchange Traded Derivative Securities (defined in proposed IEX Rule 16.135(c)(6));
Proposed IEX Rule 16.135(b)(1)(A)(i) requires that U.S. Component Stocks (except as mentioned below) meet the following criteria initially and on a continuing basis:
(1) Component stocks (excluding Exchange Traded Derivative Securities and Linked Securities) that in the aggregate account for at least 90% of the equity weight of the Portfolio (excluding Exchange Traded Derivative Securities and Linked Securities) each shall have a minimum market value of at least $75 million;
(2) Component stocks (excluding Exchange Traded Derivative Securities and Linked Securities) that in the aggregate account for at least 70% of the equity weight of the Portfolio (excluding Exchange Traded Derivative Securities and Linked Securities) each shall have a minimum monthly trading volume of 250,000 shares, or minimum notional volume traded per month of $25,000,000, averaged over the previous six months;
(3) The most heavily weighted component stock (excluding Exchange Traded Derivative Securities and Linked Securities) must not exceed 30% of the equity weight of the Portfolio, and, to the extent applicable, the five most heavily weighted component stocks (excluding Exchange Traded Derivative Securities and Linked Securities) must not exceed 65% of the equity weight of the Portfolio;
(4) Where the equity portion of the Portfolio does not include Non-U.S. Component Stocks, the equity portion of the Portfolio shall include a minimum of 13 component stocks; provided, however, that there would be no minimum number of component stocks if (a) one or more series of Exchange Traded Derivative Securities or Linked Securities constitute, at least in part, components underlying a series of Managed Fund Shares, or (b) one or more series of Exchange Traded Derivative Securities or Linked Securities account for 100% of the equity weight of the Portfolio of a series of Managed Fund Shares;
(5) Except as provided in proposed IEX Rule 16.135(b)(1)(A)(i), equity securities in the Portfolio must be U.S. Component Stocks listed on a national securities exchange and must be NMS Stocks as defined in Rule 600 of Regulation NMS; and
(6) American Depositary Receipts (“ADRs”) may be exchange traded or non-exchange traded, but no more than 10% of the equity weight of the Portfolio shall consist of non-exchange traded ADRs.
Proposed IEX Rule 16.135(b)(1)(A)(ii) requires that Non-U.S. Component Stocks must meet the following criteria initially and on a continuing basis:
(1) Non-U.S. Component Stocks each shall have a minimum market value of at least $100 million;
(2) Non-U.S. Component Stocks each shall have a minimum global monthly trading volume of 250,000 shares, or minimum global notional volume traded per month of $25,000,000, averaged over the last six months;
(3) The most heavily weighted Non-U.S. Component Stock shall not exceed 25% of the equity weight of the Portfolio, and, to the extent applicable, the five most heavily weighted Non-U.S. Component Stocks shall not exceed 60% of the equity weight of the Portfolio;
(4) Where the equity portion of the Portfolio includes Non-U.S. Component Stocks, the equity portion of the Portfolio shall include a minimum of 20 component stocks; provided, however, that there shall be no minimum number of component stocks if (a) one or more series of Exchange Traded Derivative Securities or Linked Securities constitute, at least in part, components
(5) Each Non-U.S. Component Stock shall be listed and traded on an exchange that has last-sale reporting.
Proposed IEX Rule 16.135(b)(1)(B) establishes criteria for fixed income securities that are included in a Portfolio. Fixed income securities are debt securities that are notes, bonds, debentures, or evidence of indebtedness that include, but are not limited to, U.S. Department of Treasury securities (“Treasury Securities”), government-sponsored entity securities (“GSE Securities”), municipal securities, trust preferred securities, supranational debt and debt of a foreign country or a subdivision thereof, investment grade and high yield corporate debt, bank loans, mortgage and asset backed securities, and commercial paper.
Under proposed IEX Rule 16.135(b)(1)(B), fixed income securities that are part of a Portfolio must satisfy the following criteria initially and on a continuing basis:
(1) Components that in the aggregate account for at least 75% of the fixed income weight of the Portfolio must each have a minimum original principal amount outstanding of $100 million or more;
(2) No component fixed-income security (excluding Treasury Securities and GSE Securities) shall represent more than 30% of the fixed income weight of the Portfolio, and the five most heavily weighted fixed income securities in the Portfolio (excluding Treasury Securities and GSE Securities) shall not in the aggregate account for more than 65% of the fixed income weight of the Portfolio;
(3) A Portfolio that includes fixed income securities (excluding exempted securities) shall include a minimum of 13 non-affiliated issuers; provided, however, that there shall be no minimum number of non-affiliated issuers required for fixed income securities if at least 70% of the weight of the Portfolio consists of equity securities as described in IEX Rule 16.135(b)(1)(A);
(4) Component securities that in aggregate account for at least 90% of the fixed income weight of the Portfolio must be: (a) From issuers that are required to file reports pursuant to Sections 13 and 15(d) of the Act; (b) from issuers each of which has a worldwide market value of its outstanding common equity held by non-affiliates of $700 million or more; (c) from issuers each of which has outstanding securities that are notes, bonds, debentures, or evidence of indebtedness having a total remaining principal amount of at least $1 billion; (d) exempted securities as defined in Section 3(a)(12) of the Act; or (e) from issuers that are a government of a foreign country or a political subdivision of a foreign country; and
(5) Non-agency, non-GSE, and privately issued mortgage-related and other asset-backed securities shall not account, in the aggregate, for more than 20% of the weight of the fixed income portion of the Portfolio.
Proposed IEX Rule 16.135(b)(1)(C) provides that a Portfolio may include cash and cash equivalents. Cash equivalents are defined as short-term instruments with maturities of less than three months.
Proposed IEX Rule 16.135(b)(1)(D) establishes criteria for the portion of a Portfolio that consists of listed derivatives, such as futures, options, and swaps overlying commodities, currencies, financial instruments (
Proposed IEX Rule 16.135(b)(1)(E) establishes a limit on over-the-counter (“OTC”) derivatives. Specifically, no more than 20% of the weight of the Portfolio may be invested in OTC derivatives.
Finally, proposed IEX Rule 16.135(b)(1)(F) provides that, to the extent that listed or OTC derivatives are used to gain exposure to individual equities and/or fixed income securities, or to indexes of equities and/or fixed income securities, the aggregate gross notional value of such exposure shall meet the criteria set forth in IEX Rules 16.135(b)(1)(A) and 16.135(b)(1)(B), respectively.
With respect to proposals to list and trade shares of actively managed funds that do not satisfy the proposed generic listing criteria, proposed IEX Rule 16.135(b)(1) provides that statements or representations in those 19b-4s regarding the following constitute continued listing standards: (1) The description of the portfolio; (2) limitations on portfolio holdings or reference assets; (3) dissemination and availability of the reference asset or intraday indicative values; or (4) the applicability of IEX rules and surveillance procedures.
The Exchange also proposes to expand to definition of “Disclosed Portfolio” to require that the Web site for each series of Managed Fund Shares must disclose the following information, to the extent applicable: ticker symbol, CUSIP or other identifier, a description of the holding, identity of the asset upon which the derivative is based, the strike price for any options, the quantity of each security or other asset held as measured by select metrics, maturity date, coupon rate, effective date, market value, and percentage weight of the holding in the portfolio.
Additionally, the Exchange proposes to amend the continued listing requirements in Rule 16.135(d)(2)(A) by changing the requirement that an Intraday Indicative Value (“IIV”) for Managed Fund Shares be widely disseminated by one or more major market data vendors at least every 15 seconds during the time when the Managed Fund Shares trade on the Exchange to a requirement that an IIV be widely disseminated by one or more major market data vendors at least every 15 seconds during the Regular Market Session, as defined in IEX Rule 1.160(gg).
The Exchange proposes to require that every issue of Managed Fund Shares have a stated investment objective and that it be adhered to under normal market conditions.
Further, the Exchange also seeks to amend Rule 16.135(d)(2)(C) to provide that IEX will consider suspension of trading and will initiate delisting proceedings under the IEX Rule Series 14.500 with respect to a series of Managed Fund Shares (rather than only considering removing a series from listing) under the following new or revised circumstances:
1. If, following the initial twelve-month period after commencement of trading on IEX of a series of Managed Fund Shares, there are fewer than 50 beneficial holders of the series of Managed Fund Shares.
2. If an interruption to the dissemination of the value of the IIV persists past the trading day in which it occurred or is no longer calculated or available.
3. If the Disclosed Portfolio is not made available to all market participants at the same time.
4. If the series is not in compliance with any statements or representations included in the applicable rule proposal under Section 19(b) of the Act regarding: (a) The description of the portfolio or reference assets; (b) limitations on portfolio holdings or reference assets; (c) dissemination and availability of the reference asset or intraday indicative values; or (d) the applicability of IEX rules and surveillance procedures.
5. If any of the requirements of IEX Rule 16.135 are not continuously maintained.
Further, the Exchange proposes to amend Rule 16.135(g) to provide that, if an investment adviser to the investment company issuing Managed Fund Shares is affiliated with a broker-dealer, the investment adviser must erect and maintain a “fire wall” between the investment adviser and the broker-dealer with respect to access to information concerning the composition and/or changes to such investment company portfolio.
After careful review, the Commission finds that the Exchange's proposal to amend IEX Rule 16.135 to, among other things, adopt generic listing criteria and continued listing requirements, is consistent with the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.
IEX's proposal is substantively identical with respect to Managed Fund Shares to proposals recently approved by the Commission (“Prior Orders”).
In support of its proposal, the Exchange represents the following:
(1) Managed Fund Shares listed and traded on IEX will conform to the initial and continued listing criteria under Rule 16.135;
(2) The Exchange's surveillance procedures are adequate to continue to properly monitor the trading of the Managed Fund Shares in all trading sessions and to deter and detect violations of Exchange rules;
(3) Prior to the commencement of trading of a particular series of Managed Fund Shares, the Exchange will inform its members in an information circular (“Circular”) of the special characteristics and risks associated with trading the Managed Fund Shares, including procedures for purchases and redemptions of Managed Fund Shares, suitability requirements under Rules 3.150 and 3.170, the risks involved in trading the Managed Fund Shares during the Pre-Market and Post-Market Sessions when an updated IIV will not be calculated or publicly disseminated, information regarding the IIV and the Disclosed Portfolio, prospectus delivery requirements, and other trading information;
(4) The issuer of a series of Managed Fund Shares will be required to comply with Rule 10A-3 under the Act for the initial and continued listing of Managed Fund Shares, as provided under the IEX Rule Series 14.400;
(5) The Exchange, on a periodic basis and no less than annually, will review issues of Managed Fund Shares generically listed pursuant to Rule 16.135 and will provide a report to the Regulatory Oversight Committee of the Exchange's Board of Directors regarding the Exchange's findings;
(6) The Exchange will provide the Commission staff with a report each calendar quarter that includes the following information for issues of Managed Fund Shares listed during such calendar quarter under Rule 16.135(b)(1): (a) Trading symbol and date of listing on the Exchange; (b) the number of active authorized participants and a description of any failure of an issue of Managed Fund Shares or of an authorized participant to deliver shares, cash, or cash and financial instruments in connection with creation or redemption orders; and (c) a description of any failure of an issue of Managed Fund Shares to comply with Rule 16.135;
(7) Prior to listing pursuant to proposed Rule 16.135(b)(1), an issuer would be required to represent to the Exchange that it will advise the Exchange of any failure by a series of Managed Fund Shares to comply with the continued listing requirements;
(8) Pursuant to its obligations under Section 19(g)(1) of the Act, the Exchange will monitor for compliance with the continued listing requirements; and
(9) If a managed fund is not in compliance with the applicable listing requirements, the Exchange will commence delisting procedures under IEX Rule Series 14.500.
As noted above, in Amendment No. 1, the Exchange proposed to adopt certain continued listing requirements for Managed Fund Shares. The Commission believes that the changes to the Managed Fund Shares listing standard proposed in Amendment No. 1: (1) Clarify how the Exchange will interpret and administer its listing requirements; (2) make Managed Fund Shares listed on the Exchange less susceptible to manipulation by adding the firewall provision discussed above; and (3) enhance consistency between the Exchange's Managed Fund Shares listing criteria and the requirements for Managed Fund Shares recently adopted by other national securities exchanges. Accordingly, the Commission finds good cause, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, to approve the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, on an accelerated basis.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning whether Amendment No. 1 is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's Internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
On March 9, 2017, Fixed Income Clearing Corporation (“FICC”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) advance notice SR-FICC-2017-803 (“Advance Notice”) pursuant to Section 806(e)(1) of the Payment, Clearing, and Settlement Supervision Act of 2010 (“Clearing Supervision Act”)
Repurchase agreement (“repo”) transactions involve the sale of securities along with an agreement to repurchase the securities on a later date. Bilateral repo transactions involve a cash lender (
FICC currently provides central clearing to a segment of the tri-party repo market through its general collateral finance repo service (“GCF Repo ® Service”).
The Advance Notice is a proposal by FICC to broaden the pool of entities that would be eligible to submit tri-party repo transactions for central clearing at FICC. Specifically, FICC proposes to amend its Government Securities Division (“GSD”) Rulebook (“GSD Rules”)
To effectuate the proposed CCIT Service, FICC proposes to create a new limited service membership category in GSD for institutional cash lenders. These new members would be referred to as CCIT members, and the GSD membership provisions that apply to the CCIT members would be addressed in proposed GSD Rule 3B. These new membership provisions include:
• Membership eligibility criteria, including minimum financial requirements, operational capabilities, and opinions of counsel;
• joint account ownership, in which one authorized entity would act as agent for two or more CCIT Members;
• membership application processes, including document provision and disclosure requirements, operational testing requirements, reporting requirements, FATCA compliance certification requirements,
• membership agreement terms describing rights and obligations;
• procedures for the voluntary termination of CCIT membership; and
• ongoing membership requirements, including (i) annual financial and other disclosure requirements; (ii) operational testing requirements and related reporting requirements; (iii) notification of GSD rule non-compliance; (iv) penalties for GSD rule non-compliance; (v) mandatory assurances in the event that FICC has reason to believe a member may fall into GSD rule non-compliance; (vi) requirements to comply with applicable tax, money laundering, and sanctions laws; (vii) audit provisions allowing FICC to access relevant books and records; and (viii) financial/operational monitoring.
In addition to membership provisions, proposed Rule 3B also would set forth the applicable risk management provision relating to the new limited
• Non-mutualized loss allocation obligations of CCIT members, including FICC's perfected security interest in each CCIT member's underlying repo securities;
• a rules-based committed liquidity facility for CCIT members, in which CCIT members that have outstanding CCIT transactions with a defaulting member would be required to enter into CCIT master repurchase agreement transactions with FICC for specified periods of time;
• uncommitted liquidity repos between CCIT members and FICC; and
• application of certain other GSD Rules (
In addition to the proposed changes to the GSD Rules related to the proposed CCIT Service, the Advance Notice also contains other changes to the GSD Rules, unrelated to the CCIT proposal. These non-CCIT related changes generally are intended to update the GSD Rules and provide additional specificity, clarity, and transparency for members that rely on them.
• Clarifying that Comparison-Only Members must conform to FICC's operational conditions and requirements;
• clarifying the point of time in which a member is required to notify FICC that the member is no longer in compliance with a relevant membership qualification and standard;
• providing that a member's written notice of its membership termination is not effective until accepted by FICC;
• requiring all GCF Repo transactions to be fully collateralized by 9:00 a.m. New York Time;
• prohibiting a member that receives collateral in the GCF Repo process from withdrawing the securities or cash collateral received;
• specifying the steps that members must take in the event of FICC's default so that FICC may determine the net amount owed by or to each member;
• reflecting FICC's current practice of annual study and evaluation of FICC's internal accounting control system; and
• correcting several grammatical and out-of-date cross-references.
In addition to the proposed changes listed above, the Advance Notice also includes a proposal for a non-CCIT related rule change that would provide FICC with access to the books and records of a RIC Netting Member's controlling management. The change is intended to enable FICC to determine whether the RIC has sufficient financial resources and monitor compliance with FICC's financial requirements on an ongoing basis.
Although the Clearing Supervision Act does not specify a standard of review for an advance notice, its stated purpose is instructive: To mitigate systemic risk in the financial system and promote financial stability by, among other things, promoting uniform risk management standards for systemically important financial market utilities and strengthening the liquidity of systemically important financial market utilities.
• Promote robust risk management;
• promote safety and soundness;
• reduce systemic risks; and
• support the stability of the broader financial system.
The Commission has adopted risk management standards under Section 805(a)(2) of the Clearing Supervision Act
As discussed below, the Commission believes that the changes proposed in the Advance Notice are consistent with Section 805(b) of the Clearing Supervision Act because they (i) are designed to reduce systemic risk, (ii) are designed to support the stability of the financial system, (iii) are designed to promote robust risk management, and (iv) are consistent with promoting safety and soundness.
When considering the CCIT Service in its entirety, the Commission believes that the proposal could help to reduce systemic risk presented by FICC and a tri-party repo market member default, which in turn could help support the stability of the broader financial system. The CCIT Service would make the risk-reducing benefits of central clearing available to a wider range of types of repo transactions while at the same time ensuring that FICC is able to effectively manage the additional financial risk exposure. For example, as described above, the CCIT Service would enable a greater number of tri-party repo transactions to be eligible for netting and subject to guaranteed settlement, novation, and independent risk management through FICC, which would help decrease the settlement and operational risk of such transactions relative to those made outside of FICC, enhancing the stability of the tri-party repo market. Furthermore, by providing central clearing to a greater number of tri-party repo transactions, the CCIT Service would permit FICC to centralize and control the liquidation of a greater number of such positions in the event of a Netting Member's default, which in turn would help protect against the risk that an uncoordinated liquidation of the positions by multiple counterparties to a defaulting firm would cause a fire sale that destabilizes the broader financial system. Therefore, the Commission believes that the CCIT Service would help reduce systemic risks and support
The Commission also believes that the CCIT Service designed by FICC is consistent with promoting robust risk management and safety and soundness at FICC and to the tri-party repo market. The CCIT Service includes certain risk management tools that facilitate FICC's management of credit, market, and liquidity risk arising from becoming a central counterparty to the new repo positions coming in via CCIT. For example, the CCIT Service would provide FICC with a perfected security interest in the underlying repo securities of a CCIT transaction and a built-in liquidity resource to support CCIT Service liquidity demands in the form of repo transactions under the CCIT Master Repurchase Agreement (“CCIT MRA”).
In addition, the CCIT Service would enable FICC to manage instances where a default results in liquidity demands for FICC within the CCIT Service that exceed the level of financial resources FICC might otherwise have on hand (such as the defaulter's collateral) at the time of the default by requiring CCIT Members to engage in repo transactions to provide cash as a liquidity resource in such instances. In addition to the risk management tools described above, the CCIT Service also would establish initial and ongoing financial responsibility and operational capacity requirements for CCIT members, as well as requirements that would be applicable to Netting Members with respect to their participation in the proposed CCIT Service. Collectively, these requirements would enable FICC to monitor the likelihood of a CCIT member default and limit its counterparty risk by (i) ensuring that FICC only takes on exposure to entities that are creditworthy counterparties; and (ii) enabling FICC to monitor the ongoing capability of these members to perform their obligations to FICC. For these reasons, the Commission believes that the CCIT Service would help promote robust risk management and safety and soundness at FICC, consistent with Section 805(b) of the Clearing Supervision Act.
In addition, the Commission believes that the CCIT Service is consistent with promoting robust risk management and safety and soundness to the tri-party repo market. As discussed above, the CCIT Service would make the risk-reducing benefits of central clearing available to a wider range of types of repo transactions, which would help decrease the settlement and operational risk of such transactions when made outside of FICC and thereby enhance stability for the tri-party repo market. Furthermore, the CCIT Service would enable a greater number of tri-party repo transactions to be subject to FICC's ability, in the event of a Netting Member's default, to centralize and control the liquidation of such positions at FICC, which in turn would help protect the tri-party repo market against the risk that a liquidation of the positions would cause a fire sale that destabilizes the broader financial system. Therefore, the Commission believes that the CCIT Service would help promote robust risk management and safety and soundness to the tri-party repo market, consistent with Section 805(b) of the Clearing Supervision Act.
The Commission believes that the changes proposed in the Advance Notice are consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(1) under the Act.
The Commission believes that the changes proposed in the Advance Notice are consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(iii) under the Act.
The Commission also believes that the proposal is consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(18) under the Act.
In connection with the establishment of the proposed CCIT Service, FICC would include provisions in the GSD rules to incorporate membership standards, requiring, for example, ongoing financial responsibility and operational capacity requirements, as well as the requirements that would be applicable to Netting Members with respect to their participation in the proposed CCIT Service. The
Similarly, in connection with the proposed non-CCIT related change to provide FICC with access to the books and records of a RIC Netting Member's controlling management, FICC would be authorized to review the financial information of the RIC. Because this would enable FICC to determine whether the RIC has sufficient financial resources and monitor compliance with FICC's financial requirements on an ongoing basis, the Commission believes this requirement is consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(18).
By the Commission.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1)
The Exchange proposes to list and trade shares of the Franklin Liberty Intermediate Municipal Opportunities ETF and Franklin Liberty Municipal Bond ETF (each a “Fund” and, collectively, the “Funds”) under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600 (“Managed Fund Shares”). The proposed change is available on the Exchange's Web site at
In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such statements.
The Exchange proposes to list and trade shares (“Shares”) of each Fund under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600,
The investment adviser to each Fund will be Franklin Advisers, Inc. (the “Adviser”). Franklin Templeton Distributors, Inc. will serve as the distributor (the “Distributor”) of each Fund's Shares on an agency basis. Franklin Templeton Services, LLC will serve as the administrator and State Street Bank and Trust Company will serve as the sub-administrator, custodian and transfer agent for each Fund.
Commentary .06 to Rule 8.600 provides that, if the investment adviser to the investment company issuing Managed Fund Shares is affiliated with a broker-dealer, such investment adviser shall erect a “fire wall” between the investment adviser and the broker-dealer with respect to access to information concerning the composition and/or changes to such investment company portfolio.
According to the Registration Statement, the investment objective of the Fund will be to achieve a high level of current income that is exempt from federal income taxes. Under normal market conditions,
The Fund may invest in municipal securities rated in any rating category by U.S. nationally recognized rating services (or comparable unrated or short-term rated securities), including below investment grade and defaulted securities and securities of issuers that are, or are about to be, involved in reorganizations, financial restructurings, or bankruptcy (generally referred to as “distressed debt”). Such investments typically involve the purchase of lower-rated or defaulted debt securities, comparable unrated debt securities, or other indebtedness (or participations in the indebtedness) of such issuers. Although the Adviser will search for investments across a large number of municipal securities that finance different types of projects, from time to time, based on economic conditions, the Fund may have significant positions in municipal securities that finance similar types of projects.
According to the Registration Statement, the Funds may invest in one or more of the following municipal securities (“Municipal Securities”):
• General obligation bonds, which are typically issued by states, counties, cities, towns and regional districts and backed by the issuer's pledge of its full faith, credit and taxing power for the payment of principal and interest.
• Revenue bonds, which are generally backed by the net revenue derived from a particular facility, group of facilities, or, in some cases, the proceeds of a special excise tax or other specific revenue source.
• Anticipation notes, including bond, revenue and tax anticipation notes, which are issued to provide interim financing of various municipal needs in anticipation of the receipt of other sources of money for repayment of the notes.
• Insured Municipal Securities, which are covered by insurance policies that guarantee the timely payment of principal and interest. When beneficial, a Fund may purchase insurance for an uninsured bond directly from a qualified municipal bond insurer, in which case a Fund pays the insurance premium directly to the insurance company.
• Municipal lease obligations, which generally are issued to support a government's infrastructure by financing or refinancing equipment or property acquisitions or the construction, expansion or rehabilitation of public facilities. A Fund may also gain exposure to municipal lease obligations through certificates of participation, which represent a proportionate interest in the payments under a specified lease or leases.
• Municipal Securities that are issued on a when-issued or delayed delivery basis.
• Variable and floating rate securities, including variable rate demand notes, municipal inflation protected securities, index-based floating rate securities, and auction rate securities, which have interest rates that change either at specific intervals from daily up to semi-annually, or whenever a benchmark rate changes.
• Pre-refunded bonds, which are outstanding debt securities that are not immediately callable (redeemable) by the issuer but have been “pre-refunded” by the issuer.
• Zero coupon bonds (including convertible and step coupon bonds) and deferred interest securities.
• Stripped securities, which are debt securities that have been transformed from a principal amount with periodic interest coupons into a series of zero coupon bonds, each with a different maturity date corresponding to one of the payment dates for interest coupon payments or the redemption date for the principal amount.
• Mandatory tender (mandatory put) Municipal Securities, which may be sold with a requirement that a holder of a security surrender the security to the issuer or its agent for cash at a date prior to the stated maturity.
• Callable securities, which give the issuer the right to redeem the security on a given date or dates (known as the call dates) prior to maturity.
• Tax-exempt commercial paper, which typically represents an unsecured short-term obligation (270 days or less) issued by a municipality.
• Tax-exempt or qualified private activity and industrial development revenue bonds, which are typically issued by or on behalf of public authorities to finance various privately operated facilities which are expected to benefit the municipality and its residents, such as business, manufacturing, housing, sports and pollution control, as well as public facilities such as airports, mass transit systems, ports and parking.
According to the Registration Statement, the investment objective of the Fund will be to achieve a high level of current income that is exempt from federal income taxes. Under normal market conditions, the Fund will invest at least 80% of its net assets in Municipal Securities whose interest is free from federal income taxes, including the federal alternative minimum tax.
Although the Adviser will search for investments across a large number of Municipal Securities that finance different types of projects, from time to time, based on economic conditions, the
According to the Registration Statement, the Fund may invest in one or more of the Municipal Securities listed above. The Fund generally buys Municipal Securities rated, at the time of purchase, in one of the top four ratings categories by one or more U.S. nationally recognized rating services (or comparable unrated or short-term rated securities).
According to the Registration Statement, while each Fund, under normal market conditions, will invest at least 80% of its net assets in Municipal Securities whose interest is free from federal income taxes, including the federal alternative minimum tax, each Fund may invest up to 20% of its net assets in the securities that pay interest that may be subject to the federal alternative minimum tax and, although not anticipated, in securities that pay taxable interest, as described below.
With respect to up to 20% of its net assets, each Fund may invest in bank obligations;
The Franklin Liberty Intermediate Municipal Opportunities ETF may also invest in defaulted debt securities
According to the Registration Statement, a Fund may invest up to 100% of its assets in temporary defensive investments, including cash, cash equivalents or other high quality short-term investments, such as short-term debt instruments, including U.S. government securities, high grade commercial paper, repurchase agreements, negotiable certificates of deposit, non-negotiable fixed time deposits, bankers acceptances, and other money market equivalents. In addition, with respect to each of the Funds, on a temporary basis, during periods of high cash inflows or outflows,
Each Fund may hold up to an aggregate amount of 15% of its net assets in illiquid assets (calculated at the time of investment), consistent with Commission guidance. Each Fund will monitor its portfolio liquidity on an ongoing basis to determine whether, in light of current circumstances, an adequate level of liquidity is being maintained, and will consider taking appropriate steps in order to maintain adequate liquidity if, through a change in values, net assets, or other circumstances, more than 15% of a Fund's net assets are held in illiquid assets. Illiquid assets include securities subject to contractual or other restrictions on resale and other instruments that lack readily available markets as determined in accordance with Commission staff guidance.
Each Fund intends to qualify for and to elect treatment as a separate regulated investment company under Subchapter M of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
Each Fund's investments will be consistent with its investment objective and will not be used to provide multiple returns of a benchmark or to produce leveraged returns. A Fund will not necessarily focus its investments in a particular state, and will not invest more than 15% of its total assets in Municipal Securities of any one state as discussed below.
Under normal market conditions, except for periods of high cash inflows or outflows,
The Exchange is submitting this proposed rule change because the portfolios for the Funds will not meet all of the “generic” listing requirements of Commentary .01 to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600 applicable to the listing of Managed Fund Shares. Each Fund's portfolio will meet all such requirements except for those set forth in Commentary .01(b)(1).
The Exchange believes that it is appropriate and in the public interest to approve listing and trading of Shares of the Funds on the Exchange notwithstanding that the Funds would not meet the requirements of Commentary .01(b)(1) to Rule 8.600 in that the Funds' investments in Municipal Securities will be well-diversified. A Fund will not necessarily focus its investments in a particular state, and will not invest more than 15% of its total assets in Municipal Securities of any one state. As noted above, under normal market conditions, except for periods of high cash inflows or outflows,
The Exchange believes that permitting Fund Shares to be listed and traded on the Exchange notwithstanding that less than 75% of the weight of a Fund's portfolio may consist of components with less than $100 million minimum original principal amount outstanding would provide the Funds with greater ability to select from a broad range of Municipal Securities, as described above, that would support a Fund's investment objective.
The Exchange believes that, notwithstanding that each Fund's portfolio may not satisfy Commentary .01(b)(1) to Rule 8.600, the Funds' portfolios will not be susceptible to manipulation. A Fund will not invest more than 15% of its total assets in Municipal Securities of any one state. In addition, each Fund's portfolio will be well-diversified in that each Fund will have a specified minimum number of Municipal Securities holdings and will be subject to percentage limitations on a Fund's total assets invested in Municipal Securities of individual issuers, states and sectors, as described above. The Exchange notes that, other than Commentary .01(b)(1) to Rule 8.600, each Fund's portfolio will meet all other requirements of Rule 8.600.
According to the Registration Statement, the Trust will issue and sell Shares of a Fund only in “Creation Units” in aggregations of 100,000 Shares per Creation Unit on a continuous basis through the Distributor or its agent, without a sales load, at a price based on a Fund's NAV next determined after receipt, on any “Business Day,”
In its discretion, the Adviser reserves the right to increase or decrease the number of a Fund's Shares that constitute a Creation Unit.
The consideration for purchase of Creation Units of a Fund may consist of the “Deposit Securities” (
The “Cash Component” is an amount equal to the difference between the NAV of the Shares (per Creation Unit) and the “Deposit Amount,” which is an amount equal to the market value of the Deposit Securities, and serves to compensate for any differences between the NAV per Creation Unit and the Deposit Amount.
Each Fund's current policy is to accept cash in substitution for the Deposit Securities it might otherwise accept as in-kind consideration for the purchase of Creation Units. A Fund may, at times, elect to receive Deposit Securities (
The identity and number of shares of the Deposit Securities and the amount of the Cash Component changes pursuant to changes in the composition of a Fund's portfolio and as rebalancing adjustments and corporate action events are reflected from time to time by the Adviser with a view to the investment objective of a Fund. The composition of the Deposit Securities and the amount of the Cash Component may also change in response to adjustments to the weighting or composition of the component securities constituting a Fund's portfolio.
Each Fund reserves the right to permit or require the substitution of a “cash in lieu” amount to be added to the Cash Component to replace any Deposit Security that may not be available in sufficient quantity for delivery or that may not be eligible for transfer through the facilities of Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) (“DTC Facilities”) or the clearing process through the Continuous Net Settlement System of the National Securities Clearing Corporation (“NSCC”) (“NSCC Clearing Process”) (as discussed below), or that the Authorized Participant is not able to trade due to a trading restriction. Each Fund also reserves the right to permit or require a “cash in lieu” amount in certain circumstances, including circumstances in which: (i) The delivery of the Deposit Security by the Authorized Participant would be restricted under applicable securities or other local laws; (ii) the delivery of the Deposit Security to the Authorized Participant would result in the disposition of the Deposit Security by the Authorized Participant becoming restricted under applicable securities or other local laws; or (iii) in certain other situations.
When partial or full cash purchases of Creation Units are available or specified for a Fund (currently, Creation Units of each Fund are generally offered solely for cash), they will be effected in essentially the same manner as in-kind purchases thereof. In the case of a partial or full cash purchase, the “Authorized Participant” (as defined below) must pay the cash equivalent of the Deposit Securities it would otherwise be required to provide through an in-kind purchase, plus the same Cash Component required to be paid by an in-kind purchaser.
To be eligible to place orders with the Distributor and to create a Creation Unit of a Fund, an entity must be: (i) A “Participating Party,”
An Authorized Participant must submit an irrevocable order to purchase Shares of a Fund, in proper form, generally before 4 p.m., Eastern time on any Business Day in order to receive that day's NAV. Creation Units may be purchased only by or through an Authorized Participant that has entered into an Authorized Participant Agreement with the Distributor.
An Authorized Participant must submit an irrevocable order to purchase Shares of a Fund, in proper form, generally before 4 p.m., Eastern time on any Business Day in order to receive that day's NAV.
Shares of a Fund may be redeemed by Authorized Participants only in Creation Units at their NAV next determined after receipt of a redemption request in proper form by the Distributor or its agent and only on a Business Day. A Fund will not redeem Shares in amounts less than Creation Units.
The Adviser will make available through the NSCC, prior to the opening of business on the Exchange on each Business Day, the designated portfolio of securities (including any portion of such securities for which cash may be substituted) that will be applicable (subject to possible amendment or correction) to redemption requests received in proper form on that day (“Fund Securities”), and an amount of cash as described below (“Cash Amount”) (if any). Such Fund Securities and the corresponding Cash Amount (each subject to possible amendment or correction) are applicable in order to effect redemptions of Creation Units of a Fund until such time as the next announced composition of the Fund Securities and Cash Amount is made available. Fund Securities received on redemption may not be identical to Deposit Securities that are applicable to creations of Creation Units under certain circumstances.
Unless cash redemptions are available or specified for a Fund, the redemption proceeds for a Creation Unit generally consist of Fund Securities, plus the Cash Amount, which is an amount equal to the difference between the NAV of the Shares being redeemed, as next determined after the receipt of a redemption request in proper form, and the value of Fund Securities, less a redemption transaction fee (as described below).
Each Fund may, in its sole discretion, substitute a “cash in lieu” amount to replace any Fund Security that may not be eligible for transfer through DTC Facilities or the NSCC Clearing Process or that the Authorized Participant is not able to trade due to a trading restriction. Each Fund also reserves the right to permit or require a “cash in lieu” amount in certain circumstances, including circumstances in which: (i) The delivery of a Fund Security to the Authorized Participant would be restricted under applicable securities or other local laws; (ii) the delivery of a Fund Security to the Authorized Participant would result in the disposition of the Fund Security by the Authorized Participant becoming restricted under applicable securities or other local laws; or (iii) in certain other situations. The amount of cash paid out in such cases will be equivalent to the value of the substituted security listed as a Fund Security. In the event that the Fund Securities have a value greater than the NAV of the Shares, a compensating cash payment equal to the difference is required to be made by or through an Authorized Participant by the redeeming shareholder. When partial or full cash redemptions of Creation Units are available or specified for a Fund (currently, Creation Units of each Fund are generally redeemed solely for cash), they will be effected in essentially the same manner as in-kind redemptions thereof. In the case of partial or full cash redemption, the Authorized Participant will receive the cash equivalent of the Fund Securities it would otherwise receive through an in-kind redemption, plus the same Cash Amount to be paid to an in-kind redeemer.
Redemption requests for Creation Units of a Fund must be submitted to the Distributor or its agent by or through an Authorized Participant. An Authorized Participant must submit an irrevocable request to redeem Shares of a Fund, in proper form, generally before 4 p.m., Eastern time on any Business Day, in order to receive that day's NAV.
The NAV of each Fund will be determined by deducting a Fund's liabilities from the total assets of the portfolio. The NAV per Share will be determined by dividing the total NAV of a Fund by the number of Shares outstanding.
Each Fund will calculate its NAV per Share each Business Day as of 1 p.m. Pacific time which normally coincides with the close of trading on the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”). Each Fund will not calculate its NAV on days the NYSE is closed for trading. If the NYSE has a scheduled early close or unscheduled early close, a Fund's Share price would still be determined as of 1 p.m. Pacific time/4 p.m. Eastern time. Each Fund's NAV per Share will be available online at
Municipal Securities generally trade in the over-the-counter (“OTC”) market rather than on a securities exchange. Each Fund's pricing services will use valuation models or matrix pricing to determine current value. In general, they will use information with respect to comparable bond and note transactions, quotations from bond dealers or by reference to other securities that are considered comparable in such characteristics as rating, interest rate and maturity date. Matrix pricing is considered a form of fair value pricing.
Each Fund generally will use two independent pricing services to assist in determining a current market value for each security. If market quotations are readily available for portfolio securities listed on a securities exchange, a Fund will value those securities at the last quoted sale price or the official closing price of the day, respectively, in accordance with valuation procedures approved by the Board of Trustees, or, if there is no reported sale, within the range of the most recent quoted bid and ask prices. Short-term debt instruments, including U.S. government securities, high grade commercial paper, repurchase agreements, negotiable certificates of deposit, non-negotiable fixed time deposits, bankers acceptances, and other money market equivalents will be valued at prices supplied by approved pricing services which are generally within the range of the most recent bid and ask prices.
Generally, trading in U.S. government securities and money market equivalents is substantially completed each day at various times before 1 p.m. Pacific time. The value of these securities used in computing the NAV will be determined as of such times. Each Fund will rely on third-party pricing vendors to provide evaluated prices that reflect current fair market value as of 1 p.m. Pacific time.
Each Fund has procedures, approved by the Board of Trustees, to determine the fair value of individual securities and other assets for which market prices are not readily available or which may not be reliably priced (such as in the case of trade suspensions or halts, price movement limits set by certain foreign markets, and thinly traded or illiquid securities). Some methods for valuing these securities may include: Fundamental analysis (earnings multiple, etc.), matrix pricing, discounts from market prices of similar securities, or discounts applied due to the nature and duration of restrictions on the disposition of the securities. The Board of Trustees oversees the application of fair value pricing procedures.
ETFs will be valued at market value, which will generally be determined using the last reported official closing or last trading price on the exchange or market on which the security is primarily traded at the time of valuation or, if no sale has occurred, at the last quoted bid price on the primary market or exchange on which they are traded. If market prices are unavailable or a Fund believes that they are unreliable, or when the value of a security has been materially affected by events occurring after the relevant market closes, a Fund will price those securities at fair value as determined in good faith using methods approved by the Funds' Board of Trustees.
Shares of non-exchange-traded open-end investment companies will be valued at their current day NAV published by the relevant fund.
Information regarding the intraday value of Shares of a Fund (the Indicative Optimized Portfolio Value” or “IOPV”) will be disseminated every 15 seconds during the Exchange's Core Trading Session (normally 9:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time) by market data vendors or other information providers. The IOPV will be based on the current market value of the Fund's portfolio holdings that will form the basis for the Fund's calculation of NAV at the end of the Business Day, as disclosed on the Fund's Web site prior to that Business Day's commencement of trading. The IOPV will generally be determined by using both current market quotations and/or price quotations obtained from broker-dealers that may trade in the portfolio securities held by a Fund. A Fund's IOPV disseminated during the Exchange's Core Trading Session should not be viewed as a real-time update of a Fund's NAV, which is calculated only once a day.
Each Fund's Web site (
On a daily basis, the Funds will disclose the information required under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600(c)(2) to the extent applicable. The Web site information will be publicly available at no charge.
In addition, a basket composition file, which includes the security names and share quantities, if applicable, required to be delivered in exchange for a Fund's Shares, together with estimates and actual cash components, will be publicly disseminated daily prior to the opening of the Exchange via the NSCC. The basket represents one Creation Unit of a Fund. The NAV of Shares of a Fund
Investors can also obtain each Fund's Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”), shareholder reports, Form N-CSR and Form N-SAR, filed twice a year. The Funds' SAI and shareholder reports will be available free upon request from the Trust, and those documents and the Form N-CSR and Form N-SAR may be viewed on-screen or downloaded from the Commission's Web site at
Quotation and last sale information for the Shares and for ETFs will be available via the Consolidated Tape Association (“CTA”) high-speed line, and from the national securities exchange on which they are listed.
Quotation information from brokers and dealers or pricing services will be available for Municipal Securities, unrated debt securities, defaulted debt securities, high yield debt securities, and cash equivalents or other high quality short-term investments, including U.S. government securities, bank obligations and taxable commercial paper. Price information for money market funds and other investment companies will be available from the applicable investment company's Web site and from market data vendors. Pricing information regarding each other asset class in which a Fund will invest will generally be available through nationally recognized data service providers through subscription agreements. In addition, the IOPV (which is the Portfolio Indicative Value, as defined in NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600(c)(3)), will be widely disseminated at least every 15 seconds during the Core Trading Session (ordinarily 9:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time) by one or more major market data vendors or other information providers.
With respect to trading halts, the Exchange may consider all relevant factors in exercising its discretion to halt or suspend trading in the Shares of a Fund. Trading in Shares of a Fund will be halted if the circuit breaker parameters in NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.12 have been reached. Trading also may be halted because of market conditions or for reasons that, in the view of the Exchange, make trading in the Shares inadvisable.
The Exchange deems the Shares to be equity securities, thus rendering trading in the Shares subject to the Exchange's existing rules governing the trading of equity securities. Shares will trade on the NYSE Arca Marketplace from 4 a.m. to 8 p.m., Eastern Time in accordance with NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.34 (Early, Core, and Late Trading Sessions). The Exchange has appropriate rules to facilitate transactions in the Shares during all trading sessions. As provided in NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.6, the minimum price variation (“MPV”) for quoting and entry of orders in equity securities traded on the NYSE Arca Marketplace is $0.01, with the exception of securities that are priced less than $1.00 for which the MPV for order entry is $0.0001.
The Shares of each Fund will conform to the initial and continued listing criteria under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600. Consistent with NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600(d)(2)(B)(ii), the Adviser will implement and maintain, or be subject to, procedures designed to prevent the use and dissemination of material non-public information regarding the actual components of a Fund's portfolio. The Exchange represents that, for initial and/or continued listing, a Fund will be in compliance with Rule 10A-3
The Exchange represents that trading in the Shares will be subject to the existing trading surveillances, administered by the Exchange, as well as cross-market surveillances administered by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) on behalf of the Exchange, which are designed to detect violations of Exchange rules and applicable federal securities laws. The Exchange represents that these procedures are adequate to properly monitor Exchange trading of the Shares in all trading sessions and to deter and detect violations of Exchange rules and federal securities laws applicable to trading on the Exchange.
The surveillances referred to above generally focus on detecting securities trading outside their normal patterns, which could be indicative of manipulative or other violative activity. When such situations are detected, surveillance analysis follows and investigations are opened, where appropriate, to review the behavior of all relevant parties for all relevant trading violations.
The Exchange or FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, or both, will communicate as needed regarding trading in the Shares and ETFs with other markets and other entities that are members of the ISG, and the Exchange or FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, or both, may obtain trading information regarding trading in the Shares and ETFs from such markets and other entities. In addition, the Exchange may obtain information regarding trading in the Shares and ETFs from markets and other entities that are members of ISG or with which the Exchange has in place a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement. In addition, FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, is able to access, as needed, trade information for certain fixed income securities held by a Fund reported to FINRA's Trade Reporting and Compliance Engine (“TRACE”). FINRA also can access data obtained from the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (“MSRB”) relating to municipal bond trading activity for surveillance purposes in connection with trading in the Shares.
In addition, the Exchange also has a general policy prohibiting the distribution of material, non-public information by its employees.
All statements and representations made in this filing regarding (a) the description of the portfolio, (b) limitations on portfolio holdings or reference assets, or (c) applicability of Exchange listing rules specified in this filing shall constitute continued listing requirements for listing the Shares of a Fund on the Exchange.
The issuer has represented to the Exchange that it will advise the Exchange of any failure by a Fund to comply with the continued listing requirements, and, pursuant to its obligations under Section 19(g)(1) of the Act, the Exchange will monitor for compliance with the continued listing requirements. If a Fund is not in compliance with the applicable listing requirements, the Exchange will commence delisting procedures under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.5(m).
Prior to the commencement of trading, the Exchange will inform its Equity Trading Permit Holders in an Information Bulletin (“Bulletin”) of the special characteristics and risks associated with trading the Shares. Specifically, the Bulletin will discuss the following: (1) The procedures for purchases and redemptions of Shares in Creation Unit aggregations (and that Shares are not individually redeemable); (2) NYSE Arca Equities Rule 9.2(a), which imposes a duty of due diligence on its Equity Trading Permit Holders to learn the essential facts relating to every customer prior to trading the Shares; (3) the risks involved in trading the Shares during the Opening and Late Trading Sessions when an updated IOPV will not be calculated or publicly disseminated; (4) how information regarding the IOPV and the Disclosed Portfolio is disseminated; (5) the requirement that Equity Trading Permit Holders deliver a prospectus to investors purchasing newly issued Shares prior to or concurrently with the confirmation of a transaction; and (6) trading information.
In addition, the Bulletin will reference that each Fund is subject to various fees and expenses described in the Registration Statement. The Bulletin will discuss any exemptive, no-action, and interpretive relief granted by the Commission from any rules under the Act. The Bulletin will also disclose that the NAV for the Shares will be calculated after 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time each trading day.
The basis under the Act for this proposed rule change is the requirement under Section 6(b)(5)
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices in that the Shares will be listed and traded on the Exchange pursuant to the initial and continued listing criteria in NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600. The Exchange has in place surveillance procedures that are adequate to properly monitor trading in the Shares in all trading sessions and to deter and detect violations of Exchange rules and applicable federal securities laws. The Exchange or FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, or both, will communicate as needed regarding trading in the Shares and ETFs with other markets and other entities that are members of the ISG, and the Exchange or FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, or both, may obtain trading information regarding trading in the Shares and ETFs from such markets and other entities. In addition, the Exchange may obtain information regarding trading in the Shares and ETFs from markets and other entities that are members of ISG or with which the Exchange has in place a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement. In addition, FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, is able to access, as needed, trade information for certain fixed income securities held by a Fund reported to TRACE. FINRA also can access data obtained from the MSRB relating to municipal bond trading activity for surveillance purposes in connection with trading in the Shares. Each Fund may not purchase illiquid assets if, in the aggregate, more than 15% of its net assets would be invested in illiquid assets. Each Fund will monitor its portfolio liquidity on an ongoing basis to determine whether, in light of current circumstances, an adequate level of liquidity is being maintained, and will consider taking appropriate steps in order to maintain adequate liquidity if, through a change in values, net assets, or other circumstances, more than 15% of a Fund's net assets are held in illiquid assets. The Adviser is not registered as a broker-dealer but is affiliated with a broker-dealer and will implement and maintain a fire wall with respect to each of its relevant personnel or broker-dealer affiliate regarding access to information concerning the composition and/or changes to the portfolios.
The Exchange believes that it is appropriate and in the public interest to approve listing and trading of Shares of the Funds on the Exchange notwithstanding that the Funds would not meet the requirements of Commentary .01(b)(1) to Rule 8.600 in that the Funds' investments in Municipal Securities will be well-diversified. As noted above, under normal market conditions, except for periods of high cash inflows or outflows, each Fund will satisfy the following criteria. Each Fund will have a minimum of 35 Municipal Securities holdings. After a Fund has at least $100 million in assets, it will have a minimum of 75 Municipal Securities holdings. With respect to 75% of each Fund's total assets, no single Municipal Securities issuer will account for more than 3% of the weight of a Fund's portfolio. For the remaining portion of each Fund's assets, no single Municipal Securities issuer will account for more than 6% of the weight of a Fund's portfolio. Each Fund will limit its investments in Municipal Securities of any one state to 15% of a Fund's total assets and will be diversified among issuers in at least 10 states. Each Fund will limit its investments in Municipal Securities in any single sector to 25% of a Fund's total assets. The Exchange believes it would be appropriate to exclude pre-refunded bonds from the above limits given that they have a high level of credit quality and liquidity. In addition, other than Commentary .01(b)(1) to Rule 8.600, each Fund's portfolio will meet all other requirements of Rule 8.600.
The Exchange believes that permitting Fund Shares to be listed and traded on the Exchange notwithstanding that less than 75% of the weight of a Fund's portfolio may consist of components with less than $100 million minimum original principal amount outstanding would provide the Funds with greater ability to select from a broad range of Municipal Securities, as described above, that would support a Fund's investment objective. The Exchange believes further that, notwithstanding that each Fund's portfolio may not satisfy Commentary .01(b)(1) to Rule 8.600, the Funds' portfolios will not be susceptible to manipulation. A Fund will not invest more than 15% of its total assets in Municipal Securities of any one state. In addition, each Fund's portfolio will be well-diversified in that
The proposed rule change is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade and to protect investors and the public interest in that the Exchange will obtain a representation from the issuer of the Shares that the NAV per Share will be calculated daily and that the NAV and the Disclosed Portfolio will be made available to all market participants at the same time. In addition, a large amount of information is publicly available regarding each Fund and the Shares, thereby promoting market transparency. Quotation and last sale information for the Shares and ETFs will be available via the CTA high-speed line, and from the national securities exchange on which they are listed. Prior to the commencement of trading, the Exchange will inform its Equity Trading Permit Holders in an Information Bulletin of the special characteristics and risks associated with trading the Shares. Trading in Shares of the Funds will be halted if the circuit breaker parameters in NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.12 have been reached or because of market conditions or for reasons that, in the view of the Exchange, make trading in the Shares inadvisable. Trading in the Shares will be subject to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600(d)(2)(D), which sets forth circumstances under which Shares of the Funds may be halted. In addition, as noted above, investors will have ready access to information regarding the Funds' holdings, the IOPV, the Disclosed Portfolio, and quotation and last sale information for the Shares.
The proposed rule change is designed to perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest in that it will facilitate the listing and trading of additional types of actively-managed exchange-traded products that principally hold municipal bonds and that will enhance competition among market participants, to the benefit of investors and the marketplace. As noted above, the Exchange has in place surveillance procedures relating to trading in the Shares and may obtain information via ISG from other exchanges that are members of ISG or with which the Exchange has entered into a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement. In addition, as noted above, investors will have ready access to information regarding each Fund's holdings, IOPV, Disclosed Portfolio, and quotation and last sale information for the Shares.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purpose of the Act. The Exchange notes that the proposed rule change will facilitate the listing and trading of additional types of actively-managed exchange-traded products that principally hold municipal bonds and that will enhance competition among market participants, to the benefit of investors and the marketplace.
No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change.
Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
(A) By order approve or disapprove the proposed rule change, or
(B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's Internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”).
Notice.
Notice of application for an order approving the substitution of certain securities pursuant to Section 26(c) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act” or “Act”) and an order of exemption pursuant to Section 17(b) of the Act from Section 17(a) of the Act.
Commonwealth Annuity and Life Insurance Company (“Commonwealth”) and Commonwealth Select Separate Account of Commonwealth Annuity and Life Insurance Company, Commonwealth Select Separate Account II of Commonwealth Annuity and Life Insurance Company, Commonwealth Select Separate Account III of Commonwealth Annuity and Life Insurance Company, Fulcrum Separate Account of Commonwealth Annuity and Life Insurance Company, Group VEL Account of Commonwealth Annuity and Life Insurance Company, Inheritage Account of Commonwealth Annuity and Life Insurance Company, Separate Account FUVUL of Commonwealth Annuity and Life Insurance Company, Separate Account IMO of Commonwealth Annuity and Life Insurance Company, Separate Account KG of Commonwealth Annuity and Life Insurance Company, Separate Account KGC of Commonwealth Annuity and Life Insurance Company, Separate Account VA-K of Commonwealth Annuity and Life Insurance Company, Separate Account VA-P of Commonwealth Annuity and Life Insurance Company, Separate Account VEL of Commonwealth Annuity and Life Insurance Company, Separate Account VEL II of Commonwealth Annuity and Life Insurance Company, Separate Account VEL III of Commonwealth Annuity and Life Insurance Company (collectively, the “Separate Accounts,” and together with Commonwealth, the “Section 26 Applicants”); and Forethought Variable Insurance Trust (the “Trust”), and Global Atlantic Investment Advisors, LLC (“Global Atlantic,” and collectively with the Section 26 Applicants, the “Section 17 Applicants”).
The Section 26 Applicants seek an order pursuant to Section 26(c) of the 1940 Act, approving the substitution of shares of 77 investment portfolios (each, an “Existing Portfolio,” and collectively, the “Existing Portfolios”) of 20 registered investment companies
The application was filed on April 29, 2016, and was amended and restated on October 18, 2016 and March 3, 2017.
An order granting the requested relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested persons may request a hearing by writing to the Secretary of the Commission and serving the Applicants with a copy of the request, personally or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on May 22, 2017 and should be accompanied by proof of service on the Applicants in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of service. Pursuant to Rule 0-5 under the Act, hearing requests should state the nature of the writer's interest, any facts bearing upon the desirability of a hearing on the matter, the reason for the request, and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request notification by writing to the Commission's Secretary.
Erin C. Loomis, Senior Counsel, at (202) 551-6721, or Holly Hunter-Ceci, Acting Assistant Chief Counsel at (202) 551-6825 (Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office).
The following is a summary of the application. The complete application may be obtained via the Commission's Web site by searching for the file number, or for an Applicant using the Company name box, at
1. Commonwealth is a life insurance company engaged in the business of writing individual and group annuity contracts and life insurance policies. Commonwealth was originally organized under the laws of Delaware in July 1974 and was subsequently re-domiciled in the state of Massachusetts effective December 31, 2002.
2. Prior to December 30, 2005, Commonwealth (formerly Allmerica Financial Life Insurance and Annuity Company) was an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of The Hanover Insurance Group (“THG”), formerly Allmerica Financial Corporation. On that date, THG completed the closing of the sale of Commonwealth to The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (“Goldman Sachs”). Effective September 1, 2006, Commonwealth changed its name from Allmerica Financial Life Insurance and
3. Each of the Separate Accounts meets the definition of “separate account,” as defined in Section 2(a)(37) of the 1940 Act and Rule 0-1(e) thereunder. The Separate Accounts are registered with the Commission under the 1940 Act as unit investment trusts. The assets of the Separate Accounts support the Contracts and interests in the Separate Accounts offered through such Contracts. Commonwealth is the legal owner of the assets in the Separate Accounts. The Separate Accounts are segmented into subaccounts, and each subaccount invests in an underlying registered open-end management investment company or a series thereof. A subaccount of one or more of the Separate Accounts corresponds to each of the Existing Portfolios. The business and affairs of the Separate Accounts, as unit investment trusts, are conducted by Commonwealth, as depositor thereof.
4. The Contracts are each registered under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “1933 Act”), on Form N-4 or Form N-6, as applicable. Each of the Contracts has particular fees, charges, and investment options, as described in the Contracts' respective registration statements.
5. The Contracts are individual or group deferred variable annuity contracts or variable life insurance policies. As set forth in the prospectuses for the Contracts, Commonwealth reserves the right to substitute shares of another registered investment company for the shares of any registered investment company already purchased or to be purchased in the future by the Separate Accounts.
6. Applicants propose, as set forth below, to substitute shares of the Replacement Portfolios for shares of the Existing Portfolios (“Substitutions”):