Federal Register Vol. 83, No.148,

Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 148 (August 1, 2018)

Page Range37421-37733
FR Document

83_FR_148
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
83 FR 37460 - Idaho (Boise, Caribou-Targhee, Salmon-Challis, and Sawtooth National Forests and Curlew National Grassland); Nevada (Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest); Utah (Ashley, Dixie, Fishlake, Manti-La Sal, and Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forests); Wyoming (Bridger-Teton National Forest); and Wyoming/Colorado (Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest and Thunder Basin National Grassland); Amendments to Land Management Plans for Greater Sage-Grouse ConservationPDF
83 FR 37515 - Government in the Sunshine Act Meeting NoticePDF
83 FR 37509 - COBRA Fees To Be Adjusted for Inflation in Fiscal Year 2019PDF
83 FR 37520 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; National Firearms Act Division and Firearms and Explosives Services Division Customer Service SurveyPDF
83 FR 37466 - Export Trade Certificate of ReviewPDF
83 FR 37516 - Certain Subsea Telecommunication Systems and Components Thereof; Commission Determination Not To Review an Initial Determination Granting a Motion for Leave To Amend the Complaint and Notice of Investigation To Reflect a Corporate Name ChangePDF
83 FR 37514 - Certain Clidinium Bromide and Products Containing Same; Commission Decision Not To Review an Initial Determination Granting Complainants' Unopposed Motion To Terminate the Investigation Based on the Withdrawal of the Amended Complaint; Termination of the InvestigationPDF
83 FR 37516 - Certain Programmable Logic Controller (PLCs), Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same; Commission Determination Not To Review an Initial Determination Granting a Motion of Non-Party North Coast To IntervenePDF
83 FR 37513 - Public Meeting of the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Work GroupPDF
83 FR 37606 - St. Paul & Pacific Railroad Company, LLC-Change in Operators Exemption-Santa Cruz and Monterey Bay Railway CompanyPDF
83 FR 37605 - Progressive Rail Incorporated-Continuance in Control Exemption-St. Paul & Pacific Railroad Company, LLCPDF
83 FR 37616 - Quarterly Publication of Individuals, Who Have Chosen To Expatriate, as Required by Section 6039GPDF
83 FR 37423 - Addition of Certain Entities; and Modification of Entry on the Entity ListPDF
83 FR 37473 - Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the Ketchikan Berth IV Expansion ProjectPDF
83 FR 37635 - Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses; Notice of MeetingPDF
83 FR 37636 - Agency Information Collection Activity: Description of MaterialsPDF
83 FR 37440 - Titanium dioxide; Exemption From the Requirement of a TolerancePDF
83 FR 37434 - Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin; Modification of Greenhouse Gas LanguagePDF
83 FR 37520 - Bulk Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Application: Chemtos, LLCPDF
83 FR 37524 - Importer of Controlled Substances Application: Cody Laboratories Inc.PDF
83 FR 37525 - Importer of Controlled Substances Application: Galephar Pharmaceutical Research Inc.PDF
83 FR 37525 - Importer of Controlled Substances Application: Ultra Scientific Inc.PDF
83 FR 37525 - Importer of Controlled Substances Application: Anderson Brecon, Inc.PDF
83 FR 37450 - Interlocking Officers and Directors; Requirements for Applicants and HoldersPDF
83 FR 37455 - Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Permit Renewal ApplicationsPDF
83 FR 37495 - Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC; Notice of Request Under Blanket AuthorizationPDF
83 FR 37491 - Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP; Notice of ApplicationPDF
83 FR 37493 - D'Lo Gas Storage, LLC; Notice of ApplicationPDF
83 FR 37488 - State Energy Advisory Board (STEAB)PDF
83 FR 37489 - Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Oak RidgePDF
83 FR 37490 - Biomass Research and Development Technical Advisory CommitteePDF
83 FR 37493 - Notice of Commission Staff AttendancePDF
83 FR 37489 - Notice of Request for Information (RFI) on National Wind Technology Center Facility and Infrastructure InvestmentsPDF
83 FR 37488 - Notice of Request for Information (RFI) on National Offshore Wind Energy R&D Test FacilitiesPDF
83 FR 37512 - Public Land Order No. 7871; Partial Withdrawal Revocation, Power Site Classification No. 361 and Modification of Public Land Order No. 7448; ColoradoPDF
83 FR 37465 - Ripe Olives From Spain: Antidumping Duty OrderPDF
83 FR 37469 - Ripe Olives From Spain: Amended Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Countervailing Duty OrderPDF
83 FR 37471 - Polyester Staple Fiber From the Republic of Korea: Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2017-2018PDF
83 FR 37463 - Steel Propane Cylinders From the People's Republic of China: Postponement of Preliminary Determination in the Countervailing Duty InvestigationPDF
83 FR 37467 - Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Advance Notification of Sunset ReviewPDF
83 FR 37463 - Initiation of Five-Year (Sunset) ReviewsPDF
83 FR 37462 - Foreign-Trade Zone 163-Ponce, Puerto Rico; Application for Subzone; Liquilux Gas Corporation; Ponce, Puerto RicoPDF
83 FR 37615 - Proposed Collection of Information: Claim for Lost, Stolen, or Destroyed U.S. Savings Bonds and Supplemental Statement for U.S. SecuritiesPDF
83 FR 37615 - Proposed Collection of Information: Request by Fiduciary for Distribution of United States Treasury SecuritiesPDF
83 FR 37634 - Pricing for the Presidential Silver Medals ProgramPDF
83 FR 37508 - Current List of HHS-Certified Laboratories and Instrumented Initial Testing Facilities Which Meet Minimum Standards To Engage in Urine Drug Testing for Federal AgenciesPDF
83 FR 37631 - Privacy Act of 1974; System of RecordsPDF
83 FR 37448 - Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Ocean Perch in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management AreaPDF
83 FR 37472 - Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; General Provisions for Domestic Fisheries; Monkfish Research Set-Aside Exempted Fishing Permit AdjustmentPDF
83 FR 37517 - Certain Pasta From Italy and Turkey; Institution of Five-Year ReviewsPDF
83 FR 37514 - Certain Water Filters and Components Thereof Institution of InvestigationPDF
83 FR 37487 - Patent Public Advisory Committee Public Hearing on the Proposed Patent Fee SchedulePDF
83 FR 37437 - Air Plan Approval; Connecticut; Infrastructure State Implementation Plan Requirements; Prevention of Significant Deterioration Permit Program RevisionsPDF
83 FR 37526 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; New CollectionPDF
83 FR 37537 - Information Collection: Domestic Licensing of Source MaterialPDF
83 FR 37579 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats BZX Exchange, Inc.; Order Setting Aside Action by Delegated Authority and Disapproving a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendments No. 1 and 2, To List and Trade Shares of the Winklevoss Bitcoin TrustPDF
83 FR 37544 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.; Notice of Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on a Proposed Rule Change Relating to ATS Reporting of Transactions to TRACE in U.S. Treasury SecuritiesPDF
83 FR 37569 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; Notice of Withdrawal of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 4702(b)(14) To Establish a Price Improvement Only Variation on the Midpoint Extended Life OrderPDF
83 FR 37560 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Regarding Investments of the First Trust TCW Unconstrained Plus Bond ETFPDF
83 FR 37556 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE American LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the NYSE American Equities Price List and the NYSE American Options Fee Schedule Related to Co-Location Services in Connection With a Proposed Transaction With the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. Exchange and Its Parent, CHX Holdings, Inc.PDF
83 FR 37548 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its Price List Related to Co-Location Services in Connection With a Proposed Transaction With the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. Exchange and Its Parent, CHX Holdings, Inc.PDF
83 FR 37545 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the NYSE Arca Options Fees and Charges and the NYSE Arca Equities Fees and Charges Related to Co-Location Services in Connection With a Proposed Transaction With the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. Exchange and Its Parent, CHX Holdings, Inc.PDF
83 FR 37552 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE National, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its Schedule of Fees and Rebates Related to Co-Location Services in Connection With a Proposed Transaction With the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. Exchange and Its Parent, CHX Holdings, Inc.PDF
83 FR 37538 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend MSRB Rule A-13 to Temporarily Reduce the Rate of Assessment for the MSRB's Underwriting, Transaction and Technology Fees on Brokers, Dealers and Municipal Securities DealersPDF
83 FR 37541 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Depository Trust Company; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Make Clarifying Changes and Updates to the DTC Underwriting Service GuidePDF
83 FR 37570 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation; Notice of No Objection to Advance Notice, as Modified by Amendments No. 1 and 2, Concerning Proposed Changes to the Options Clearing Corporation's Stress Testing and Clearing Fund MethodologyPDF
83 FR 37500 - Outsourcing Facility Fee Rates for Fiscal Year 2019PDF
83 FR 37605 - Ironwood Mezzanine Fund IV-A, L.P.; Notice Seeking Exemption Under Section 312 of the Small Business Investment Act, Conflicts of InterestPDF
83 FR 37605 - Stellus Capital SBIC, L.P.; Notice Seeking Exemption Under Section 312 of the Small Business Investment Act, Conflicts of InterestPDF
83 FR 37435 - Air Plan Approval; Vermont; Infrastructure Requirement for the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality StandardPDF
83 FR 37614 - Requested Administrative Waiver of the Coastwise Trade Laws: Vessel LA DOLCE VITA; Invitation for Public CommentsPDF
83 FR 37461 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 37462 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 37614 - Request for Comments on the Renewal of a Previously Approved Information Collection: Maritime Administration Service Obligation Compliance Annual ReportPDF
83 FR 37613 - Requested Administrative Waiver of the Coastwise Trade Laws: Vessel TEDDY BEAR; Invitation for Public CommentsPDF
83 FR 37613 - Requested Administrative Waiver of the Coastwise Trade Laws: Vessel NINE LIVES; Invitation for Public CommentsPDF
83 FR 37530 - American Centrifuge Operating, LCC; Lead Cascade FacilityPDF
83 FR 37606 - Proposed Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 37529 - Exelon Generation Company, LLC; Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3PDF
83 FR 37528 - Information Collection: Request for Taxpayer Identification NumberPDF
83 FR 37635 - Solicitation of Nominations for Appointment to the Geriatrics and Gerontology Advisory CommitteePDF
83 FR 37494 - North American Electric Reliability Corporation; Notice of Staff Review of Enforcement ProgramsPDF
83 FR 37490 - Rugraw, LLC; Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Lassen Lodge Hydroelectric ProjectPDF
83 FR 37491 - Indiana Michigan Power Company; Notice of Intent To File License Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document (PAD), Commencement of Pre-Filing Process, and Scoping; Request for Comments on the PAD and Scoping Document, and Identification of Issues and Associated Study RequestsPDF
83 FR 37511 - The President's National Security Telecommunications Advisory CommitteePDF
83 FR 37433 - Provision of Early Intervention Services to Eligible Infants and Toddlers With Disabilities and Their Families, and Special Education Children With Disabilities Within the Section 6 School ArrangementsPDF
83 FR 37532 - LaCrosse Solutions, LLC; Dairyland Power Cooperative La Crosse Boiling Water ReactorPDF
83 FR 37529 - Interim Staff Guidance for Decommissioning Funding Plans for Materials LicenseesPDF
83 FR 37535 - Information Collection: NRC Form 748, National Source Tracking Transaction ReportPDF
83 FR 37527 - Information Collection: Standards for Protection Against RadiationPDF
83 FR 37459 - Texas A&M AgriLife Research; Availability of a Draft Plant Pest Risk Assessment and Draft Environmental Assessment for Cotton Genetically Engineered for Ultra-low Gossypol Levels in the CottonseedPDF
83 FR 37446 - Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; Adjustments to 2018 North and South Atlantic Swordfish QuotasPDF
83 FR 37504 - Prescription Drug User Fee Rates for Fiscal Year 2019PDF
83 FR 37511 - Notice of Realty Action: Application for Conveyance of Federally Owned Mineral Interests in Pima County, AZPDF
83 FR 37512 - Notice of Temporary Closures of Public Land in Washoe County, NevadaPDF
83 FR 37495 - Notice for Proposed Model Family Foster Home Licensing StandardsPDF
83 FR 37444 - Vacatur Response-CERCLA/EPCRA Administrative Reporting Exemption for Air Releases of Hazardous Substances From Animal Waste at Farms; FARM Act Amendments to CERCLA Release Notification RequirementsPDF
83 FR 37422 - Amendment of Class E Airspace; Lyons, KSPDF
83 FR 37421 - Amendment of Class D Airspace; Erie, PAPDF
83 FR 37468 - Stainless Steel Flanges From the People's Republic of China: Antidumping Duty OrderPDF
83 FR 37433 - Availability of Department of the Navy Records and Publication of Department of the Navy Documents Affecting the PublicPDF
83 FR 37638 - Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Alaska Fisheries Science Center Fisheries ResearchPDF
83 FR 37455 - Significant New Use Rules on Certain Chemical SubstancesPDF
83 FR 37702 - Significant New Use Rules on Certain Chemical SubstancesPDF

Issue

83 148 Wednesday, August 1, 2018 Contents Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

See

Forest Service

Alcohol Tobacco Firearms Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: National Firearms Act Division and Firearms and Explosives Services Division Customer Service Survey, 37520 2018-16487 Animal Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service NOTICES Environmental Assessments; Availability, etc.: Texas A and M AgriLife Research; Cotton Genetically Engineered for Ultra-Low Gossypol Levels in Cottonseed, 37459-37460 2018-16389 Children Children and Families Administration NOTICES Proposed Model Family Foster Home Licensing Standards, 37495-37500 2018-16380 Commerce Commerce Department See

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

See

Industry and Security Bureau

See

International Trade Administration

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

See

Patent and Trademark Office

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 37461-37462 2018-16409 2018-16410 2018-16411
Defense Department Defense Department See

Navy Department

RULES Provision of Early Intervention Services to Eligible Infants and Toddlers With Disabilities and Their Families, and Special Education Children With Disabilities Within Section 6 School Arrangements, 37433 2018-16394
Drug Drug Enforcement Administration NOTICES Bulk Manufacturer of Controlled Substances; Applications: Chemtos, LLC, 37520-37524 2018-16468 Importer of Controlled Substances; Applications: Anderson Brecon, Inc., 37525-37526 2018-16464 Cody Laboratories, Inc., 37524-37525 2018-16467 Galephar Pharmaceutical Research, Inc., 37525 2018-16466 Ultra Scientific, Inc., 37525 2018-16465 Energy Department Energy Department See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

NOTICES Meetings: Biomass Research and Development Technical Advisory Committee, 37490 2018-16456 Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Oak Ridge, 37489-37490 2018-16457 State Energy Advisory Board; Teleconference, 37488 2018-16458 Requests for Information: National Offshore Wind Energy R and D Test Facilities, 37488-37489 2018-16453 National Wind Technology Center Facility and Infrastructure Investments, 37489 2018-16454
Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Administrative Reporting Exemption for Air Releases of Hazardous Substances From Animal Waste at Farms and Release Notification Requirements; Vacatur Response, 37444-37446 2018-16379 Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Connecticut; Infrastructure State Implementation Plan Requirements; Prevention of Significant Deterioration Permit Program Revisions, 37437-37440 2018-16431 Vermont; Infrastructure Requirement for 2010 Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard, 37435-37437 2018-16413 Wisconsin; Modification of Greenhouse Gas Language, 37434-37435 2018-16469 Significant New Use Rules on Certain Chemical Substances, 37702-37733 2018-15995 Tolerance Exemptions: Titanium dioxide, 37440-37443 2018-16470 PROPOSED RULES Significant New Use Rules on Certain Chemical Substances, 37455 2018-15996 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration RULES Amendment of Class D Airspace: Erie, PA, 37421-37422 2018-16362 Amendment of Class E Airspace: Lyons, KS, 37422-37423 2018-16363 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission PROPOSED RULES Interlocking Officers and Directors; Requirements for Applicants and Holders, 37450-37455 2018-16463 NOTICES Applications: D'Lo Gas Storage, LLC, 37493-37494 2018-16459 Gulf South Pipeline Co., LP, 37491 2018-16460 Indiana Michigan Power Co., 37491-37493 2018-16396 Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Rugraw, LLC; Lassen Lodge Hydroelectric Project, 37490-37491 2018-16397 Requests Under Blanket Authorizations: Florida Gas Transmission Co., LLC, 37495 2018-16461 Staff Attendances, 37493 2018-16455 Staff Review of Enforcement Programs: North American Electric Reliability Corp., 37494-37495 2018-16398 Federal Railroad Federal Railroad Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 37606-37612 2018-16403 Fiscal Fiscal Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Claim for Lost, Stolen, or Destroyed U.S. Savings Bonds and Supplemental Statement for U.S. Securities, 37615 2018-16443 Request by Fiduciary for Distribution of United States Treasury Securities, 37615-37616 2018-16442 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration NOTICES Outsourcing Facility Fee Rates for Fiscal Year 2019, 37500-37504 2018-16416 Prescription Drug User Fee Rates for Fiscal Year 2019, 37504-37507 2018-16387 Foreign Trade Foreign-Trade Zones Board NOTICES Subzone Applications: Liquilux Gas Corp., Ponce, PR, 37462-37463 2018-16444 Forest Forest Service NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Idaho; Nevada; Wyoming; and Wyoming/Colorado Amendments to Land Management Plans for Greater Sage-Grouse Conservation, 37460-37461 2018-16556 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Children and Families Administration

See

Food and Drug Administration

See

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration

Homeland Homeland Security Department See

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

NOTICES Meetings: President's National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee, 37511 2018-16395
Industry Industry and Security Bureau RULES Addition of Certain Entities; and Modification of Entry on Entity List, 37423-37433 2018-16474 Interior Interior Department See

Land Management Bureau

See

Reclamation Bureau

Internal Revenue Internal Revenue Service NOTICES Quarterly Publication of Individuals, Who Have Chosen To Expatriate, 37616-37631 2018-16475 International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Advance Notification of Sunset Review, 37467-37468 2018-16446 Initiation of Five-Year (Sunset) Reviews, 37463-37464 2018-16445 Polyester Staple Fiber From Republic of Korea: 2017-2018 Review; Rescission, 37471-37472 2018-16448 Ripe Olives From Spain, 37465-37466, 37469-37471 2018-16449 2018-16450 Stainless Steel Flanges From the People's Republic of China, 37468-37469 2018-16348 Steel Propane Cylinders From the People's Republic of China, 37463 2018-16447 Export Trade Certificates of Review: Ginseng Board of Wisconsin, Inc., 37466-37467 2018-16486 International Trade Com International Trade Commission NOTICES Investigations; Determinations, Modifications, and Rulings, etc.: Certain Clidinium Bromide and Products Containing Same; Termination of Investigation, 37514 2018-16484 Certain Pasta From Italy and Turkey, 37517-37520 2018-16435 Certain Programmable Logic Controller, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same, 37516 2018-16483 Certain Subsea Telecommunication Systems and Components Thereof, 37516-37517 2018-16485 Certain Water Filters and Components Thereof, 37514-37515 2018-16434 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 37515 2018-16552 Justice Department Justice Department See

Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau

See

Drug Enforcement Administration

See

Justice Programs Office

Justice Programs Justice Programs Office NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 37526-37527 2018-16430 Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Public Land Orders: Partial Withdrawal Revocation, Power Site Classification No. 361 and Modification of Public Land Order No. 7448; Colorado, 37512-37513 2018-16451 Public Lands; Temporary Closures: Washoe County, NV, 37512 2018-16384 Realty Actions: Application for Conveyance of Federally Owned Mineral Interests in Pima County, AZ, 37511-37512 2018-16385 Maritime Maritime Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 37614 2018-16407 Requests for Administrative Waivers of the Coastwise Trade Laws: TEDDY BEAR, 37613 2018-16406 Vessel LA DOLCE VITA, 37614-37615 2018-16412 Vessel NINE LIVES, 37613-37614 2018-16405 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RULES Atlantic Highly Migratory Species: Adjustments to 2018 North and South Atlantic Swordfish Quotas, 37446-37448 2018-16388 Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska: Pacific Ocean Perch in Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area, 37448-37449 2018-16438 PROPOSED RULES Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic: Permit Renewal Applications, 37455-37458 2018-16462 Taking and Importing Marine Mammals: Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Alaska Fisheries Science Center Fisheries Research, 37638-37699 2018-16114 NOTICES Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions: General Provisions for Domestic Fisheries; Monkfish Research Set-Aside Exempted Fishing Permit Adjustment, 37472-37473 2018-16437 Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities: Ketchikan Berth IV Expansion Project, 37473-37487 2018-16473 Navy Navy Department RULES Availability of Department of Navy Records and Publication of Department of Navy Documents Affecting Public, 37433 2018-16347 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Domestic Licensing of Source Material, 37537-37538 2018-16428 National Source Tracking Transaction Report, 37535-37536 2018-16391 Request for Taxpayer Identification Number, 37528-37529 2018-16401 Standards for Protection Against Radiation, 37527-37528 2018-16390 Environmental Assessments; Availability, etc.: American Centrifuge Operating, LCC, Lead Cascade Facility, 37530-37532 2018-16404 Exemptions: LaCrosseSolutions, LLC; Dairyland Power Coop. La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor, 37532-37535 2018-16393 Interim Staff Guidance: Decommissioning Funding Plans for Materials Licensees, 37529-37530 2018-16392 License Renewals; Applications: Exelon Generation Co., LLC; Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3, 37529 2018-16402 Patent Patent and Trademark Office NOTICES Hearings: Patent Public Advisory Committee, 37487-37488 2018-16432 Reclamation Reclamation Bureau NOTICES Meetings: Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Work Group, 37513 2018-16481 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Bats BZX Exchange, Inc., 37579-37605 2018-16427 Depository Trust Co., 37541-37544 2018-16418 Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc., 37544-37545 2018-16426 Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board, 37538-37541 2018-16419 Nasdaq Stock Market, LLC, 37569-37570 2018-16425 New York Stock Exchange, LLC, 37548-37552 2018-16422 NYSE American, LLC, 37556-37559 2018-16423 NYSE Arca, Inc., 37545-37548, 37560-37569 2018-16421 2018-16424 NYSE National, Inc., 37552-37556 2018-16420 Options Clearing Corp., 37570-37579 2018-16417 Small Business Small Business Administration NOTICES Conflicts of Interest; Exemptions: Ironwood Mezzanine Fund IV-A, LP, 37605 2018-16415 Stellus Capital SBIC, LP, 37605 2018-16414 Substance Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration NOTICES Certified Laboratories and Instrumented Initial Testing Facilities: Urine Drug Testing for Federal Agencies, 37508-37509 2018-16440 Surface Transportation Surface Transportation Board NOTICES Changes in Operator Exemptions: St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Co., LLC; Santa Cruz and Monterey Bay Railway Co., 37606 2018-16478 Continuances in Control; Exemptions: Progressive Rail Inc.; St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Co., LLC, 37605-37606 2018-16477 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

Federal Railroad Administration

See

Maritime Administration

Treasury Treasury Department See

Fiscal Service

See

Internal Revenue Service

See

United States Mint

NOTICES Privacy Act; Systems of Records, 37631-37634 2018-16439
Customs U.S. Customs and Border Protection NOTICES COBRA Fees To Be Adjusted for Inflation in Fiscal Year 2019, 37509-37511 2018-16510 U.S. Mint United States Mint NOTICES Pricing for Presidential Silver Medals Program, 37634-37635 2018-16441 Veteran Affairs Veterans Affairs Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Description of Materials, 37636 2018-16471 Meetings: Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses, 37635-37636 2018-16472 Requests for Nominations: Appointment to Geriatrics and Gerontology Advisory Committee, 37635 2018-16400 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Commerce Department, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 37638-37699 2018-16114 Part III Environmental Protection Agency, 37702-37733 2018-15995 Reader Aids

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

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

83 148 Wednesday, August 1, 2018 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0679; Airspace Docket No. 18-AEA-14] RIN-2120-AA66 Amendment of Class D Airspace; Erie, PA AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule; technical amendment.

SUMMARY:

This action amends the legal description of the Class D airspace at Erie International Airport/Tom Ridge Field, Erie, PA, by correcting a printing error in the latitude coordinate symbols for the airport. This action does not affect the boundaries or operating requirements of the airspace.

DATES:

Effective 0901 UTC, August 1, 2018. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES:

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

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

John Fornito, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, 1701 Columbia Ave., College Park, GA 30337; telephone (404) 305-6364.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, 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 corrects a printing error in the geographic coordinates of Erie International Airport/Tom Ridge Field, Erie, PA.

History

The FAA Aeronautical Information Services branch found the latitude coordinate for Erie International Airport/Tom Ridge Field, Erie, PA, in Class D airspace, was incorrectly published in the Federal Register of May 23, 2018 (83 FR 23798). The minute latitude degrees were incorrectly listed as seconds. Class D airspace designations are published in paragraph 5000 of FAA Order 7400.11B dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15, 2017, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR part 71.1. The Class D airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

This document amends FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15, 2017. FAA Order 7400.11B is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11B lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

The Rule

This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by correcting a printing error in the geographic coordinates of Erie International Airport/Tom Ridge Field, Erie, PA, in Class D airspace. The coordinates are changed from (lat. 42°04′59″ N, long. 80°10′26″ W) to (lat. 42°04′59″ N, long. 80°10′26″ W).

Administratively, this change does not affect the boundaries, or operating requirements of the airspace, therefore, notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are unnecessary.

In consideration of the need correctly state the airport reference point (coordinates) to avoid confusion on the part of pilots flying in the vicinity of the airport, the FAA finds good cause, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d), for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. Therefore, this regulation: (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 only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, “Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures,” paragraph 5-6.5.a. This airspace action is not expected to cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

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

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

§ 71.1 [Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation Administration Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017, effective September 15, 2017, is amended as follows: Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace. AEA PA D  Erie, PA [Amended] Erie International Airport/Tom Ridge Field, PA (Lat. 42°04′59″ N, long. 80°10′26″ W)

That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 3,200 feet MSL within a 4.2-mile radius of Erie International Airport/Tom Ridge Field. This Class D airspace area is effective during the specific days and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective days and times will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

Issued in College Park, Georgia, on July 23, 2018. Ryan W. Almasy, Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic Organization.
[FR Doc. 2018-16362 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0139; Airspace Docket No. 18-ACE-1] RIN 2120-AA66 Amendment of Class E Airspace; Lyons, KS AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This action modifies Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface, at Lyons-Rice Municipal Airport, Lyons, KS. This action is necessary due to the decommissioning of the Lyons non-directional radio beacon (NDB), and cancellation of the NDB approach, and would enhance the safety and management of standard instrument approach procedures for instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at this airport. Additionally, the geographic coordinates have been updated to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database.

DATES:

Effective 0901 UTC, November 8, 2018. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under Title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES:

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

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Rebecca Shelby, Federal Aviation Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone (817) 222-5857.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

History

The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register (83 FR 16261; April 16, 2018) for Docket No. FAA-2018-0139 to amend Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface, at Lyons-Rice Municipal Airport, Lyons, KS. Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.

Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.11B, dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15, 2017, 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.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

This document amends FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15, 2017. FAA Order 7400.11B is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11B lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

The Rule

The FAA amends Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by amending Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Lyons-Rice Municipal Airport; by removing the Lyons NDB and the associated approach; and updating the geographic coordinates of the airport to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database.

Airspace reconfiguration is necessary due to decommissioning and cancellation of the Lyons NDB and NDB approach, and to support the safety and management of IFR operations at this airport.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

Environmental Review

The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, “Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures,” paragraph 5-6.5.a. This airspace action is not expected to cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

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

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

§ 71.1 [Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15, 2017, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. ACE KS E5 Lyons, KS [Amended] Lyons-Rice Municipal Airport, KS (Lat. 38°20′31″ N, long. 98°13′38″ W)

That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.5-mile radius of Lyons-Rice County Municipal Airport.

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on July 24, 2018. Walter Tweedy, Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2018-16363 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of Industry and Security 15 CFR Part 744 [Docket No. 170714666-7666-01] RIN 0694-AH42 Addition of Certain Entities; and Modification of Entry on the Entity List AGENCY:

Bureau of Industry and Security, Commerce.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This rule amends the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) by adding forty-four entities (eight entities and thirty-six subordinate institutions) to the Entity List. The entities that are being added to the Entity List have been determined by the U.S. Government to be acting contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests of the United States. These entities will be listed on the Entity List under the destination of China. This rule also modifies one entry under China to provide additional addresses and names for the entity at issue.

DATES:

This rule is effective August 1, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Chair, End-User Review Committee, Office of the Assistant Secretary, Export Administration, Bureau of Industry and Security, Department of Commerce, Phone: (202) 482-5991, Email: [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The Entity List (Supplement No. 4 to part 744) identifies entities reasonably believed to be involved, or to pose a significant risk of being or becoming involved, in activities contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests of the United States. The EAR imposes additional license requirements on, and limits the availability of most license exceptions for, exports, reexports, and transfers (in-country) to listed entities. The “license review policy” for each listed entity is identified in the License Review Policy column on the Entity List and the impact on the availability of license exceptions is described in the Federal Register notice adding entities to the Entity List. BIS places entities on the Entity List pursuant to sections of part 744 (Control Policy: End-User and End-Use Based) and part 746 (Embargoes and Other Special Controls) of the EAR.

The End-User Review Committee (ERC), composed of representatives of the Departments of Commerce (Chair), State, Defense, Energy and, where appropriate, the Treasury, makes all decisions regarding additions to, removals from, or other modifications to the Entity List. The ERC makes all decisions to add an entry to the Entity List by majority vote and all decisions to remove or modify an entry by unanimous vote.

ERC Entity List Decisions Additions to the Entity List

This rule implements the decision of the ERC to add forty-four entities (eight entities and thirty-six of their subordinate institutions) to the Entity List. These entities are being added on the basis of § 744.11 (License requirements that apply to entities acting contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests of the United States) of the EAR. All of the entities added as part of this rule are located in China.

The ERC reviewed § 744.11(b) (Criteria for revising the Entity List) in making the determination to add these entities to the Entity List. Under that paragraph, entities for which there is reasonable cause to believe, based on specific and articulable facts, that the entity has been involved, is involved, or poses a significant risk of being or becoming involved in, activities that are contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests of the United States, and those acting on behalf of such entity, may be added to the Entity List. Paragraphs (b)(1) through (5) of § 744.11 provide an illustrative list of activities that could be contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests of the United States.

The ERC determined that seventeen entities, China Electronic Technology Group Corporation (CETC) 13, and twelve of its subordinate institutions; CETC-55, and two of its subordinate institutions; and Hebei Far East Communication System Engineering, all located in China, be added to the Entity List for actions contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests of the United States. These seventeen entities are being added to the Entity List on the basis of their involvement in the procurement of U.S.-origin items for activities contrary to the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States. Specifically, the ERC determined that there is reasonable cause to believe, based on specific and articulable facts, that all of these entities are involved in the illicit procurement of commodities and technologies for unauthorized military end-use in China.

The ERC determined that twenty-seven entities, China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation Second Academy, and thirteen of its subordinate institutions; China Electronics Technology Group Corporation 14th Research Institute, and two of its subordinate institutions; China Electronics Technology Group Corporation 38th Research Institute, and seven of its subordinate institutions; China Tech Hi Industry Import and Export Corporation; and China Volant Industry, all located in China, be added to the Entity List for actions contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests of the United States. The ERC determined that for these twenty-seven entities there is reasonable cause to believe, based on specific and articulable facts, that there is an unacceptable risk of use in (or diversion of U.S.-origin items to) military end-use activities in China.

Pursuant to § 744.11(b) of the EAR, the ERC determined that the conduct of all forty-four of these entities raises sufficient concern that prior review of exports, reexports or transfers (in-country) of all items subject to the EAR involving these entities, and the possible imposition of license conditions or license denials on shipments to the entities, will enhance BIS's ability to prevent violations of the EAR.

For all forty-four entities added to the Entity List in this final rule, BIS imposes a license requirement for all items subject to the EAR, and a license review policy of presumption of denial. The license requirements apply to any transaction in which items are to be exported, reexported or transferred (in-country) to any of the entities or in which such entities act as purchaser, intermediate consignee, ultimate consignee, or end-user. In addition, no license exceptions are available for exports, reexports or transfers (in-country) to the entities being added to the Entity List in this rule. The acronym “a.k.a.” (also known as) is used in entries on the Entity List to identify aliases and help exporters, reexporters and transferors to better identify entities on the Entity List.

This rule adds the following entities to the Entity List:

China

(1) China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation Second Academy, a.k.a., the following eight aliases, and thirteen subordinate institutions:

—China Changfeng Mechanics and Electronics Technology Academy; —China Chang Feng Mechano-Electronic Engineering Academy; —CASIC Second Academy; —China Chang Feng Mechano-Electronic Engineering Company; —CASIC Academy of Defense Technology; —Second Research Academy of CASIC; —Changfeng Electromechanical Technology Design Institute; and —China Chang Feng Mechanics and Electronics Technology Academy. Subordinate Institution

Second Design Department, a.k.a., the following two aliases:

—Beijing Institute of Electronics Systems Engineering; and —Second Planning Department. Subordinate Institution

23rd Research Institute, a.k.a., the following two aliases:

—Beijing Institute of Radio Measurement; and —BIRM. Subordinate Institution

25th Research Institute, a.k.a., the following one alias:

—Beijing Institute of Remote Sensing Equipment. Subordinate Institution

201 Research Institute, a.k.a., the following one alias:

—Aerospace Science and Technology Defense Technology Research and Experimental Center. Subordinate Institution

203rd Research Institute, a.k.a., the following two aliases:

—Beijing Radio Measurement and Testing Institute; and —Beijing Institute of Radio Metrology and Measurement. Subordinate Institution

204th Research Institute, a.k.a., the following two aliases:

—Beijing Institute of Computer Applications and Simulation Technology; and —706th Research Institute. Subordinate Institution

206th Research Institute, a.k.a., the following two aliases:

—Beijing Institute of Mechanical Equipment; and —Beijing Institute of Machinery and Equipment. Subordinate Institution

207th Research Institute, a.k.a., the following three aliases:

—Beijing Guangda Optoelectronics; —Beijing Institute of Environmental Features; and —Beijing Institute of Environmental Characteristics. Subordinate Institution

208th Research Institute, a.k.a., the following one alias:

—Beijing Electronic Document Service Center. Subordinate Institution

210th Research Institute, a.k.a., the following one alias:

—Xian Changfeng Electromechanical Institute. Subordinate Institution

283 Factory, a.k.a., the following one alias:

—Beijing Xinfeng Machinery Factory. Subordinate Institution

284 Factory, a.k.a., the following two aliases:

—Beijing Changfeng Machinery Factory; and —Beijing Changfeng Xinlian Project Management. Subordinate Institution

699 Factory, a.k.a., the following one alias:

—Beijing Xinli Machinery Factory.

The following addresses apply to the entity and to the thirteen subordinate institutions:

50 Yongding Road, Haidian District, Beijing, China; and 51 Yongding Road, Haidian District, Beijing, China; and 52 Yongding Road, Haidian District, Beijing, China; and 58 Yongding Road, Haidian District, Beijing, China; and 90 Dianzi Road, Section One, Xian, China.

(2) China Electronics Technology Group Corporation 13th Research Institute (CETC 13), a.k.a., the following six aliases, and twelve subordinate institutions:

—Hebei Semiconductor Research Institute; —HSRI; —Hebei Institute of Semiconductors; —Heibei Semiconductor Institute; —Hebei Semiconductor; and —CETC Research Institute 13.

113 Hezuo Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Street, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China;

Subordinate Institution

Bowei Integrated Circuits, a.k.a., the following three aliases:

—Hebei Bowei Integrated; —Hebei Bowel Technology; and —Shijuang Bowei.

113 Hezuo Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Street, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and Shijiazhuang New and Hi-Tech Dev Zone, Hebei, China.

Subordinate Institution

Envoltek, a.k.a., the following one alias:

—Hebei Envoltek Electronics.

21 Changsheng Street, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China.

Subordinate Institution

Hebei Sinopack Electronics, a.k.a., the following one alias:

—Hebei Sinapack Elec.

113 Hezuo Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Street, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China.

Subordinate Institution

Hebei Brightway International,

21 Changsheng Street, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China.

Subordinate Institution

Hebei Medicines Health,

113 Hezuo Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China.

Subordinate Institution

Hebei Poshing Electronics, a.k.a., the following three aliases:

—Hebei Poshin Electronics; —Hebei Poshing Elec.; and —Hubei PoshingElectronics.

113 Hezuo Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Street, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China.

Subordinate Institution

Hebei Puxing Electronic,

113 Hezuo Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Street, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China.

Subordinate Institution

Micro Electronic Technology, a.k.a., the following three aliases:

—Micro Electronic Technology Development Application Corp; —METDA; —METDAC.

113 Hezuo Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China.

Subordinate Institution

Shijiazhuang Development Zone Maiteda Microelectronics Technology Development and Application Corporation,

21 Changsheng Street, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China.

Subordinate Institution

MT Microsystems,

113 Hezuo Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China.

Subordinate Institution

North China Integrated Circuit Corporation,

21 Changsheng Street, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 113 Hezuo Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China.

Subordinate Institution

Tonghui Electronics, a.k.a., the following one alias:

—Tonghui Electronics Technology.

21 Changsheng Street, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China;

(3) China Electronics Technology Group Corporation 14th Research Institute (CETC 14), a.k.a., the following seven aliases, and two subordinate institutions:

—Nanjing Research Institute of Electronics Technology; —NRIET; —Nanjing Electronics Technology Institute; —Ministry of Information Industry Electronics; —No 14 Research Institute; —Research Institute 14; and —CETC Research Institute 14. Subordinate Institution

Nanjing SunSea Industry Corporation.

Subordinate Institution

Nanjing Institute of Radio Technology,

The following addresses apply to the entity and to the two subordinate institutions:

No 1 Dinghuaimen, Nanjing, China; and No 8 Guorui Road, Yuhua District, Nanjing, China; and No 4 Guping Gang, Nanjing, China; and 52 Huju Road, North, Nanjing, China;

(4) China Electronics Technology Group Corporation 38th Research Institute (CETC 38), a.k.a., the following seven aliases, and seven subordinate institutions:

—Hefei Institute of Electronic Engineering; —Southwest China Research Institute of Radar Technology; —East China Research Institute of Electronic Engineering; —ECRIEE; —No 38 Research Institute; —Research Institute 38; and —CETC Research Institute 38. Subordinate Institution

Anhui Sun-Create Electronics.

Subordinate Institution

Anhui Bowei Chang An Electronics.

Subordinate Institution

ECU Electronic Industrial.

Subordinate Institution

Hefei ECU-TAMURA Electric.

Subordinate Institution

Anhui Bowei Guangcheng Information Technology.

Subordinate Institution

Anhui Bowei Ruida Electronics Technology.

Subordinate Institution

Brainware Terahertz.

The following addresses apply to the entity and to the seven subordinate institutions:

199 Xiangzhang Ave, Hefei, Anhui, China; and 19 He Huan Lu, Hefei, China; and 19 Hehuan Road, Hefei, China; and 418 Guilin Road, Shanghai, China; and 260 Ji Xi Road, Hefei, China; and 88 Pihe Road, Hefei, China; and Forward Road, Economics Development Zone of Luan, Luan, Anhui, China;

(5) China Electronics Technology Group Corporation 55th Research Institute (CETC 55), a.k.a., the following four aliases, and two subordinate institutions:

—Nanjing Electronic Devices Institute; —CETC Research Institute 55; —NEDI; and —NEDTEK.

524 Zhongzhan East Road, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China; and 524 East Zhongshan Road, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China; and 523 East Zhongshang Road, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China; and 166 Middle Zhenghang Road, Nanjing, China; and 166 Zhengfang Mid Road, Nanjing, China; and 166 Zhengfand Mid Road, Nanjing, China; and Huaxia Sci and Tech Park Hi-Tech Development, Nanjing, China; and RM 2105 Huaxia Bldg, No 81 Zhongshan Rd, Nanjing, China; and 8 Xingwen Road, Economic and Tech, Nanjing, China.

Subordinate Institution

Nanjing Guosheng Electronics,

8 Xingwen Road, Economic and Tech, Nanjing, China; and 166 Middle Zhenghang Road, Nanjing, China; and 166 Zhengfang Mid Road, Nanjing, China; and 166 Zhengfand Mid Road, Nanjing, China; and 168 Zhengfand Mid Road, Nanjing, China; and 165 Zhangfang Mid-Road, Nanjing, China; and 414 South Zhong Shan Road, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.

Subordinate Institution

Nanjing Guobo Electronic,

166 Zhengfang Mid Road, Nanjing, China;

(6) China Tech Hi Industry Import and Export Corporation, a.k.a., the following two aliases:

—CTHC; and —Tianhang Industry Import and Export Company.

30 Haidian Road, Beijing, China; and No A 16 Zao Jun Miao, Haidian, Beijing, China;

(7) China Volant Industry, a.k.a., the following two aliases:

—Volinco; and —China Huateng Industry.

30 Haidian Road, Beijing, China; and Room 703, 7th Floor, Building 1, No 11, Changchunqiao Road, Haidian District, Beijing, China; and

(8) Hebei Far East Communication System Engineering, a.k.a., the following two aliases:

—Hebei Far East Comm.; and —HBFEC.

21 Changsheng Street, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 589 West Zhongshan Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China.

Modifications to the Entity List

This final rule implements a decision of the ERC to modify one existing entry on the Entity List. The ERC made a determination to revise one entry under the destination of China by adding three additional aliases and five additional addresses to the entry for Chengdu GaStone Technology Co., Ltd. (CGTC), for a total of four aliases and nine addresses.

This final rule revises one entry on the Entity List to make the modifications described above:

(1) Chengdu GaStone Technology Co., Ltd. (CGTC), a.k.a., the following four aliases:

—-Chengdu Jiashi Technology Co.; —Chengdu HiWafer Semiconductor; —Chengdu Haiwei Technology; and —Chengdu Zenith.

31F, A Tower, Yanlord Square, No. 1, Section 2, Renmind South Road, Chengdu China; and Internet of Things Industrial Park Economic Development District Xinan Hangkonggang (Southwest Airport), Shuangliu County, Chengdu; and 29th Floor, Yanlord Landmark, No. 1 Renmin South Road Section 2, Chengdu; and 29/F Yanlord Landmark Tower A, Chengdu, China; and Union Road, No 88 Internet of Things Industrial, Chengdu, China; and No 88 Wulian Road, Southwest Airp Development Zone, Chengdu, China; and Industrial Park of Internet of Thing SW Airport Eco Dev Zone, Chengdu, China; and Internet Things of Industrial Pa Southwest Airport Economic, Chengdu, China; and The Industrial Park of Internet of Things, Southwest Airport Economic Development Zone, Chengdu, China.

Export Administration Act of 1979

Although the Export Administration Act of 1979 expired on August 20, 2001, the President, through Executive Order 13222 of August 17, 2001, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783 (2002), as amended by Executive Order 13637 of March 8, 2013, 78 FR 16129 (March 13, 2013) and as extended by the Notice of August 15, 2017, 82 FR 39005 (August 16, 2017), has continued the Export Administration Regulations in effect under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. BIS continues to carry out the provisions of the Export Administration Act of 1979, as appropriate and to the extent permitted by law, pursuant to Executive Order 13222, as amended by Executive Order 13637.

Rulemaking Requirements

1. Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866. This rule is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action because this rule is not significant under Executive Order 12866.

2. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is required to respond to nor be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with a collection of information, subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) (PRA), unless that collection of information displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Control Number. This regulation involves collections previously approved by OMB under control number 0694-0088, Simplified Network Application Processing System, which includes, among other things, license applications, and carries a burden estimate of 43.8 minutes for a manual or electronic submission.

Total burden hours associated with the PRA and OMB control number 0694-0088 are not expected to increase as a result of this rule. You may send comments regarding the collection of information associated with this rule, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Jasmeet K. Seehra, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), by email to [email protected], or by fax to (202) 395-7285.

3. This rule does not contain policies with Federalism implications as that term is defined in Executive Order 13132.

4. For the entities added to the Entity List in this rule, the provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553) requiring notice of proposed rulemaking, the opportunity for public participation and a 30-day delay in effective date are inapplicable because this regulation involves a military or foreign affairs function of the United States (5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1)). BIS's implementation of this rule is necessary to protect U.S. national security and foreign policy interests by preventing items subject to the EAR from being exported, reexported, or transferred (in-country) to the entities being added to the Entity List. If this rule were delayed to allow for notice and comment and a delay in effective date, the entities being added to the Entity List by this action would continue to be able to receive items subject to the EAR without a BIS license and to conduct activities contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests of the United States. In addition, publishing a proposed rule would give these entities notice of the U.S. Government's intention to place them on the Entity List, which could provide them with an incentive to accelerate their receipt of items subject to the EAR to conduct activities that are contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests of the United States, including taking steps to set up additional aliases, change addresses, and engaging in other measures to try to limit the impact of the listing on the Entity List once a final rule was published. Further, no other law requires that a notice of proposed rulemaking and an opportunity for public comment be provided for this rule.

5. The Department finds that there is good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) to waive the provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) requiring prior notice and the opportunity for public comment for the one modification to an Entity list entry included in this rule because doing so would be contrary to the public interest. In addition, the one change is limited to providing additional addresses and aliases, which will assist the public in more easily identifying the listed entity.

6. Because a notice of proposed rulemaking and an opportunity for public comment are not required to be given for this rule by 5 U.S.C. 553, or by any other law, the analytical requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., are not applicable. Accordingly, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required and none has been prepared.

List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 744

Exports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Terrorism.

Accordingly, part 744 of the Export Administration Regulations (15 CFR parts 730-774) is amended as follows:

PART 744—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for 15 CFR part 744 continues to read as follows: Authority:

50 U.S.C. 4601 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 3201 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 2139a; 22 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 7210; E.O. 12058, 43 FR 20947, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 179; E.O. 12851, 58 FR 33181, 3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p. 608; E.O. 12938, 59 FR 59099, 3 CFR, 1994 Comp., p. 950; E.O. 12947, 60 FR 5079, 3 CFR, 1995 Comp., p. 356; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13099, 63 FR 45167, 3 CFR, 1998 Comp., p. 208; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; E.O. 13224, 66 FR 49079, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 786; Notice of August 15, 2017, 82 FR 39005 (August 16, 2017); Notice of September 18, 2017, 82 FR 43825 (September 19, 2017); Notice of November 6, 2017, 82 FR 51971 (November 8, 2017); Notice of January 17, 2018, 83 FR 2731 (January 18, 2018).

2. Supplement No. 4 to part 744 is amended under China, People's Republic of: a. By revising one entity “Chengdu GaStone Technology Co., Ltd. (CGTC)”; and b. By adding, in alphabetical order, eight entities.

The additions and revisions read as follows:

Supplement No. 4 to Part 744—Entity List Country Entity License
  • requirement
  • License
  • review policy
  • Federal Register
  • citation
  • *         *         *         *         *         *         * CHINA, PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF  *         *         *         *         *         * Chengdu GaStone Technology Co., Ltd. (CGTC), a.k.a., the following four aliases:
  • —Chengdu Jiashi Technology Co.;
  • —Chengdu HiWafer Semiconductor;
  • —Chengdu Haiwei Technology; and
  • —Chengdu Zenith.
  • For all items subject to the EAR. (See § 744.11 of the EAR). Presumption of denial 79 FR 44683, 8/1/14. 81 FR 14958, 3/21/16. 83 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER], 8/1/2018.
    31F, A Tower, Yanlord Square, No. 1, Section 2, Renmind South Road, Chengdu China; and Internet of Things Industrial Park Economic Development District Xinan Hangkonggang (Southwest Airport), Shuangliu County, Chengdu; and 29th Floor, Yanlord Landmark, No. 1 Renmin South Road Section 2, Chengdu; and 29/F Yanlord Landmark Tower A, Chengdu, China; and Union Road, No 88 Internet of Things Industrial, Chengdu, China; and No 88 Wulian Road, Southwest Airp Development Zone, Chengdu, China; and Industrial Park of Internet of Thing SW Airport Eco Dev Zone, Chengdu, China; and Internet Things of Industrial Pa Southwest Airport Economic, Chengdu, China; and The Industrial Park of Internet of Things, Southwest Airport Economic Development Zone, Chengdu, China  *         *         *         *         *         * China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation Second Academy, a.k.a., the following eight aliases, and thirteen subordinate institutions: For all items subject to the EAR. (See § 744.11 of the EAR) Presumption of denial 83 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER], 8/1/2018. —China Changfeng Mechanics and Electronics Technology Academy; —China Chang Feng Mechano-Electronic Engineering Academy; —CASIC Second Academy; —China Chang Feng Mechano-Electronic Engineering Company; —CASIC Academy of Defense Technology; —Second Research Academy of CASIC; —Changfeng Electromechanical Technology Design Institute; and —China Chang Feng Mechanics and Electronics Technology Academy. Subordinate institution
  • Second Design Department, a.k.a., the following two aliases:
  • —Beijing Institute of Electronics Systems Engineering; and
  • —Second Planning Department.
  • Subordinate institution
  • 23rd Research Institute, a.k.a., the following two aliases:
  • —Beijing Institute of Radio Measurement; and
  • —BIRM.
  • Subordinate institution
  • 25th Research Institute, a.k.a., the following one alias:
  • —Beijing Institute of Remote Sensing Equipment.
  • Subordinate institution
  • 201 Research Institute, a.k.a., the following one alias:
  • —Aerospace Science and Technology Defense Technology Research and Experimental Center.
  • Subordinate institution
  • 203rd Research Institute, a.k.a., the following two aliases:
  • —Beijing Radio Measurement and Testing Institute; and
  • —Beijing Institute of Radio Metrology and Measurement.
  • Subordinate institution
  • 204th Research Institute, a.k.a., the following two aliases:
  • —Beijing Institute of Computer Applications and Simulation Technology; and
  • —706th Research Institute.
  • Subordinate institution
  • 206th Research Institute, a.k.a., the following two aliases:
  • —Beijing Institute of Mechanical Equipment; and
  • —Beijing Institute of Machinery and Equipment.
  • Subordinate institution
  • 207th Research Institute, a.k.a., the following three aliases:
  • —Beijing Guangda Optoelectronics;
  • —Beijing Institute of Environmental Features; and
  • —Beijing Institute of Environmental Characteristics.
  • Subordinate institution
  • 208th Research Institute, a.k.a., the following one alias:
  • —Beijing Electronic Document Service Center.
  • Subordinate institution
  • 210th Research Institute, a.k.a., the following one alias:
  • —Xian Changfeng Electromechanical Institute.
  • Subordinate institution
  • 283 Factory, a.k.a., the following one alias:
  • —Beijing Xinfeng Machinery Factory.
  • Subordinate institution
  • 284 Factory, a.k.a., the following two aliases:
  • —Beijing Changfeng Machinery Factory; and
  • —Beijing Changfeng Xinlian Project Management.
  • Subordinate institution
  • 699 Factory, a.k.a., the following one alias:
  • —Beijing Xinli Machinery Factory.
  • The following addresses apply to the entity and to the thirteen subordinate institutions: 50 Yongding Road, Haidian District, Beijing, China; and 51 Yongding Road, Haidian District, Beijing, China; and 52 Yongding Road, Haidian District, Beijing, China; and 58 Yongding Road, Haidian District, Beijing, China; and 90 Dianzi Road, Section One, Xian, China.  *         *         *         *         *         * China Electronics Technology Group Corporation 13th Research Institute (CETC 13), a.k.a., the following six aliases, and twelve subordinate institutions: For all items subject to the EAR. (See § 744.11 of the EAR). Presumption of denial 83 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER], 8/1/2018. —Hebei Semiconductor Research Institute; —HSRI; —Hebei Institute of Semiconductors; —Hebei Semiconductor Institute; —Hebei Semiconductor; and —CETC Research Institute 13. 113 Hezuo Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Street, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China. Subordinate institution
  • Bowei Integrated Circuits, a.k.a., the following three aliases:
  • —Hebei Bowei Integrated; —Hebei Bowel Technology; and —Shijuang Bowei. 113 Hezuo Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Street, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and Shijiazhuang New and Hi-Tech Dev Zone, Hebei, China. Subordinate institution
  • Envoltek, a.k.a., the following one alias:
  • —Hebei Envoltek Electronics. 21 Changsheng Street, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China. Subordinate institution
  • Hebei Sinopack Electronics, a.k.a., the following one alias:
  • —Hebei Sinapack Elec. 113 Hezuo Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Street, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China. Subordinate institution
  • Hebei Brightway International,
  • 21 Changsheng Street, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China. Subordinate institution
  • Hebei Medicines Health, 113 Hezuo Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China.
  • Subordinate institution
  • Hebei Poshing Electronics, a.k.a., the following three aliases:
  • —Hebei Poshin Electronics; —Hebei Poshing Elec.; and —Hubei PoshingElectronics. 113 Hezuo Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Street, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China. Subordinate institution
  • Hebei Puxing Electronic,
  • 113 Hezuo Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Street, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China.
  • Subordinate institution
  • Micro Electronic Technology, a.k.a., the following three aliases:
  • —Micro Electronic Technology Development Application Corp; —METDA; and —METDAC.
  • 113 Hezuo Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China.
  • Subordinate institution
  • Shijiazhuang Development Zone Maiteda Microelectronics Technology Development and Application Corporation,
  • 21 Changsheng Street, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China. Subordinate institution
  • MT Microsystems,
  • 113 Hezuo Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China. Subordinate institution
  • North China Integrated Circuit Corporation,
  • 21 Changsheng Street, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 113 Hezuo Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China. Subordinate institution
  • Tonghui Electronics, a.k.a., the following one alias:
  • —Tonghui Electronics Technology. 21 Changsheng Street, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China. China Electronics Technology Group Corporation 14th Research Institute (CETC 14), a.k.a., the following seven aliases, and two subordinate institutions: For all items subject to the EAR. (See § 744.11 of the EAR). Presumption of denial 83 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER], 8/1/2018. —Nanjing Research Institute of Electronics Technology; —NRIET; —Nanjing Electronics Technology Institute; —Ministry of Information Industry Electronics; —No 14 Research Institute; —Research Institute 14; and —CETC Research Institute 14. Subordinate institution
  • Nanjing SunSea Industry Corporation.
  • Subordinate institution
  • Nanjing Institute of Radio Technology.
  • The following addresses apply to the entity and the two subordinate institutions: No 1 Dinghuaimen, Nanjing, China; and No 8 Guorui Road, Yuhua District, Nanjing, China; and No 4 Guping Gang, Nanjing, China; and 52 Huju Road, North, Nanjing, China.  *         *         *         *         *         * China Electronics Technology Group Corporation 38th Research Institute (CETC 38), a.k.a., the following seven aliases, and seven subordinate institutions: For all items subject to the EAR. (See § 744.11 of the EAR). Presumption of denial 83 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER], 8/1/2018. —Hefei Institute of Electronic Engineering; —Southwest China Research Institute of Radar Technology; —East China Research Institute of Electronic Engineering; —ECRIEE; —No 38 Research Institute; —Research Institute 38; and —CETC Research Institute 38. Subordinate institution
  • Anhui Sun-Create Electronics.
  • Subordinate institution
  • Anhui Bowei Chang An Electronics.
  • Subordinate institution
  • ECU Electronic Industrial.
  • Subordinate institution
  • Hefei ECU-TAMURA Electric.
  • Subordinate institution
  • Anhui Bowei Guangcheng Information Technology.
  • Subordinate institution
  • Anhui Bowei Ruida Electronics Technology.
  • Subordinate institution
  • Brainware Terahertz.
  • The following addresses apply to the entity and to the seven subordinate institutions: 199 Xiangzhang Ave, Hefei, Anhui, China; and 19 He Huan Lu, Hefei, China; and 19 Hehuan Road, Hefei, China; and 418 Guilin Road, Shanghai, China; and 260 Ji Xi Road, Hefei, China; and 88 Pihe Road, Hefei, China; and Forward Road, Economics Development Zone of Luan, Luan, Anhui, China. China Electronics Technology Group Corporation 55th Research Institute (CETC 55), a.k.a., the following four aliases, and two subordinate institutions: For all items subject to the EAR. (See § 744.11 of the EAR). Presumption of denial 83 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER], 8/1/2018. —Nanjing Electronic Devices Institute; —CETC Research Institute 55; —NEDI; and —NEDTEK. 524 Zhongzhan East Road, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China; and 524 East Zhongshan Road, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China; and 523 East Zhongshang Road, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China; and 166 Middle Zhenghang Road, Nanjing, China; and 166 Zhengfand Mid Road, Nanjing, China; and 166 Zhengfang Mid Road, Nanjing, China; and Huaxia Sci and Tech Park Hi-Tech Development, Nanjing, China; and RM 2105 Huaxia Bldg, No 81 Zhongshan Rd, Nanjing, China; and 8 Xingwen Road, Economic and Tech, Nanjing, China. Subordinate institution
  • Nanjing Guosheng Electronics,
  • 8 Xingwen Road, Economic and Tech, Nanjing,Chia; and 166 Middle Zhenghang Road, Nanjing, China; and 166 Zhengfang Mid Road, Nanjing, China; and 166 Zhengfand Mid Road, Nanjing, China; and 168 Zhengfand Mid Road, Nanjing, China; and 165 Zhangfang Mid-Road, Nanjing, China; and 414 South Zhong Shan Road, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China; and Subordinate institution
  • Nanjing Guobo Electronic,
  • 166 Zhengfang Mid Road, Nanjing, China. China Tech Hi Industry Import and Export Corporation, a.k.a., the following two aliases: For all items subject to the EAR. (See § 744.11 of the EAR). Presumption of denial 83 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER], 8/1/2018. —CTHC; and —Tianhang Industry Import and Export Company. 30 Haidian Road, Beijing, China; and No A 16 Zao Jun Miao, Haidian, Beijing, China. China Volant Industry a.k.a., the following two aliases: For all items subject to the EAR. (See § 744.11 of the EAR). Presumption of denial 83 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER], 8/1/2018. —Volinco; and —China Huateng Industry. 30 Haidian Road, Beijing, China; and Room 703, 7th Floor, Building 1, No 11, Changchunqiao Road, Haidian District, Beijing, China.  *         *         *         *         *         * Hebei Far East Communication System Engineering, a.k.a., the following two aliases: For all items subject to the EAR. (See § 744.11 of the EAR). Presumption of denial 83 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER], 8/1/2018. —Hebei Far East Comm.; and —HBFEC. 21 Changsheng Street, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 21 Changsheng Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China; and 589 West Zhongshan Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China.  *         *         *         *         *         * *         *         *         *         *         *         *
    Dated: July 27, 2018. Richard E. Ashooh, Assistant Secretary for Export Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16474 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-33-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary 32 CFR Part 80 [Docket ID: DOD-2017-OS-0047] RIN 0790-AJ92 Provision of Early Intervention Services to Eligible Infants and Toddlers With Disabilities and Their Families, and Special Education Children With Disabilities Within the Section 6 School Arrangements AGENCY:

    Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This final rule removes the Department of Defense (DoD) regulation concerning the provision of early intervention services to eligible infants and toddlers with disabilities and their families, and special education children with disabilities within the Section 6 school arrangements. The contents of this part have been updated and incorporated into the revision of DoD's regulation at 32 CFR part 57, “Provision of Early Intervention and Special Education Services to Eligible DoD Dependents.” Therefore, this part is unnecessary and can be removed from the CFR.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective on August 1, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rebecca Lombardi, 571-372-0862.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    It has been determined that publication of this CFR part removal for public comment is impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to public interest since its content was incorporated into another CFR part for which public comment was taken.

    DoD internal guidance concerning the provision of early intervention services to eligible infants and toddlers with disabilities and their families, and special education children with disabilities within the Section 6 school arrangements will continue to be published in DoD Instruction 1342.12 (available at http://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/134212p.pdf) and DoD Manual 1342.12 (available at http://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodm/134212m.pdf). This rule is not significant under Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, “Regulatory Planning and Review,” therefore, E.O. 13771, “Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs” does not apply.

    List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 80

    Education of individuals with disabilities, Government employees, Infants and children, Military personnel.

    PART 80—[REMOVED] Accordingly, by the authority of 5 U.S.C. 301, 32 CFR part 80 is removed. Dated: July 25, 2018. Aaron T. Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16394 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Navy 32 CFR Part 701 [Docket ID: USN-2017-HQ-0003] RIN 0703-AA95 Availability of Department of the Navy Records and Publication of Department of the Navy Documents Affecting the Public AGENCY:

    Department of the Navy, Department of Defense (DoD).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This final rule removes DoD's regulation concerning the Department of the Navy's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) program. The DoD has revised their FOIA program rule to include DoD component information and has removed the requirement for component supplementary rules. Therefore, the Navy's FOIA program rule can be removed from the CFR.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective on August 1, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Christopher Julka at 703-697-0031.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On February 6, 2018 (83 FR 5196-5197), the DoD published a revised FOIA program rule as a result of the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016. When the DoD FOIA program rule was revised, it included DoD component information and removed the requirement for component supplementary rules. The DoD now has one DoD-level rule for the FOIA program at 32 CFR part 286 that contains all the codified information required for the Department. Therefore, 32 CFR part 701, subparts A through D, can be removed from the CFR.

    It has been determined that publication of these subpart removals from the CFR for public comment is impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to public interest since it is based on removing DoD internal policies and procedures that are publicly available on the Department's website.

    Department of the Navy internal guidance concerning the implementation of the FOIA within the Navy will remain in effect and will continue to be published in SECNAVINST 5720.42F (available at https://doni.daps.dla.mil/Directives/05000%20General%20Management%20Security%20and%20Safety%20Services/05-700%20General%20External%20and%20Internal%20Relations%20Services/5720.42F.pdf).

    This rule is one of 14 separate DoD FOIA rules. With the finalization of the DoD-level FOIA rule at 32 CFR part 286, the Department is eliminating the need for this separate FOIA rule and reducing costs to the public as explained in the preamble of the DoD-level FOIA rule published at 83 FR 5196-5197.

    This rule is not significant under Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, “Regulatory Planning and Review,” therefore, E.O. 13771, “Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs” does not apply.

    List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 701

    Freedom of information.

    Accordingly, 32 CFR part 701 is amended as follows:

    PART 701—AVAILABILITY OF DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY RECORDS AND PUBLICATION OF DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY DOCUMENTS AFFECTING THE PUBLIC 1. The authority citation for part 701 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    5 U.S.C. 552.

    Subparts A, B, C, and D [Removed and Reserved] 2. Remove and reserve subparts A through D. Dated: July 26, 2018. Emilee Kujat Baldini, Lieutenant Commander, Judge Advocate General's Corps, U.S. Navy, Federal Register Liaison Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16347 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R05-OAR-2017-0701; FRL-9981-44—Region 5] Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin; Modification of Greenhouse Gas Language AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing an approval to a revision to the Wisconsin State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) to EPA on November 28, 2017. In this revision, WDNR makes modifications to the language associated with how greenhouse gases are evaluated in the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program. These revisions were made to reflect changes required by the United States Supreme Court in its June 23, 2014 decision, Utility Air Regulatory Group (UARG) v. EPA), 134 S. Ct. 2427.

    DATES:

    This final rule is effective on August 31, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-2017-0701. All documents in the docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either through www.regulations.gov or at the Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We recommend that you telephone Rachel Rineheart, Environmental Engineer, at (312) 886-7017 before visiting the Region 5 office.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rachel Rineheart, Environmental Engineer, Air Permits Section, Air Programs Branch (AR18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-7017, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Throughout this document whenever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean EPA. This SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section is arranged as follows:

    I. Background II. What action is EPA taking? III. Incorporation by Reference IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background

    This final rulemaking addresses the November 28, 2017 WDNR submittal for SIP revision, revising the rules in the Wisconsin SIP to reflect the changes required by UARG v. EPA, 134 S. Ct. 2427, on how greenhouse gases are evaluated in the PSD program.

    On June 23, 2014, in UARG v. EPA, the Supreme Court ruled that the Clean Air Act (CAA) neither compels nor permits EPA to adopt an interpretation of the CAA requiring a source to obtain a PSD or title V permit based solely on its potential greenhouse gas emissions. The ruling supported EPA's decision to require sources otherwise subject to PSD review to comply with BACT emission standards for greenhouse gases. In other words, with respect to PSD, the ruling upheld PSD permitting requirements for greenhouse gases under Step 1 of the Tailoring rule for “anyway” sources, i.e., sources that were subject to PSD review anyway due to their non-greenhouse gas regulated pollutants, and invalidated PSD permitting requirement for Step 2 sources, i.e., sources that were considered major solely as a result of their greenhouse gas emissions.

    Following the UARG v. EPA decision, WDNR is modifying its PSD rules in NR 405.07(9) to establish the conditions under which greenhouse gases at a stationary source shall be subject to the PSD regulations.

    On May 25, 2018 (83 FR 24258), EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) proposing approval of Wisconsin's November 28, 2017 submittal for SIP revision on the basis that we found it consistent with the June 23, 2014, UARG v. EPA ruling.

    The specific details of Wisconsin's November 28, 2017 SIP revision and the rationale for EPA's approval are discussed in the NPRM and will not be restated here. EPA received three comments on the proposed action; none were relevant to the rulemaking.

    II. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is approving Wisconsin's November 28, 2017 submittal for SIP revision as the modification to the greenhouse gas language in NR 405.07(9) is consistent with the June 23, 2014, UARG v. EPA ruling.

    III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Wisconsin Regulations described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth below. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents generally available through www.regulations.gov, and at the EPA Region 5 Office (please contact the person identified in the For Further Information Contact section of this preamble for more information).

    IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews.

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

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

    • Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under Executive Order 12866;

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 1, 2018. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: July 17, 2018. Cathy Stepp, Regional Administrator, Region 5.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

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

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    2. Section 52.2570 is amended by revising paragraphs (c)(126) introductory text and (c)(126)(i)(D) to read as follows:
    § 52.2570 Identification of plan.

    (c) * * *

    (126) On May 4, 2011, June 20, 2012, and September 28, 2012, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) submitted a request to revise Wisconsin's Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program to incorporate the “Tailoring Rule” and the Federal deferral for biogenic CO2 emissions into Wisconsin's SIP. On November 28, 2017, WDNR submitted a modification to the greenhouse gas language to be consistent with the June 23, 2014, UARG v. EPA ruling.

    (i) * * *

    (D) Wisconsin Administrative Code, NR 405.07 Review of major stationary sources and major modifications—source applicability and exemptions. NR 405.07(9), as published in the Wisconsin Administrative Register July 2015, No. 715, effective August 1, 2015.

    [FR Doc. 2018-16469 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R01-OAR-2014-0604; FRL-9981-23—Region 1] Air Plan Approval; Vermont; Infrastructure Requirement for the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Vermont. This revision addresses the interstate transport requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA), referred to as the good neighbor provision, with respect to the primary 2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2) national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). This action approves Vermont's demonstration that the State is meeting its obligations regarding the transport of SO2 emissions into other states. This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective on August 31, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket Identification No. EPA-R01-OAR-2014-0604. All documents in the docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available at www.regulations.gov or at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air Quality Planning Unit, 5 Post Office Square—Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding legal holidays.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Donald Dahl, Air Permits, Toxics, and Indoor Programs Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square—Suite 100, (Mail code OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109—3912, tel. (617) 918-1657; or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Throughout this document whenever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean EPA.

    Table of Contents I. Background and Purpose II. Response to Comments III. Final Action IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background and Purpose

    On November 2, 2015, the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (VT DEC) submitted a formal SIP revision certifying that its SIP was adequate to meet the program elements required by Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA with respect to the 2008 ozone, 2010 primary nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and 2010 primary SO2 NAAQS (2015 SIP submittal). On June 27, 2017 (82 FR 29005), the EPA approved most of the State's submission. The EPA conditionally approved the State's submission in relation to subsections (C), (D), and (J) of CAA Section 110(a)(2) for the prevention of significant deterioration permit program. At that time, the EPA did not take action on the State's submittal regarding VT DEC's certification that its SIP met the requirements of Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2010 primary SO2 NAAQS.

    On April 10, 2018 (83 FR 15336), the EPA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPR) for the portion of the 2015 SIP submittal that demonstrated Vermont's SIP meets the infrastructure requirements of Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2010 primary SO2 NAAQS. The rationale for the EPA's proposed action is explained in the NPR and will not be restated here.

    II. Response to Comments

    The EPA received four comments during the comment period. The comments discuss subjects outside the scope of an infrastructure SIP action, do not explain (or provide a legal basis for) how the proposed action should differ in any way, and make no specific mention of the proposed action. As such, they are not germane and do not require further response to finalize the action as proposed.

    III. Final Action

    The EPA is approving Vermont's November 2, 2015 infrastructure submittal for the 2010 primary SO2 NAAQS as it pertains to Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA.

    IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

    • This action is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action because this action is not significant under Executive Order 12866.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 1, 2018. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2)).

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.

    Dated: July 26, 2018. Alexandra Dunn, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1.

    Part 52 of chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

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

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Subpart UU—Vermont 2. Section 52.2370 is amended in paragraph (e) table by adding the entry “Transport Element of the Infrastructure SIP for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS” after the entry “Infrastructure SIP for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS” to read as follows:
    § 52.2370 Identification of plan.

    (e) * * *

    Vermont Non-Regulatory Name of non-regulatory SIP provision Applicable
  • geographic or
  • nonattainment area
  • State submittal date/effective date EPA
  • approved
  • date
  • Explanations
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * Transport Element of the Infrastructure SIP for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS Statewide 11/2/2015 8/1/2018
  • [Insert Federal Register citation]
  • Approved submittal meets the requirements of Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS
    *         *         *         *         *         *         *
    [FR Doc. 2018-16413 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R01-OAR-2017-0065; FRL-9979-40—Region 1] Air Plan Approval; Connecticut; Infrastructure State Implementation Plan Requirements; Prevention of Significant Deterioration Permit Program Revisions AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving elements of a State Implementation Plan (SIP) submission from Connecticut regarding the infrastructure requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) for the 2012 fine particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), and a SIP submission addressing interstate transport requirements of the CAA for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. In addition, we are approving one statute included in the SIP for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. The infrastructure requirements are designed to ensure that the structural components of each state's air quality management program are adequate to meet the state's responsibilities under the CAA. The EPA is also approving revisions to the SIP submitted by Connecticut on October 18, 2017, satisfying Connecticut's earlier commitment to adopt and submit provisions that meet certain requirements of the federal Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permit program. In addition, we are converting the June 3, 2016 conditional approval to full approval for elements of Connecticut's infrastructure SIP regarding PSD requirements to treat nitrogen oxides (NOX) as a precursor to ozone and to establish a minor source baseline date for PM2.5 emissions for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5, 1997 and 2008 ozone, 2008 lead, 2010 nitrogen dioxide, and 2010 sulfur dioxide NAAQS. This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective on August 31, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket Identification No. EPA-R01-OAR-2017-0065. All documents in the docket are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available at https://www.regulations.gov or at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air Quality Planning Unit, 5 Post Office Square—Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding legal holidays.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Alison C. Simcox, Air Quality Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square—Suite 100, (Mail code OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109-3912, tel. (617) 918-1684; [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Throughout this document whenever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean EPA.

    Table of Contents I. Background and Purpose II. Response to Comments III. Final Action IV. Incorporation by Reference V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background and Purpose

    On March 19, 2018 (83 FR 11933), EPA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for the State of Connecticut. The NPRM proposed approval of three formal SIP submissions from the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (CT DEEP). These included a SIP revision addressing the “Good Neighbor” (or “transport”) (Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA) provisions for the 2006 PM2.51 NAAQS submitted on August 19, 2011, and an infrastructure SIP (including the transport provisions) for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS submitted on December 14, 2015. In addition, on October 18, 2017, CT DEEP submitted a SIP revision addressing applicable requirements for the PSD permit program in Part C of the CAA that are codified in 40 CFR 51.166.

    1 PM2.5 refers to particulate matter of 2.5 microns or less in diameter, often referred to as “fine” particles.

    This rulemaking does not cover three substantive areas that are not integral to acting on a state's infrastructure SIP submission: (i) Existing provisions related to excess emissions during periods of start-up, shutdown, or malfunction at sources (“SSM” emissions) that may be contrary to the CAA and EPA's policies addressing such excess emissions; (ii) existing provisions related to “director's variance” or “director's discretion” that purport to permit revisions to SIP-approved emissions limits with limited public process or without requiring further approval by EPA, that may be contrary to the CAA (“director's discretion”); and, (iii) existing provisions for Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) programs that may be inconsistent with current requirements of EPA's “Final New Source Review (NSR) Improvement Rule,” 67 FR 80186 (December 31, 2002), as amended by 72 FR 32526 (June 13, 2007) (“NSR Reform”). Instead, EPA has the authority to address each one of these substantive areas separately. A detailed history, interpretation, and rationale for EPA's approach to infrastructure SIP requirements can be found in EPA's May 13, 2014, proposed rule entitled, “Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 2008 Lead NAAQS” in the section, “What is the scope of this rulemaking?” See 79 FR 27241 at 27242-45.

    The rationale for EPA's proposed action is explained in the NPR and will not be restated here.

    II. Response to Comments

    EPA received 12 comments during the comment period, three of which are essentially identical. The nine distinct comments discuss subjects outside the scope of an infrastructure SIP action, do not explain (or provide a legal basis for) how the proposed action should differ in any way, and make no specific mention of the proposed action. As such, they are not germane.

    Only the three identical comments make direct reference to the proposed rule or to Connecticut's SIP, but even these comments lack specificity and are unclear. They state that, “as much as the rule gives clear mandate and responsibility of the state in SIP [sic], it does not give out the responsibilities of other agencies and stakeholders in absolute terms.” The comments, however, provide no further explanation for this statement, such as articulating what particular “responsibilities” the SIP should, but does not currently, “give out,” offering any “absolute terms” to be included, or providing any specifics regarding the “other agencies and stakeholders.” Moreover, it is not even clear that the commenter(s) opposes EPA's proposed approval of Connecticut's submittals. In short, most of the comments are not germane and none of them provide a cogent explanation of how the proposed action should differ in any way nor any relevant legal basis for any changes. Consequently, the comments require no further response, and we are finalizing the action as proposed.

    III. Final Action

    EPA is approving Connecticut's infrastructure SIP submittal for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, as well as the transport provisions (CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)) of the state's infrastructure SIP submittal for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS as revisions to the Connecticut SIP. EPA is also approving, into the Connecticut SIP, revisions to the PSD permit program pertaining to treating NOX as a precursor to ozone (RCSA Section 22a-174-3a(k)(1)(C)) and establishing a minor source baseline date for PM2.5 (RCSA Section 22a-174-1(71)). Additionally, EPA is approving revised CGS section 16a-21a, “Sulfur content of home heating oil and off-road diesel fuel. Suspension of requirements for emergency. Enforcement.” effective July 1, 2015. Finally, we are converting to full approval the June 3, 2016 conditional approval of Connecticut's infrastructure SIP submittals for the PSD-related requirements in section 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and J for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5, 1997 and 2008 ozone, 2008 lead, 2010 nitrogen dioxide, and 2010 sulfur dioxide NAAQS.

    IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the General Statutes of Connecticut and state regulations described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth below. Specifically, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of Connecticut General Statute Title 16a, Chapter 296, Section 16a-21a, and state regulations, namely the provisions at Regulation 22a-174-1(71) and at 22a-174-3a(k)(1)(C). The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents generally available through https://www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 1 Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more information).

    V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

    • This action is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action because this action is not significant under Executive Order 12866.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 1, 2018. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: July 26, 2018. Alexandra Dunn, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1.

    Part 52 of chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

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

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Subpart H—Connecticut 2. Section 52.370 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(103)(i)(C) and (c)(118) to read as follows:
    § 52.370 Identification of plan.

    (c) * * *

    (103) * * *

    (i) * * *

    (C) Connecticut General Statute Section16a-21a, which was approved in paragraph (c)(103)(i)(B) of this section, is removed and replaced by Connecticut General Statute 16a-21a, see paragraph (c)(118)(i)(A) of this section.

    (118) Revisions to the State Implementation Plan submitted by the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection on August 19, 2011, December 14, 2015, and October 18, 2017.

    (i) Incorporation by reference. (A) “Definitions,” Regulation 22a-174-1(71), the definition of “Minor source baseline date,” amended October 5, 2017.

    (B) “Permit to Construct and Operate Stationary Sources,” Regulation 22a-174-3a(k)(1)(C), amended October 5, 2017.

    (C) Connecticut General Statute, Title 16a, “Planning and Energy Policy,” Chapter 296, “Operation of Fuel Supply Business,” Section 16a-21a, “Sulfur content of home heating oil and off-road diesel fuel. Suspension of requirements for emergency. Enforcement,” effective July 1, 2015, as published in the State of Connecticut General Statutes, Revision of 1958, Revised to January 1, 2017.

    (ii) Additional materials. (A) The Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection document, “Addendum to the CAA § 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) Portion of Connecticut's Infrastructure Submittal for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS,” August 19, 2011.

    (B) The Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection document, “Connecticut State Implementation Plan for Clean Air Act Section 110(a) Infrastructure Elements: 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS,” December 14, 2015.

    (C) The Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection document, State Implementation Plan Revision Concerning the Consumer Products, Architectural and Industrial Maintenance Coatings and Prevention of Significant Deterioration Permit Programs,” October 18, 2017.

    § 52.380 [Amended]
    3. Section 52.380 is amended by: a. Under paragraph (e)(2), removing the text “Note 1 to paragraphs (f) through (h)” and adding in its place “Note 1 to paragraphs (f) through (g)”; and b. Removing and reserving paragraph (h). 4. In § 52.385, Table 52.385 is amended by adding entries for state citations 22a-174-1 and 22a-174-3a in numerical order by state citation and date approved by EPA and revising the entry for state citation Section 16a-21a to read as follows:
    § 52.385 EPA-approved Connecticut regulations. Table 52.385—EPA-Approved Regulations Connecticut
  • state citation
  • Title/subject Dates Date adopted
  • by state
  • Date approved
  • by EPA
  • Federal
  • Register
  • citation
  • Section
  • 52.370
  • Comments/
  • description
  • *         *         *         *         *         *         * 22a-174-1 Definitions 10/05/17 08/01/17 [Insert Federal Register citation] c (118) Modified definition of “minor source baseline date” for purposes of adding PM2.5. *         *         *         *         *         *         * 22a-174-3a Permit to Construct and Operate Stationary Sources 10/05/17 08/01/17 [Insert Federal Register citation] c (118) Amendment of subsection (k)(1)(C). *         *         *         *         *         *         * Connecticut General Statutes Section 16a-21a Sulfur content of home heating oil and off road diesel fuel. Suspension of requirements for emergency. Enforcement 07/01/15 08/01/17 [Insert Federal Register citation] c (118) Allowable sulfur content of fuels provided. Criteria for suspension of requirements and for enforcement identified. *         *         *         *         *         *         *
    5. Section 52.386 is amended by adding paragraph (c) to read as follows:
    § 52.386 Section 110(a)(2) infrastructure requirements.

    (c) The Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection submitted the following infrastructure SIPs on these dates: 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS—August 19, 2011 (CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) transport provisions), and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS—December 14, 2015. These infrastructure SIPs are approved. Also with respect to the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5, 1997 and 2008 ozone, 2008 lead, 2010 nitrogen dioxide, and 2010 sulfur dioxide NAAQS, elements related to PSD, which are in CAA section 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) and were previously conditionally approved, are now approved.

    [FR Doc. 2018-16431 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0150; FRL-9980-39] Titanium dioxide; Exemption From the Requirement of a Tolerance AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This regulation amends the exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of titanium dioxide (CAS Reg. No. 13463-67-7) when used as an inert ingredient in pesticide formulations applied to growing crops to allow for use as a carrier. SciReg. Inc., on behalf of Bayer CropScience Biologics GmbH, submitted a petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting establishment of an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. This regulation eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level for residues of titanium dioxide resulting from this use.

    DATES:

    This regulation is effective August 1, 2018. Objections and requests for hearings must be received on or before October 1, 2018, and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0150, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Michael Goodis, Registration Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; main telephone number: (703) 305-7090; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

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

    • Crop production (NAICS code 111).

    • Animal production (NAICS code 112).

    • Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).

    • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

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

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

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

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0150 in the subject line on the first page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before October 1, 2018. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).

    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0150, by one of the following methods:

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

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

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

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

    II. Petition for Exemption

    In the Federal Register of May 18, 2018 (83 FR 23247) (FRL-9976-87), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408, 21 U.S.C. 346a, announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP IN-11085) by SciReg. Inc., on behalf of Bayer CropScience Biologics GmbH, Lukaswiese 4, 23970 Wismar, Germany. The petition requested that the 40 CFR 180.920 exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of titanium dioxide (CAS Reg. No. 13463-67-7) be amended to allow for use as a carrier when used as an inert ingredient in pesticide formulations applied to growing crops only. That document referenced a summary of the petition prepared by SciReg. Inc., on behalf of Bayer CropScience Biologics GmbH, the petitioner, which is available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response to the notice of filing.

    III. Inert Ingredient Definition

    Inert ingredients are all ingredients that are not active ingredients as defined in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are not limited to, the following types of ingredients (except when they have a pesticidal efficacy of their own): Solvents such as alcohols and hydrocarbons; surfactants such as polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty acids; carriers such as clay and diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as carrageenan and modified cellulose; wetting, spreading, and dispersing agents; propellants in aerosol dispensers; microencapsulating agents; and emulsifiers. The term “inert” is not intended to imply nontoxicity; the ingredient may or may not be chemically active. Generally, EPA has exempted inert ingredients from the requirement of a tolerance based on the low toxicity of the individual inert ingredients.

    IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish an exemption from the requirement for a tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is “safe.” Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines “safe” to mean that “there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable information.” This includes exposure through drinking water and in residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to “ensure that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. . . .”

    EPA establishes exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance only in those cases where it can be clearly demonstrated that the risks from aggregate exposure to pesticide chemical residues under reasonably foreseeable circumstances will pose no appreciable risks to human health. In order to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to pesticide inert ingredients, the Agency considers the toxicity of the inert in conjunction with possible exposure to residues of the inert ingredient through food, drinking water, and through other exposures that occur as a result of pesticide use in residential settings. If EPA is able to determine that a finite tolerance is not necessary to ensure that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the inert ingredient, an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance may be established.

    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(A), and the factors specified in FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), EPA has reviewed the available scientific data and other relevant information in support of this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a determination on aggregate exposure for titanium dioxide including exposure resulting from the exemption established by this action. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with titanium dioxide follows.

    A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered their validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and children.

    The available toxicity studies on titanium dioxide via the oral route of exposure clearly demonstrate a lack of toxicity. The several studies in mice, rats, dogs, cats, rabbits and other species of varying durations do not indicate toxicity, even at very high doses (e.g., 50,000 ppm or 2,500 mg/kg/day dietary exposure for two years in rats). There are no studies on the dermal toxicity of titanium dioxide and there is no expected toxicity via the dermal route of exposure because as an insoluble solid material, titanium dioxide is not absorbed via the skin.

    The available inhalation studies indicate that the primary toxicity of titanium dioxide is due to deposition of the inhaled particles. Although these studies suggest equivocal evidence of carcinogenicity due to prolonged exposure to titanium dioxide particles, EPA has determined that these effects are not relevant for assessing risk from exposure to titanium dioxide when used as an inert ingredient in pesticide formulations based on the following. First, tumors were only observed in two of the available studies and only in one species. In one study, those tumors were only observed in rats continually exposed to ultrafine particles of titanium dioxide. In the second study, tumors were only observed from exposure to fine particles of titanium dioxide at extremely high concentrations (250 mg/m3), in which the animals experienced overloading of lung clearance, with chronic inflammation resulting in lung tumors. All but one of the tumors in the second study were subsequently reclassified as non-neoplastic or non-cancerous in nature. No tumors were observed in studies involving mice.

    The titanium dioxide used in pesticide formulations is considered pigmentary grade, not ultrafine or nanoscale. Consequently, the tumors observed from exposure to ultrafine particles of titanium dioxide are not relevant for assessing exposure to the type of titanium dioxide used in pesticide formulations. Following the reclassification of the tumors observed in the second inhalation study, EPA does not consider these effects to be strong evidence of carcinogenicity from exposure to fineparticle-sized titanium dioxide. Further, EPA does not expect any reasonably foreseeable uses of titanium dioxide in pesticide formulations that might result in residential exposures that would approach the levels of exposure necessary to elicit the effects seen in the available inhalation study. The levels at which effects were observed in that study greatly exceed any reasonable dose for toxicity testing and any likely residential exposure levels. Moreover, when used as an inert in pesticide formulations, titanium dioxide will be bound to other materials, with no significant inhalation exposure to titanium dioxide particles themselves.

    This position is consistent with the National Institute of Occupational Health and Safety's (NIOSH) recent assessment that ultrafine but not fine titanium dioxide would be considered a “potential occupational carcinogen.” The NIOSH Current Intelligence Bulletin “Occupational Exposure to Titanium Dioxide” concludes that “[t]he lung tumors observed in rats after exposure to 250 mg/m3 of fine TiO2 [titanium dioxide] were the basis for the original NIOSH designation of TiO2 as a “potential occupational carcinogen.” However, because this dose is considered to be significantly higher than currently accepted inhalation toxicology practice, NIOSH concluded that the response at such a high dose should not be used in making its hazard identification.” NIOSH concluded that the data is insufficient to classify fine titanium dioxide as a potential occupational carcinogen.

    Because the predominant form of titanium dioxide used commercially, and the form used as an inert ingredient in pesticide formulations, is pigment grade, which is not in the ultrafine or nanoscale particle size range but rather in the fine particle size range, EPA concludes that carcinogenicity is not a concern from exposure to titanium dioxide resulting from its use as an inert ingredient in pesticide formulations.

    Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the adverse effects caused by titanium dioxide as well as the no-observed-adverse-effect level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies are discussed in the final rule published in the Federal Register of July 27, 2012 (77 FR 44151) (FRL-9354-6) and in the Agency's risk assessment which can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in document “Titanium Dioxide; Human Health Risk Assessment and Ecological Effects Assessment to Support Proposed Exemption from the Requirement of a Tolerance When used as an Inert Ingredient in Pesticide Formulations” in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0150.

    B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

    Because the available data indicate no toxicity via the oral route of exposure, no endpoint of concern for that route of exposure has been identified in the available database. This conclusion is in agreement with the conclusion of the World Health Organization (WHO) Committee on Food Coloring Materials that no Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) need be set for the use of titanium dioxide based on the range of acute, sub-acute, and chronic toxicity assays, all showing low mammalian toxicity. Similarly, no significant toxicity of titanium dioxide is expected via the dermal route of exposure, so no endpoint was identified.

    Because the effects seen in inhalation studies occurred at doses above the levels at which pesticide exposure is expected and for particle sizes that are different from the size of titanium dioxide used in pesticide formulations, the Agency has concluded that those risks are not relevant for assessing risk from pesticide exposure and therefore, did not identify an endpoint for assessing inhalation exposure risk.

    C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary exposure to titanium dioxide, EPA considered exposure under the proposed exemption from the requirement of a tolerance and all other existing exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of titanium dioxide. EPA assessed dietary exposures from titanium dioxide in food as follows:

    Residues of titanium dioxide are exempt from the requirement of a tolerance when used as an inert ingredient in many different circumstances: When used in pesticide formulations applied to growing crops as a pigment/coloring agent in plastic bags used to wrap growing bananas or colorant on seeds for planting (40 CFR 180.920); when used in pesticide formulations applied to animals (40 CFR 180.930); when used as a UV protectant in microencapsulated formulations of the insecticide lambda-cyhalothrin at no more than 3.0% by weight (40 CFR 180.1195); when used as a UV stabilizer in pesticide formulations of napropamide at no more than 5% of the product formulation (40 CFR 180.1195); when used in pesticide placed at entrance to bee hives intended to control varroa mites in hive at a maximum of 0.1% wt/wt (40 CFR 180.1195); and when used in anthraquinone pesticide formulations at a maximum of 45% wt/wt (40 CFR 180.1195). Titanium dioxide is also approved for use as a colorant in food (21 CFR 73.575).

    Although dietary exposure may be expected from use of titanium dioxide in pesticide formulations applied to bee hives and on other crops (as well as from other non-pesticidal sources), a quantitative exposure assessment for titanium dioxide was not conducted because no endpoint of concern was identified in the database.

    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. Since a hazard endpoint of concern was not identified for the acute and chronic dietary assessment, a quantitative dietary exposure risk assessment for drinking water was not conducted, although exposures from drinking water may be expected from use on food crops.

    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term “residential exposure” is used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary exposure (e.g., textiles (clothing and diapers), carpets, swimming pools, and hard surface disinfection on walls, floors, tables).

    Titanium dioxide may be used in non-pesticide products such as paints, printing inks, paper and plastic products around the home. It has also been approved for use in drugs (21 CFR 73.1575) and in cosmetics (21 CFR 73.2575 and 73.3126). Additionally, titanium dioxide may be used as an inert ingredient in pesticides that include residential uses; however based on the discussion in Unit IV.B., a quantitative residential exposure assessment for titanium dioxide was not conducted.

    4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the Agency consider “available information” concerning the cumulative effects of a particular pesticide's residues and “other substances that have a common mechanism of toxicity.”

    Because titanium dioxide does not have a toxic mode of action or a mechanism of toxicity, this provision does not apply.

    D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    Due to titanium dioxide's low potential hazard and the lack of a hazard endpoint, it was determined that a quantitative risk assessment using safety factors applied to a point of departure protective of an identified hazard endpoint is not appropriate for titanium dioxide. For the same reasons that a quantitative risk assessment based on a safety factor approach is not appropriate for titanium dioxide, an FQPA SF is not needed to protect the safety of infants and children.

    E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    Taking into consideration all available information on titanium dioxide, EPA has determined that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm to any population subgroup will result from aggregate exposure to titanium dioxide under reasonable foreseeable circumstances. Therefore, the exemption from tolerance under 40 CFR 180.920 for residues of titanium dioxide, when used as an inert ingredient in pesticide formulations is safe under FFDCA section 408.

    V. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes since the Agency is establishing an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance without any numerical limitation.

    VI. Conclusions

    Therefore, EPA is amending the exemption from the requirement of a tolerance in 40 CFR 180.920 for residues of titanium dioxide (CAS Reg. No. 13463-67-7) when used as an inert ingredient (carrier) in pesticide formulations.

    VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action establishes an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance under FFDCA section 408(d) in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order 12866, entitled “Regulatory Planning and Review” (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); Executive Order 13045, entitled “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); or Executive Order 13771, entitled “Reducing Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Costs” (82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017). This action does not contain any information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations” (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the exemption in this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), do not apply.

    This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this action alter the relationships or distribution of power and responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled “Federalism” (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled “Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments” (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).

    This action does not involve any technical standards that would require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

    VIII. Congressional Review Act

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

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: July 11, 2018. Michael L. Goodis, Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

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

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

    2. In § 180.920, revise the inert ingredient “Titanium dioxide (CAS Reg. No. 13463-67-7)” in the table to read as follows:
    § 180.920 Inert ingredients used pre-harvest; exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance. Inert ingredients Limits Uses .         .         .         .         .         .         . Titanium dioxide (CAS Reg. No. 13463-67-7) Pigment, colorant, carrier. .         .         .         .         .         .         .
    [FR Doc. 2018-16470 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 a.m.] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 302 and 355 [EPA-HQ-OLEM-2018-0518; FRL-9981-52-OLEM] RIN 2050-AG66 Vacatur Response—CERCLA/EPCRA Administrative Reporting Exemption for Air Releases of Hazardous Substances From Animal Waste at Farms; FARM Act Amendments to CERCLA Release Notification Requirements AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is removing regulatory provisions associated with the administrative reporting exemption under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, and under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) of 1986. These revisions implement the vacatur of the CERCLA and EPCRA administrative reporting exemption regulations ordered by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit). This rule also incorporates CERCLA revisions enacted by the Fair Agricultural Reporting Method (FARM) Act.

    DATES:

    This final rule is effective on August 1, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OLEM-2018-0518. All documents in the docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center, EPA/DC, WJC West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744. For more information on EPA's Docket Center Reading Room, see https://www.epa.gov/dockets/epa-docket-center-reading-room.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Office of Emergency Management, mail code 5104A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460, Alison Kent (202) 564-7645, [email protected] or Sicy Jacob (202) 564-8019, [email protected]; or contact the EPCRA, RMP & Oil Information Center toll free at 1-800-424-9346 or (703) 348-5070 in the Washington, DC area. The call center operates from 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. EST Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    A list of entities that could be affected by this final rule include, but are not necessarily limited to:

    NAICS Description NAICS Code Examples of potentially affected entities Crop Production 111 Facilities that manage crop production. Animal Production and Aquaculture 112 Facilities that manage animal production and aquaculture.

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provide a guide for readers regarding the types of entities that EPA is aware could be involved in the activities affected by this action. However, other types of entities not listed in this table could be affected by this final rule. To determine whether your entity is affected by this action, you should carefully examine the applicability criteria found in title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 302 and 355. If you have questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the persons listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

    B. Why is EPA issuing this action?

    Section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), provides that, when an agency for good cause finds that notice and public procedure are impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the public interest, the agency may issue a rule without providing notice and an opportunity for public comment. EPA has determined that there is good cause to issue this final rule without prior proposal and opportunity for comment because these revisions undertake the ministerial tasks of removing CERCLA and EPCRA regulatory provisions vacated by the D.C. Circuit and adding provisions to the CERCLA regulations consistent with the FARM Act's legislative amendments to CERCLA section 103.

    As a matter of law, the orders issued by the D.C. Circuit on April 11, 2017 and May 2, 2018 vacated the final rule titled “CERCLA/EPCRA Administrative Reporting Exemption for Air Releases of Hazardous Substances From Animal Waste at Farms” (73 FR 76948, December 18, 2008), herein referred to as the “2008 final rule,” which was issued by EPA under CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq. and EPCRA, 42 U.S.C. 11001 et seq. It is, therefore, unnecessary to provide notice and an opportunity for comment on this action, which merely carries out the court's orders by removing the administrative reporting exemption and related definitions of “farm” and “animal waste” from the CERCLA regulations at 40 CFR part 302 and the EPCRA regulations at 40 CFR part 355.

    Prior to the court mandate vacating the 2008 final rule, Congress passed the FARM Act, which was signed into law by the President on March 23, 2018. The FARM Act amended CERCLA section 103 (42 U.S.C. 9603) to exempt reporting of air emissions from animal waste (including decomposing animal waste) at farms. This final rule revises the CERCLA regulations at 40 CFR part 302 to be consistent with the FARM Act's amendments to CERCLA section 103 by adding the reporting exemption for air emissions from animal waste at farms and adding definitions of “farm” and “animal waste” from the FARM Act. EPA finds that it is unnecessary to provide notice and an opportunity to comment on these revisions because this final rule merely codifies the FARM Act's legislative amendments to CERCLA.

    In addition, EPA finds that it has good cause to make these revisions immediately effective under section 553(d) of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(d). EPA has determined that there is good cause for making this final rule effective immediately because this action merely implements court orders vacating certain regulatory provisions and codifies statutory amendments to CERCLA. Delaying the effectiveness of this rulemaking would prolong the period of time between the change in the law (i.e., the court's mandate and the FARM Act's amendments to CERCLA) and the corresponding update to the regulations. Minimizing that time period would reduce the possibility of confusion for the regulated community and the public.

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

    These regulations are promulgated under the authority of section 102(a), 103, 104, and 115 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq., as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986. The Agency also relies on section 304 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA), 42 U.S.C. 11001 et seq., as authority to issue regulations governing EPCRA section 304 notification requirements, and EPCRA section 328 for general rulemaking authority. Finally, the Agency relies on the Consolidated Appropriations Act (Omnibus Bill), which was signed into law on March 23, 2018. Title XI of Division S of the Omnibus Bill, known as the Fair Agricultural Reporting Method (FARM) Act exempts the reporting of air emissions from animal waste (including decomposing animal waste) at a farm under CERCLA section 103(e).

    II. Background of the Final Rule A. Overview

    Section 103 of CERCLA requires the person in charge of a vessel or facility to immediately notify the National Response Center (NRC) when there is a release of a hazardous substance, as defined under CERCLA section 101(14), in an amount equal to or greater than the reportable quantity for that substance within a 24-hour period. In addition to these CERCLA reporting requirements, EPCRA section 304 requires owners or operators of certain facilities to immediately notify state and local authorities when there is a release of an extremely hazardous substance, as defined under EPCRA section 302, or of a CERCLA hazardous substance in an amount equal to or greater than the reportable quantity for that substance within a 24-hour period.

    B. December 2008 Administrative Reporting Exemption for Farms

    On December 18, 2008 (73 FR 76948), EPA issued an administrative reporting exemption for air releases from animal waste at farms. Specifically, the rule exempted all farms from CERCLA's reporting requirements for air releases of any hazardous substance from animal waste. Under EPCRA, the 2008 final rule exempted reporting of such releases if the farm had fewer animals than a large concentrated animal feeding operation, as defined by the Clean Water Act. Documents related to this rulemaking are located at www.regulations.gov, docket number EPA-HQ-SFUND-2007-0469.

    The 2008 administrative reporting exemption was ultimately struck down, or vacated, by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in Waterkeeper Alliance v. EPA, 853 F.3d 527 (D.C. Cir. 2017). In vacating the rule, the court found that the Agency could not rely on general rulemaking authority or a de minimis exception to issue an administrative reporting exemption for this category of releases, particularly where the Agency had failed to identify any statutory ambiguity as the basis for its interpretation of the reporting requirements. The court issued a mandate effectuating the vacatur on May 2, 2018.

    C. FARM Act and Legislative Amendments to CERCLA

    On March 23, 2018 the Consolidated Appropriations Act (Omnibus Bill) was signed into law. Title XI of Division S of the Omnibus Bill, known as the FARM Act, exempts the reporting of air emissions from animal waste at a farm under CERCLA section 103(e). See Fair Agricultural Reporting Method Act, Public Law 115-141, Sections 1101-1103 (2018).

    III. Vacatur and Court Mandate: Revisions to CERCLA and EPCRA Regulations

    Due to the D.C. Circuit's issuance of its mandate vacating the 2008 final rule, EPA is amending the CERCLA and EPCRA regulations to remove any provisions added in the 2008 final rule. These regulations are amended by removing the administrative reporting exemption for air releases of a hazardous substance from animal waste at farms at 40 CFR 302.6(e)(3) and 355.31(g) and (h). EPA is also removing the definitions of “animal waste” and “farm” from 40 CFR 302.3 and 355.61.

    IV. FARM Act: Revisions to CERCLA Regulations

    The FARM Act amended CERCLA section 103 by providing an exemption from reporting air emissions from animal waste (including decomposing animal waste) at a farm. In this final rule, EPA is adding this exemption to the CERCLA release reporting regulation in 40 CFR 302.6 as well as the definitions of “animal waste and “farm” to 40 CFR 302.3. Due to the FARM Act, farms remain exempt from CERCLA release reporting requirements despite the D.C. Circuit's vacatur of the 2008 final rule.

    V. Effective Date

    This final rule will become effective immediately upon publication in this Federal Register.

    VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and Executive Order 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011), this action is not a “significant regulatory action” and therefore was not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. In addition, this action is not considered an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017) regulatory action, because this action is not significant under Executive Order 12866. This action is not subject to notice and comment requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any other statute, therefore, it is not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) or sections 202 and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1999 (Pub. L. 104-4). This action is not subject to the RFA. The RFA applies only to rules subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 553, or any other statute. This rule is not subject to notice and comment requirements because the Agency has invoked the APA “good cause” exemption under 5 U.S.C. 553(b). In addition, this action does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This action does not create new binding legal requirements that substantially and directly affect Tribes under Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action does not have significant Federalism implications under Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). It will not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Because this final rule is not subject to review under Executive Order 12866, this final rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This final rule does not contain any information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it require any special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). This action does not involve technical standards; thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply.

    Congressional Review Act

    This action is subject to the Congressional Review Act (CRA), and the EPA will submit a rule report to each House of Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. The CRA allows the issuing agency to make a rule effective sooner than otherwise provided by the CRA if the agency makes a good cause finding that notice and comment rulemaking procedures are impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the public interest (5 U.S.C. 808(2)). The EPA has made a good cause finding for this rule as discussed in Section I.B of the preamble, including the basis for that finding. This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

    List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 302

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous substances, Hazardous waste, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water pollution control, Water supply.

    40 CFR Part 355

    Environmental protection, Chemicals, Disaster assistance, Hazardous substances, Hazardous waste, Natural resources, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund.

    Dated: July 23, 2018. Andrew R. Wheeler, Acting Administrator.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA is amending 40 CFR parts 302 and 355 as follows:

    PART 302—DESIGNATION, REPORTABLE QUANTITIES, AND NOTIFICATION 1. The authority citation for part 302 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 9602, 9603, and 9604; 33 U.S.C. 1321 and 1361.

    2. Section 302.3 is amended by revising the definitions for “Animal waste” and “Farm” to read as follows:
    § 302.3 Definitions.

    Animal waste means feces, urine, or other excrement, digestive emission, urea, or similar substances emitted by animals (including any form of livestock, poultry, or fish). The term “animal waste” includes animal waste that is mixed or commingled with bedding, compost, feed, soil, or any other material typically found with such waste.

    Farm means a site or area (including associated structures) that—

    (1) Is used for—

    (i) The production of a crop; or

    (ii) The raising or selling of animals (including any form of livestock, poultry, or fish); and

    (2) Under normal conditions, produces during a farm year any agricultural products with a total value equal to not less than $1,000.

    3. Section 302.6 is amended by revising paragraph (e)(3) to read as follows:
    § 302.6 Notification requirements.

    (e) * * *

    (3) Air emissions from animal waste (including decomposing animal waste) at a farm.

    PART 355—EMERGENCY PLANNING AND NOTIFICATION 4. The authority citation for part 355 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    Sections 302, 303, 304, 325, 327, 328, and 329 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA) (42 U.S.C. 11002, 11003, 11004, 11045, 11047, 11048, and 11049).

    § 355.31 [Amended]
    5. Section 355.31 is amended by removing paragraphs (g) and (h).
    § 355.61 [Amended]
    6. Section 355.61 is amended by removing the definitions for “Animal waste” and “Farm”.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16379 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 635 [Docket No. 180517485-8649-01] RIN 0648—XG262 Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; Adjustments to 2018 North and South Atlantic Swordfish Quotas AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Temporary final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS adjusts the North and South Atlantic swordfish baseline quotas for 2018 based on available underharvest from the 2017 adjusted U.S. quotas. This action is necessary to implement binding recommendations of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), as required by the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act (ATCA), and to achieve domestic management objectives under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act).

    DATES:

    Effective August 31, 2018, through December 31, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Supporting documents, such as the 2012 and 2007 Environmental Assessments (EA) and the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic Highly Migratory Species (HMS) Fishery Management Plan and its amendments described below, may be downloaded from the HMS website at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/topic/atlantic-highly-migratory-species. These documents also are available upon request from Chanté Davis or Steve Durkee at the telephone numbers below.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Chanté Davis, (301) 427-8503, or, Steve Durkee, (202) 670-6637.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Regulations implemented under the authority of ATCA, 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq., and the Magnuson-Stevens Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq., governing the harvest of swordfish by persons and vessels subject to U.S. jurisdiction are found at 50 CFR part 635. Section 635.27(c) describes the quota adjustment process for both North and South Atlantic swordfish. NMFS is required under ATCA and the Magnuson-Stevens Act to provide U.S. fishing vessels with a reasonable opportunity to harvest the ICCAT-recommended quotas.

    The North Atlantic swordfish quota adjustment process was previously analyzed in the EA, Final Regulatory Impact Review (RIR), and Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) that were prepared for the 2012 Swordfish Quota Adjustment Rule (July 31, 2012; 77 FR 45273). The South Atlantic swordfish quota adjustment process was previously analyzed in the EA, RIR, and FRFA that were prepared for the 2007 Swordfish Quota Specification Final Rule (October 5, 2007; 72 FR 56929). In the 2016 North and South Atlantic Swordfish Quotas Adjustment Final Rule (July 26, 2016, 81 FR 48719), after inviting and considering public comment on the issue, NMFS in the final rule determined it would no longer issue proposed and final specifications/rules for North and South Atlantic swordfish quotas adjustments in cases where the quota adjustment follows previously codified and analyzed formulas. As a result, in 2017, NMFS issued a temporary final rule to adjust the quota for the 2017 North and South Atlantic Swordfish fishery (September 18, 2017, 82 FR 43500). Consistent with the determination made in the 2016 final rule, NMFS is issuing this temporary final rule to adjust the North and South Atlantic swordfish quotas for 2018.

    North and South Atlantic Swordfish Annual Quota and Adjustment Process North Atlantic Swordfish

    At the 2017 ICCAT annual meeting, ICCAT finalized Recommendation 17-02, which slightly reduced the overall North Atlantic swordfish TAC from 10,300.8 metric tons (mt) dressed weight (dw) to 9,924.8 mt dw (376 .0 mt dw reduction) through 2018 in response to a recommendation by ICCAT's Standing Committee for Research and Statistics (SCRS) given updated stock status information While the overall TAC was reduced, the U.S. baseline quota was maintained at 2,937.6 mt dw (3,907 mt whole weight (ww)) per year, as was the allowable underharvest carryover of 15 percent of a Contracting Party's baseline quota. This means that the United States may carry over a maximum of 440.6 mt dw (586.0 mt ww) of underharvest from 2017 to 2018. Additionally, under Recommendation 17-02, the United States is no longer required to transfer 18.8 mt dw to Mauritania, as it has under previous recommendations since 2013 (ICCAT Recommendation 13-02).

    Per Recommendation 17-02, the 2018 U.S. North Atlantic swordfish baseline quota is 2,937.6 mt dw (3,907 mt ww). The 2017 North Atlantic swordfish landings and dead discards were 1,011.9 mt dw, leaving an underharvest of 1,925.7 mt dw. This underharvest exceeds the 440.6 mt dw underharvest carryover limit allowed under Recommendation 17-02; thus, NMFS is carrying forward 440.6 mt dw, which is the maximum allowed. Because Recommendation 17-02 removed the transfer to Mauritania, NMFS is not transferring any quota to any country. Therefore, the resulting final adjusted North Atlantic swordfish quota for the 2018 fishing year is 3,378.2 mt dw (2,937.6 baseline quota + 440.6 overharvest carryover−0 transfer to another country = 3,378.2 mt dw). From that adjusted quota, 50 mt dw will be allocated to the reserve category for inseason adjustments and research, and 300 mt dw will be allocated to the incidental category, which includes recreational landings and landings by incidental swordfish permit holders, in accordance with regulations at 50 CFR 635.27(c)(1)(i). The remainder, 3,028.2 mt dw, would be allocated to the directed category (3,378.2 adjusted quota −50 to reserve −300 to the incidental category = 3,028.2 mt dw), which would be split equally between two seasons in 2018 (January through June and July through December) (Table 1).

    South Atlantic Swordfish

    In 2017, ICCAT also finalized Recommendation 17-03, which maintained the overall South Atlantic swordfish TAC at 10,526.3 mt dw (14,000 mt ww) through 2018, and maintained the U.S. allocation at 75.2 mt dw (100 mt ww). Recommendation 17-03 continues to limit the amount of South Atlantic swordfish underharvest that can be carried forward from one year to the next; the United States may carry forward up to 100 percent of its baseline quota (75.2 mt dw). Recommendation 17-03 also continues to require the United States to transfer a total of 75.2 mt dw (100 mt ww) to other countries. These transfers are 37.6 mt dw (50 mt ww) to Namibia, 18.8 mt dw (25 mt ww) to Côte d'Ivoire, and 18.8 mt dw (25 mt ww) to Belize.

    U.S. fishermen landed no South Atlantic swordfish in 2017. The adjusted 2017 South Atlantic swordfish quota was 75.1 mt dw due to nominal landings in previous years. Therefore, 75.1 mt dw of underharvest is available to carry over to 2018. NMFS is carrying forward 75.1 mt dw to be added to the 75.2 mt dw baseline quota. The quota is then reduced by the 75.2 mt dw of annual international quota transfers outlined above, resulting in an adjusted South Atlantic swordfish quota of 75.1 mt dw for the 2018 fishing year (Table 1).

    Table 1—2017 and 2018 North and South Atlantic Swordfish Quotas 2017 2018 North Atlantic Swordfish Quota (mt dw): Baseline Quota 2,937.6 2,937.6 International Quota Transfer (−) 18.8 (to Mauritania) 0 Total Underharvest from Previous Year 2,215.0 1,925.7 Underharvest Carryover from Previous Year+ (+) 440.6 (+) 440.6 Adjusted Quota 3,359.4 3,378.2 Quota Allocation: Directed Category 3,009.4 3,028.2 Incidental Category 300 300 Reserve Category 50 50 South Atlantic Swordfish Quota (mt dw): Baseline Quota 75.2 75.2 International Quota Transfers* (−) 75.2 (−) 75.2 Total Underharvest from Previous Year 75.1 75.1 Underharvest Carryover from Previous Year+ 75.1 75.1 Adjusted quota 75.1 75.1 + Allowable underharvest carryover is capped at 15 percent of the baseline quota allocation for the North Atlantic and 75.2 dw (100 mt ww) for the South Atlantic. * Under Recommendation 17-03, the United States transfers 75.2 mt dw (100 mt ww) annually to Namibia (37.6 mt dw, 50 mt ww), Côte d'Ivoire (18.8 mt dw, 25 mt ww), and Belize (18.8 mt dw, 25 mt ww). Classification

    The Assistant Administrator for NMFS (AA) has determined that this temporary final rule is consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS FMP and its amendments, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, ATCA, and other applicable law. Pursuant to section 553(b)(B) of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)), the AA finds that it would be unnecessary and contrary to the public interest to provide prior notice of, and an opportunity for public comment on, this action for the reasons described below.

    In the 2016 North and South Atlantic Swordfish Quota Adjustment Rule (81 FR 48719, July 26, 2016), NMFS announced the intent to no longer issue proposed and final specifications/rules for North and South Atlantic swordfish quota adjustments in cases where the quota adjustment simply follows previously codified and analyzed formulas. Public comments on this process change were generally supportive; as a result, in 2017, NMFS issued a temporary final rule to adjust the swordfish quota.

    This action to adjust the 2018 North and South Atlantic Swordfish quotas applies the formula that the public received notice of in the 2016 North and South Atlantic Swordfish Quota Adjustment Rule, using the best available data regarding 2017 catch and underharvest, and calculating allowable underharvest consistent with ICCAT recommendations. The rulemaking for the 2016 North and South Atlantic Swordfish Quota Adjustment Rule specifically provided prior notice of, and accepted public comment on, these formulaic quota adjustment processes and the manner in which they occur. The application of this formula in this action does not have discretionary aspects requiring additional agency consideration and thus it would be unnecessarily duplicative to accept public comment for this action. Because there are no new quotas for 2018 and the quota formula is the same as in previous years, NMFS is issuing this temporary final rule to adjust the North and South Atlantic swordfish quotas for 2018.

    This action is being taken under § 635.27(c) and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

    This action does not contain a collection-of-information requirement for purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act.

    Because prior notice and opportunity for public comment are not required for this rule by 5 U.S.C. 553, or any other law, the analytical requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., are inapplicable.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 971 et seq. and 1801 et seq.

    Dated: July 26, 2018. Samuel D. Rauch, III, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16388 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 679 [Docket No. 170817779-8161-02] RIN 0648-XG114 Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Ocean Perch in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Temporary rule; closure.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS is prohibiting directed fishing for Pacific ocean perch in the Western Aleutian district (WAI) of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands management area (BSAI) by vessels participating in the BSAI trawl limited access fishery. This action is necessary to prevent exceeding the 2018 total allowable catch (TAC) of Pacific ocean perch in the WAI allocated to vessels participating in the BSAI trawl limited access fishery.

    DATES:

    Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), July 27, 2018, through 2400 hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Steve Whitney, 907-586-7228.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    NMFS manages the groundfish fishery in the BSAI exclusive economic zone according to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area (FMP) prepared by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council under authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Regulations governing fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance with the FMP appear at subpart H of 50 CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679.

    The 2018 TAC of Pacific ocean perch, in the WAI, allocated to vessels participating in the BSAI trawl limited access fishery was established as a directed fishing allowance of 161 metric tons by the final 2018 and 2019 harvest specifications for groundfish in the BSAI (83 FR 8365, February 27, 2018).

    In accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(iii), the Regional Administrator finds that this directed fishing allowance has been reached. Consequently, NMFS is prohibiting directed fishing for Pacific ocean perch in the WAI by vessels participating in the BSAI trawl limited access fishery. While this closure is effective, the maximum retainable amounts at § 679.20(e) and (f) apply at any time during a trip.

    Classification

    This action responds to the best available information recently obtained from the fishery. The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA, (AA) finds good cause to waive the requirement to provide prior notice and opportunity for public comment pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such a requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest. This requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest as it would prevent NMFS from responding to the most recent fisheries data in a timely fashion and would delay the closure of the Pacific ocean perch directed fishery in the WAI for vessels participating in the BSAI trawl limited access fishery. NMFS was unable to publish a notice providing time for public comment because the most recent, relevant data only became available as of July 26, 2018.

    The AA also finds good cause to waive the 30-day delay in the effective date of this action under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). This finding is based upon the reasons provided above for waiver of prior notice and opportunity for public comment.

    This action is required by § 679.20 and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: July 27, 2018. Jennifer M. Wallace, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16438 Filed 7-27-18; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    83 148 Wednesday, August 1, 2018 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 18 CFR Parts 45 and 46 [Docket No. RM18-15-000] Interlocking Officers and Directors; Requirements for Applicants and Holders AGENCY:

    Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission proposes to revise its regulations related to interlocking officers and directors to clarify and update the requirements for both applicants and holders. In particular, the Commission proposes to update its regulations to reflect statutory changes to the circumstances in which an applicant who would otherwise require Commission authorization to hold an interlocking position need not do so. The Commission also proposes to revise its regulations to clarify its position on late-filed applications and informational reports. The Commission further proposes to revise its regulations to clarify that an interlock holder is not required to file a notice of change when merely changing positions within a holding company. Additionally, the Commission proposes to revise its regulations to state that applicants do not need to list in their applications public utilities that do not have officers or directors. Next, the Commission proposes to revise its regulations with regard to public utilities owned by a natural person. Finally, the Commission proposes to update its regulations to remove a section containing definitions and phrases now rendered obsolete.

    DATES:

    Comments are due October 1, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments, identified by docket number, may be filed in the following ways:

    • Electronic Filing through http://www.ferc.gov. Documents created electronically using word processing software should be filed in native applications or print-to-PDF format and not in a scanned format.

    Mail/Hand Delivery: Those unable to file electronically may mail or hand-deliver comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.

    Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Comment Procedures Section of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amery Poré (Technical Information), Office of Energy Market Regulation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-6312 Mary Ellen Stefanou (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-8989
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    1. Section 305(b) of the Federal Power Act (FPA) 1 prohibits individuals from concurrently holding positions as an officer or director of more than one public utility; or concurrently holding the positions of officer or director of a public utility and of an entity authorized by law to underwrite or participate in the marketing of public utility securities; 2 or concurrently holding the positions of officer or director of a public utility and a company supplying electrical equipment to such public utility, unless the holding of such positions has been authorized by the Commission upon a showing that neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected.3 Congress enacted section 305(b) to prevent certain perceived abuses with holding companies, including (1) excessive charges to subsidiary public utility companies resulting from the lack of arm's length bargaining or the restraint of free and independent competition; (2) allocation of charges for goods and services among subsidiary companies in different States so as to frustrate State regulation; (3) control of subsidiary public utility companies through disproportionately small investment resulting in account practices, and rate, dividend and other policies that complicated and obstructed State regulation; and (4) a general lack of economy of management and operation of public utilities, a lack of efficiency and adequacy of services or a lack of effective public regulation and a lack of economies in raising capital.4

    1 16 U.S.C. 825d(b) (2012).

    2 However, section 305(b)(2) of the FPA, 16 U.S.C. 825d(b)(2), exempts from this prohibition certain interlocks between public utilities and a financial institution that is authorized to underwrite or participate in the marketing of public utility securities.

    3 16 U.S.C. 825d(b).

    4 Title I, Sec. 1, of the Public Utility Act of 1935 (49 Stat. 803, 15 U.S.C. 79a). Title I was the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935. Title II became Parts II and III of the Federal Power Act, which include section 305(b).

    2. The Commission implemented Congress' mandate in part 45 of the Commission's regulations.5 Consistent with the statute, part 45 provides that an application or informational filing be filed, and authorization granted, before a person may hold otherwise proscribed interlocking positions. Part 46 of the Commission's regulations, which implements section 305(c) of the FPA,6 describes the annual filing requirements for those holding interlocking positions, including the relevant definitions.

    5 18 CFR part 45 (2017).

    6 16 U.S.C. 825d(c).

    3. As described below, we propose revisions to parts 45 and 46 of our regulations.7

    7 18 CFR part 46. Section 305(c) of the FPA, as relevant here, requires that any person holding interlocking positions in both a public utility and any of the entities listed in section 305(c)(2) of the FPA file an annual report listing such interlocking positions. 16 U.S.C. 825d(c). The Commission implements section 305(c) in part 46 of its regulations and through its FERC Form No. 561.

    I. Discussion

    4. On October 27, 2016, Commission staff issued its 2016 Biennial Staff Memo Concerning Retrospective Analysis of Existing Rules,8 in which it identified certain Commission regulations as ripe for evaluation, including 18 CFR part 45. The Edison Electric Institute (EEI) submitted comments in support of the Commission's suggested revisions to 18 CFR part 45 and proposed additional revisions.9

    8 2016 Biennial Staff Memo Concerning Retrospective Analysis of Existing Rules, Docket No. AD12-6-002 (published Oct. 27, 2016) (81 FR 76542, Nov. 3, 2016).

    9See Edison Electric Institute Comments, Docket No. AD12-6-002 (Nov. 28, 2016).

    5. Based on our review of our regulations, as well as our review of the comments submitted by EEI, we propose the following changes to the regulations in part 45, as well as certain revisions to part 46.

    6. Section 45.2 of the Commission's regulations describes the types of interlocking positions that require Commission authorization, including those between a public utility and entities authorized by law to underwrite or participate in the marketing of public utility securities.10 However, in 1999, Congress amended section 305(b)(2) of the FPA to provide that an applicant for certain interlocking positions is no longer required to obtain Commission authorization to hold such positions.11 As a result, the Commission proposes to revise § 45.2 of its regulations to add that an applicant for an interlocking position between a public utility and a “bank, trust company, banking association, or firm that is authorized by law to underwrite or participate in the marketing of public utility securities,” 12 does not need Commission authorization when:

    10 18 CFR 45.2(b)(2).

    11See Public Law 106-102, sec. 737, 113 Stat. 1338, 1479 (1999).

    12 18 CFR 45.2(b)(2).

    (1) He/she does not participate in any deliberations or decisions of the public utility regarding the selection of the bank, trust company, banking association, or firm to underwrite or participate in the marketing of securities of the public utility, if he/she serves as an officer or director of a bank, trust company, banking association, or firm that is under consideration in the deliberation process;

    (2) the bank, trust company, banking association, or firm of which he/she is an officer or director does not engage in the underwriting of, or participate in the marketing of, securities of the public utility of which he/she holds the position of officer or director;

    (3) the public utility for which he/she serves or proposes to serve as an officer or director selects underwriters by competitive procedures; or

    (4) the issuance of securities of the public utility for which he/she serves or proposes to serve as an officer or director has been approved by all Federal and State regulatory agencies having jurisdiction over the issuance.13

    13See also 16 U.S.C. 825d(b)(2).

    7. Sections 45.3 and 45.9 of the Commission's regulations require applications and informational filings be filed with the Commission before an applicant holds any interlocking positions within the purview of section 305. The Commission's regulations currently provide in § 45.3(a) that “late-filed applications will be denied” and in § 45.9(b) that “[f]ailure to timely file the informational report will constitute a failure to satisfy this condition and will constitute automatic denial.”

    8. The Commission expects its regulations to be followed. However, the Commission recognizes that good faith errors and oversights may occasionally result in the inadvertent violation of the timing of section 305(b)'s filing requirements. The Commission believes that it is not in the public interest to deny otherwise-qualified applicants' late-filed applications and informational filings made under these regulations when the late filing is due solely to such good faith errors and oversights alone. Late-filed applications do not impede the Commission's ability to decide the case. The statutory standard for authorization to hold otherwise-proscribed interlocks requires the Commission to determine whether the holding of otherwise-proscribed interlocks adversely affects neither public nor private interests, and that determination typically would not depend solely on the date an applicant happens to file.14 Nor would applications that are filed late solely due to good faith errors and oversights implicate the abuses that Congress attempted to prevent in promulgating section 305. Further, denying late-filed applications could cause unnecessary inefficiencies for companies. Therefore, the Commission proposes to delete the above-quoted language, and to replace it with language providing for consideration of late-filed applications for interlocking positions on a case-by-case basis.15

    14 16 U.S.C. 825d(b)(1).

    15 The public utilities whose officers and directors are subject to the statutory directive in section 305(b) to file, as regulated entities themselves subject to and thus sensitive to the requirements of the FPA, would be well-advised to and should make every effort to ensure that their officers and directors, in turn, act in accordance with the statutory directives in section 305(b).

    9. The Commission expects that applicants will be attentive to their obligation to timely file for the required authorizations and make every effort to ensure they act in accordance with the statutory directives in section 305(b). In cases where occasional errors and oversights occur, the Commission expects that those errors and oversights will be expeditiously identified and rectified, and applications to hold interlocking director positions promptly filed. The Commission would look unfavorably on section 305(b) applications where an applicant has not been attentive to his/her obligation to file for the required authorization.

    10. The Commission proposes to revise §§ 45.4 and 45.5 of its regulations to clarify that supplemental applications and notices of change need not be filed in the case of a person already authorized to hold interlocks identified in § 45.9(a) who may assume new or different positions that are still among those identified by § 45.9(a).16 For example, a promotion within a holding company system would not require an interlock holder to file a notice of change. Such changes in positions among related public utilities are already reported in the annual Form No. 561s, and separate filings under § 45.4 or § 45.5 are unnecessary. However, the Commission clarifies that, for such interlocking positions, a holder would still be required to file a notice of change when he/she no longer holds any interlocking positions within the scope of the statute and regulations. No longer holding any interlocking positions would constitute a “material or substantial change.”

    16 If an applicant has a pending application, however, we would expect that the applicant would supplement his/her application should a change occur while the application is pending. In contrast, as noted above, an applicant who has been granted authorization and no longer has a pending application is differently situated, and any change in the positions held can be addressed in the next Form No. 561.

    11. The Commission proposes to revise § 45.8(c)(1) of its regulations to state that applicants under part 45 do not need to list in their applications those public utilities that do not have officers or directors. The Commission recognizes the growing complexity of corporate structures. Thus, in the interest of reducing regulatory burdens, the Commission proposes to eliminate the requirement that applications under part 45 list those public utilities that do not have officers or directors.

    12. The Commission proposes to revise § 45.9 of its regulations to add the word “person” when defining the corporate relationships within the scope of the automatic authorizations addressed in § 45.9. The Commission would thus recognize that public utilities can be owned not just by a corporate entity but by a natural person, and the regulations should reflect this possibility.

    13. Finally, the Commission proposes to update its regulations in part 46 to remove § 46.2(b), because the definitions were rendered obsolete as a result of the enactment of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and the concurrent repeal of the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935.17 The Commission notes that § 46.2(b) currently references the definition of “holding company system” and “registered holding company system” in the Public Utility Holding Company Act (PUHCA) of 1935.18 However, the Commission recognizes that the Energy Policy Act of 2005 repealed the PUHCA of 1935.19 Thus, the Commission proposes to remove § 46.2(b). The Commission also proposes to update part 46 to change “Rural Electrification Administration” to “Rural Utilities Service” to reflect the name change of that organization.

    17See Energy Policy Act of 2005, Public Law 109-58, 1261-77, 119 Stat. 594, 972-78 (2005).

    18 16 U.S.C. 79a et seq.

    19 EPAct 2005, Public Law 109-58, 1263.

    II. Information Collection Statement

    14. The Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 20 requires each federal agency to seek and obtain Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval before undertaking a collection of information directed to 10 or more persons or contained in a rule of general applicability. OMB's regulations 21 require approval of certain information collection requirements imposed by agency rules. Upon approval of a collection of information, OMB will assign an OMB control number and an expiration date. Respondents subject to the filing requirements of an agency rule will not be penalized for failing to respond to these collections of information unless the collections of information display a valid OMB control number.

    20 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).

    21 5 CFR part 1320.

    15. The revisions proposed in this NOPR would clarify and update the requirements 22 for those seeking and holding interlocking positions. The Commission anticipates that the revisions, once effective, would reduce regulatory burdens. The Commission will submit the proposed reporting requirements to OMB for its review and approval under section 3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act.23

    22 18 CFR parts 45 and 46.

    23 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).

    16. While the Commission expects that the regulatory revisions proposed herein will reduce the burdens on affected entities, the Commission nonetheless solicits public comments regarding the accuracy of the burden and cost estimates below.

    17. Burden Estimate:24 The estimated burden and cost for the requirements contained in this NOPR follow.

    24 “Burden” is the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. For further explanation of what is included in the information collection burden, refer to 5 CFR 1320.3

    FERC Form No. 520 [Application for authority to hold interlocking directorate positions] Number of
  • respondents
  • Annual
  • number of
  • responses
  • per
  • respondent
  • Total
  • number of
  • responses
  • Average burden
  • & cost per
  • response 25
  • Total annual
  • burden hours
  • (total annual
  • cost)
  • Cost per
  • respondent
  • ($)
  • (1) (2) (1) * (2) = (3) (4) (3) * (4) = (5) (5) ÷ (1) Full 16 1 16 50 hrs.; $3,950 800 hrs.; $63,200 $3,950 Informational 500 1 500 8 hrs.; $632 4,000 hrs.; $316,000 632 Notice of Change 100 1 100 0.25 hrs.; $19.75 25 hrs.; $1,975 19.75 Total 4,825 hrs.; $381,175

    Title: FERC-520 (Application for Authority to Hold Interlocking Directorate Positions).

    25 The Commission staff thinks that the average respondent for this collection is similarly situated to the Commission, in terms of salary plus benefits. Based upon FERC's 2018 annual average (for salary plus benefits) of $164,820, the average hourly cost is $79/hour.

    OMB Control No.: 1902-0083.

    Abstract: The FPA, as amended, mandates federal oversight and approval of certain electric corporate activities to ensure that neither public nor private interests are adversely affected. Accordingly, the Commission's regulations prescribe related information filing requirements to achieve this goal. Such filing requirements are found in 18 CFR parts 45 and 46.

    Overview of the Data Collection. FERC-520 provides information related to complex electric corporate activities, in particular, the holding of interlocking positions, and thereby serves to safeguard public and private interests, as the FPA requires.

    FERC-520 is divided into two types of applications: Full and informational. The full application, as specified in 18 CFR 45.8, implements the FPA requirement under section 305(b) that it is unlawful for any person to concurrently hold the positions of officer or director of more than one public utility; or a public utility and a financial institution that is authorized to underwrite or participate in the marketing of public utility securities; or a public utility and an electrical equipment supplier to such public utility, unless authorized by the Commission. In order to obtain authorization, an applicant must demonstrate that neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by the holding of the positions. The full application provides the Commission with information about any interlocking position for which the applicant seeks authorization including, but not limited to, a description of duties and the estimated time devoted to the position.

    An informational (abbreviated) application, as specified in 18 CFR 45.9, allows an applicant to receive automatic authorization for an interlocked position upon receipt of the filing by the Commission. The informational application applies only to those individuals who seek authorization as: (1) An officer or director of two or more public utilities where the same holding company owns, directly or indirectly, that percentage of each utility's stock (of whatever class or classes) which is required by each utility's by-laws to elect directors; (2) an officer or director of two public utilities, if one utility is owned, wholly or in part, by the other and, as its primary business, owns or operates transmission or generation facilities to provide transmission service or electric power for sale to its owners; or (3) an officer or director of more than one public utility, if such person is already authorized under part 45 to hold different positions as officer or director of those utilities where the interlock involves affiliated public utilities.

    FERC-520 also includes the requirement to file a notice of change if there are new positions or changes to the positions held. The Commission is proposing to revise its requirements and no longer require a notice of change when a person is merely changing positions within a holding company system. This proposal is expected to reduce the number of filed notices of change by 50 percent annually (from 200 filings to 100 filings) and to reduce the corresponding total burden.

    Type of Respondents: Individuals who plan to concurrently become or concurrently are officers or directors of public utilities and of certain other entities must request authorization to hold such interlocking positions by submitting a FERC-520.

    Internal Review: The Commission has reviewed the information collection requirements and has determined that certain changes are needed and that the remaining requirements are necessary. These requirements conform to the Commission's need for efficient information collection, communication, and management within the energy industry. The Commission has specific, objective support for the burden estimates associated with the information collection requirements. Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting requirements by contacting the following: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426 [Attention: Ellen Brown, Office of the Executive Director], email: [email protected], Phone: (202) 502-8663, fax: (202) 273-0873. Comments concerning the collection of information and the associated burden estimate(s) may also be sent to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503 [Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission]. Due to security concerns, comments should be sent electronically to the following email address: [email protected] Please refer to FERC-520, OMB Control No. 1902-0083 in your submission.

    III. Environmental Analysis

    18. The Commission is required to prepare an Environmental Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement for any action that may have a significant adverse effect on the human environment.26 We conclude that neither an Environmental Assessment nor an Environmental Impact Statement is required for this NOPR under 380.4(a) of the Commission's regulations, which provides a categorical exemption for approval of “action under section [ ] . . . 305 of the FPA relating to . . . interlocking directorates, . . . .” 27

    26Regulations Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act, Order No. 486, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 30,783 (1987).

    27 18 CFR 380.4(a)(16).

    IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    19. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) 28 generally requires a description and analysis of proposed rules that will have significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The Small Business Administration's (SBA) Office of Size Standards develops the numerical definition of a small entity.29 These standards are provided in the SBA regulations at 13 CFR 121.201.30

    28 5 U.S.C. 601-12.

    29 13 CFR 121.101.

    30 13 CFR 121.201. See also U.S. Small Business Administration, Table of Small Business Size Standards Matched to North American Industry Classification System Codes (effective Feb. 26, 2016), https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/files/Size_Standards_Table.pdf.

    20. This proposed rule, if adopted, would apply to those individuals seeking to hold and those currently holding interlocking positions. In order to obtain authorization, an applicant must demonstrate that neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by the holding of the interlocking positions.

    21. There are an estimated 16 respondents who could file full applications over the course of a year, who would provide one response annually with an estimated time commitment of 50 hours per response, and a resulting estimated cost of $3,950.00 per respondent. There are an estimated 500 respondents who could file informational applications over the course of a year, who would provide one response annually with an estimated time commitment of 8 hours per response, and a resulting estimated cost of $632.00 per respondent. In addition, there are an estimated 100 respondents who could file a notice of change annually with an estimated time commitment of 0.25 hours, and a resulting cost of $19.75 per respondent. Therefore the average annual cost for each of the 616 respondents is $618.79. That cost is not significant. More importantly, this proposed rule reduces industry cost by eliminating the need for the filing of some notices of change.

    22. The Commission certifies that this proposed rule, if adopted, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    V. Comment Procedures

    23. The Commission invites interested persons to submit comments on the matters and issues proposed in this notice of proposed rulemaking to be adopted, including any related matters or alternative proposals that commenters may wish to discuss. Comments are due October 1, 2018. Comments must refer to Docket No. RM18-15-000, and must include the commenter's name, the organization they represent, if applicable, and their address in their comments.

    24. The Commission encourages comments to be filed electronically via the eFiling link on the Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov. The Commission accepts most standard word processing formats. Documents created electronically using word processing software should be filed in native applications or print-to-PDF format and not in a scanned format. Commenters filing electronically do not need to make a paper filing.

    25. Commenters that are not able to file comments electronically must send an original of their comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.

    26. All comments will be placed in the Commission's public files and may be viewed, printed, or downloaded remotely as described in the Document Availability section below. Commenters on this proposal are not required to serve copies of their comments on other commenters.

    VI. Document Availability

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

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

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

    List of Subjects 18 CFR Part 45

    Electric utilities, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    18 CFR Part 46

    Antitrust, Electric utilities, Holding companies, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    By direction of the Commission.

    Issued: July 19, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission proposes to amend parts 45 and 46, chapter I, title 18, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows.

    PART 45—APPLICATION FOR AUTHORITY TO HOLD INTERLOCKING POSITIONS 1. The authority citation for part 45 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 791a-825r, 2601-2645; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 42 U.S.C. 7101-7352; 3 CFR 142.

    2. Add § 45.2(d) to read as follows:
    § 45.2 Positions requiring authorization.

    (d) A person that holds or proposes to hold an interlocking position as officer or director of a public utility and of a corporation described by paragraph (b)(2) of this section shall not require authorization to hold such positions in the following circumstances—

    (1) The person does not participate in any deliberations or decisions of the public utility regarding the selection of the bank, trust company, banking association, or firm to underwrite or participate in the marketing of securities of the public utility, if the person serves as an officer or director of a bank, trust company, banking association, or firm that is under consideration in the deliberation process;

    (2) The bank, trust company, banking association, or firm of which the person is an officer or director does not engage in the underwriting of, or participate in the marketing of, securities of the public utility of which the person holds the position of officer or director;

    (3) The public utility for which the person serves or proposes to serve as an officer or director selects underwriters by competitive procedures; or

    (4) The issuance of securities of the public utility for which the person serves or proposes to serve as an officer or director has been approved by all Federal and State regulatory agencies having jurisdiction over the issuance.

    3. Revise § 45.3(a) to read as follows:
    § 45.3 Timing of filing application.

    (a) The holding of positions within the purview of section 305(b) of the Act shall be unlawful unless the holding shall have been authorized by order of the Commission. Nothing in this part shall be construed as authorizing the holding of positions within the purview of section 305(b) of the Act prior to order of the Commission on application therefor. Applications must be filed and authorization must be granted prior to holding any interlocking positions within the purview of section 305(b) of the Act; the Commission will consider late-filed applications on a case-by-case basis. The term “holding,” as used in this part, shall mean acting as, serving as, voting as, or otherwise performing or assuming the duties and responsibilities of officer or director within the purview of section 305(b) of the Act.

    4. Add § 45.4(c) to read as follows:
    § 45.4 Supplemental applications.

    (c) Changes in interlocking positions within the scope of § 45.9. Notwithstanding paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, in the case of interlocking positions that are identified in § 45.9(a), a filing under this section will not be required if the only change to be reported is holding a different or additional interlocking position which is identified in § 45.9(a).

    5. Revise § 45.5(b) to read as follows:
    § 45.5 Supplemental information.

    (b) Notice of changes. In the event of the applicant's resignation, withdrawal, or failure of reelection or appointment in respect to any of the interlocking positions for which authorization has been granted by the Commission, or in the event of any other material or substantial change therein, the applicant shall, within 30 days after any such change occurs, give notice thereof to the Commission setting forth the position, corporation, and date of termination therewith, or other material or substantial change. In the case of interlocking positions that are identified in § 45.9(a), a notice of change under this section will not be required if the only change to be reported is holding a different or additional interlocking position which is identified in § 45.9(a).

    6. Revise § 45.8(c)(1) to read as follows:
    § 45.8 Contents of application.

    (c) * * *

    (1) Name of utility, unless said utility does not have officers or directors.

    7. Revise § 45.9(a)(1) and (b) to read as follows:
    § 45.9 Automatic authorization of certain interlocking positions.

    (a) * * *

    (1) Officer or director of one or more other public utilities if the same holding company or person owns, directly or indirectly, that percentage of each utility's stock (of whatever class or classes) which is required by each utility's by-laws to elect directors;

    (b) Conditions of authorization. As a condition of authorization, any person authorized to hold interlocking positions under this section must submit, prior to performing or assuming the duties and responsibilities of the position, an informational report in accordance with paragraph (c) of this section, unless that person is already authorized to hold interlocking positions of the type governed by this section. The Commission will consider failures to timely file the informational report on a case-by-case basis.

    PART 46—PUBLIC UTILITY FILING REQUIREMENTS AND FILING REQUIREMENTS FOR PERSONS HOLDING INTERLOCKING POSITIONS 8. The authority citation for part 46 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 792-828c; 16 U.S.C. 2601-2645; 42 U.S.C. 7101-7352; E.O. 12009, 3 CFR 142.

    9. In § 46.2, revise paragraph (a), remove and reserve paragraph (b), and revise paragraphs (c) and (e) to read as follows:
    § 46.2 Definitions.

    (a) Public utility has the same meaning as in section 201(e) of the Federal Power Act. Such term does not include any rural electric cooperative which is regulated by the Rural Utilities Service of the Department of Agriculture or any other entities covered in section 201(f) of the Federal Power Act.

    (c) Purchaser means any individual or corporation within the meaning of section 3 of the Federal Power Act who purchases electric energy from a public utility. Such term does not include the United States or any agency or instrumentality of the United States or any rural electric cooperative which is regulated by the Rural Utilities Service of the Department of Agriculture.

    (e) Entity means any firm, company, or organization including any corporation, joint-stock company, partnership, association, business trust, organized group of persons, whether incorporated or not, or a receiver or receivers, trustee or trustees of any of the foregoing. Such term does not include municipality as defined in section 3 of the Federal Power Act and does not include any Federal, State, or local government agencies or any rural electric cooperative which is regulated by the Rural Utilities Service of the Department of Agriculture.

    [FR Doc. 2018-16463 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 721 [EPA-HQ-OPPT-2017-0366; FRL-9981-16] RIN 2070-AB27 Significant New Use Rules on Certain Chemical Substances AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    EPA is proposing significant new use rules (SNURs) under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for 145 chemical substances which were the subject of premanufacture notices (PMNs). The chemical substances are subject to Orders issued by EPA pursuant to section 5(e) of TSCA. This action would require persons who intend to manufacture (defined by statute to include import) or process any of these 145 chemical substances for an activity that is designated as a significant new use by this rule to notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing that activity. The required notification initiates EPA's evaluation of the intended use within the applicable review period. Persons may not commence manufacture or processing for the significant new use until EPA has conducted a review of the premanufacture notice, made an appropriate determination on the notification, and has taken such actions as are required with that determination. In addition to this notice of proposed rulemaking, EPA is issuing the action as a direct final rule elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before August 31, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2017-0366, by one of the following methods:

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

    Mail: Document Control Office (7407M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001.

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

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For technical information contact: Kenneth Moss, Chemical Control Division (7405M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (202) 564-9232; email address: [email protected]

    For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202) 554-1404; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In addition to this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, EPA is issuing the action as a direct final rule elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register. For further information about the proposed significant new use rules, please see the information provided in the direct final action, with the same title, that is located in the “Rules and Regulations” section of this issue of the Federal Register.

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 721

    Environmental protection, Chemicals, Hazardous substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: July 19, 2018. Jeffery T. Morris, Director, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.
    [FR Doc. 2018-15996 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 622 [Docket No. 171128999-8625-01] RIN 0648-BH43 Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Permit Renewal Applications AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS proposes to make administrative revisions to the renewal process for Federal vessel permits, licenses, and endorsements, and dealer permits (hereafter referred to collectively as permits) in the NMFS Southeast Region. This proposed rule would remove the regulatory requirement that NMFS must mail a renewal application to a permit holder (vessel or dealer) whose Federal permit is expiring. NMFS will continue to provide notice of the upcoming expiration date to the permit holder. This proposed rule would also remove the regulatory requirement that NMFS must notify an applicant of any deficiency in a renewal application only through sending a letter via traditional mail, such as through the U.S. Postal Service, which would allow NMFS expanded options for notifying permit holders. The purpose of this proposed rule is to reduce the administrative costs and burden to NMFS of renewing Federal permits, while still maintaining the needed information and services to the public.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be received by August 31, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments on the proposed rule identified by “NOAA-NMFS-2018-0064” by either of the following methods:

    Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2018-0064, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.

    Mail: Submit all written comments to Sarah Stephenson, NMFS Southeast Regional Office, 263 13th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701.

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

    Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other aspects of the collection-of-information requirement contained in this proposed rule may be submitted to Adam Bailey, NMFS Southeast Regional Office (see mailing address above), by email to [email protected], or by fax to 202-395-5806.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sarah Stephenson, NMFS Southeast Regional Office, telephone: 727-824-5305, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In the U.S. southeast region, NMFS and regional fishery management councils manage fisheries in Federal waters under the under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.) and through regulations implemented by NMFS at 50 CFR part 622.

    Background

    NMFS issues permits, licenses, or endorsements to vessel owners and seafood dealers for species managed under multiple fishery management plans (FMPs) developed by Gulf of Mexico (Gulf) and South Atlantic Fishery Management Councils. These permits are valid for 1 year from the date of issuance by NMFS. Current regulations require the Regional Administrator (RA) for the NMFS Southeast Region to mail a paper renewal application with instructions to a permit holder whose Federal permit is expiring approximately 2 months prior to the expiration date (50 CFR 622.4(g)(1)).

    This requirement creates an administrative cost and time burden on NMFS, and other more efficient methods to obtain an application exist. The vessel permit application form with instructions totals nine pages, double sided, and the dealer permit application form with instructions totals five pages, double sided. Each of the application renewals incurs unnecessary labor and material costs for the printing and mailing of the renewal forms. In 2017, a total of 5,269 permit holders were estimated to collectively hold 18,188 permits that must be renewed annually. Depending on the renewal application package required, the corresponding number of pages mailed by the Southeast Permits Office each year for these renewals is between 26,345 and 47,421 pages.

    Additionally, the current regulation for permit renewals requires NMFS to notify an applicant of any deficiency in a renewal application by a letter, which NMFS sends through traditional mail (50 CFR 622.4(g)(1)). In 2017, the NMFS Southeast Permits Office received approximately 8,060 separate applications for vessel permits, licenses, or endorsements, and dealer permits, of which NMFS subsequently mailed letters to 4,305 applicants (53 percent) to address application deficiencies. These notifications also incur unnecessary labor and material costs for the printing and mailing of these letters.

    Management Measures Contained in This Proposed Rule

    This proposed rule would remove the requirement that the RA mail a renewal application to a permit holder whose Federal permit is expiring. Instead, the RA would notify the permit holder approximately 2 months prior to the expiration date of the permit through a letter, email, or other appropriate means that may be available. NMFS would continue to mail applications upon request from an applicant, and applications to renew a Federal vessel permit, license, or endorsement, and dealer permit are currently available for download from the NMFS Southeast Permits Office website at http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/operations_management_information_services/constituency_services_branch/permits/index.html. NMFS is also continuing to expand the number of applications that applicants can submit online. As of July 1, 2018, applicants can access and submit applications online to renew 13 permits.

    This proposed rule would also remove the requirement that the RA notify an applicant of any deficiency in a renewal application only by a letter sent through traditional mail.

    NMFS expects this proposed rule to reduce administrative labor and material costs associated with mailing permit renewal applications and letters of application deficiency to permit holders by allowing NMFS the flexibility to use more efficient means to provide the permit renewal applications and notifications of application deficiency.

    NMFS does not expect this proposed rule to affect the overall number of annual permit renewals that NMFS receives or change the average time necessary for an applicant to complete an application. This proposed rule would not result in any change to fisheries operations.

    Additional Change not Contained in This Proposed Rule

    Although not a regulatory requirement, NMFS has historically mailed renewal applications for Federal operator cards to vessel operators prior to the expiration date. If NMFS implements this proposed rule, a renewal application would not automatically be mailed to individuals with an operator card prior to the expiration date; however, similar to the notification of permit holders with Federal permits discussed in this proposed rule, NMFS intends to continue providing notification to a vessel operator with an operator card of its upcoming expiration prior to that date. Additionally, NMFS may use methods other than by letter to notify applicants that a renewal application contains deficiencies.

    Classification

    The NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this proposed rule is consistent with the applicable FMPs in the Gulf and South Atlantic, the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable laws, subject to further consideration after public comment.

    This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.

    The Magnuson-Stevens Act provides the statutory basis for this proposed rule. No duplicative, overlapping, or conflicting Federal rules have been identified. A description of this proposed rule and its purpose and need are contained in the SUMMARY section of the preamble.

    The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA) that this proposed rule, if adopted, would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The factual basis for this certification is as follows.

    This proposed rule would directly apply to businesses that operate in the commercial fishing (NAICS code 11411), charter vessel and headboat (for-hire) fishing (NAICS code 487210), and fish and seafood market industries (NAICS code 445220) that are required to renew permits, licenses, and endorsements to continue to participate in fisheries managed by the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic Fishery Management Councils.

    For RFA purposes only, NMFS has established a small business size standard for businesses, including their affiliates, whose primary industry is commercial fishing. A business primarily engaged in commercial fishing is classified as a small business if it is independently owned and operated, is not dominant in its field of operation (including its affiliates), and has combined annual receipts not in excess of $11 million for all its affiliated operations worldwide. The SBA's annual revenue threshold for a business involved in either the for-hire fishing, or fish and seafood marketing industry is $7.5 million. It is initially expected that almost all to all of the businesses directly affected by this action are small.

    In 2017, 5,269 unique entities were estimated to collectively hold 18,188 permits, licenses, or endorsements that must be renewed annually, and these unique entities are expected to represent up to 5,269 unique small businesses.

    The proposed rule would eliminate the requirement that the RA print and mail renewal applications to every applicable permit, license, or endorsement holder every year. Instead, the RA would notify small businesses whose permits are expiring and instruct them of the various alternative methods of acquiring the renewal application, which are: submit an electronic application form online, if available; download and print an application form; call the NMFS Southeast Permits Office toll-free number and request an application form by mail; or acquire an application form in person from the NMFS Southeast Permits Office.

    Currently, all small businesses can acquire a paper renewal application by either waiting for the application in the mail, downloading and printing one, or coming to the Permits Office. An increasing number of applicants can access and submit an electronic renewal application online, but this service is not available for all applicants because not all renewal applications can be submitted online at this time. As of July 1, 2018, applicants can access and submit applications online to renew 13 permits (of the 27 permits issued under the FMPs), and NMFS is working to increase the number of permits that can be renewed in this manner.

    This action would have no impact on any small businesses that currently submit an online application to renew their permit, download and print an application, or get an application in-person from the Permits Office. However, it would have impacts on those small businesses that currently rely on or otherwise use the application automatically mailed to them.

    NMFS expects that this proposed rule would divide those latter small businesses into four subgroups depending on which option to obtain an application they prefer and are able to choose. The number of small businesses that would choose any particular option is unknown. All options would require the same average amount of time to complete an application.

    As NMFS continues to expand the number of permit applications that are available to submit online, small businesses that presently cannot submit their permit renewal applications online would receive multiple direct and indirect benefits. These include the convenience and efficiency of accessing and submitting an application online, eliminating the cost of mailing a completed paper application (estimated to be, on average, $0.91 per application annually), and a small business' ability to pay the renewal fee(s) by either credit card or electronic check via Pay.gov accessed through the Southeast Fisheries Online Permit System, rather than by check or money order. Benefits of paying electronically include, but are not restricted to, higher transaction speed, reduced check-associated costs, and greater transaction transparency.

    The existing option to download and print out a paper application would have added benefits and costs to those who currently do not choose this option. These include the flexibility to acquire the application at their convenience and the additional direct cost of downloading and printing each application form (expected to vary from $1 to $10). This option would not change baseline mailing costs ($0.91) or payment options. Payment submitted with paper applications must be made by either check or money order.

    The proposed rule would also give small businesses the option to call the NMFS Southeast Permits Office toll-free to request that NMFS mail a paper application to them. This would require a small business to take the time to call NMFS to request the application be mailed. This option is essentially a no-action alternative; there would be no change in baseline mailing costs or payment options to small businesses for each application.

    A fourth option would be for an applicant to travel to the NMFS Southeast Permits Office in St. Petersburg, Florida, to obtain an application. However, NMFS expects that most small businesses would not select this option because of time and travel costs.

    The added cost to acquire an application by telephone request, download, online access and submission, or traveling to the Permits Office is expected to be minimal. In conclusion, NMFS expects this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, and an initial regulatory flexibility analysis is not required and none has been prepared.

    This proposed rule contains collection-of-information requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) and which have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under control number 0648-0205. Public reporting burden for renewal applications in the Southeast Region Permit Family of Forms is estimated to vary between 30 and 55 minutes, depending on the applicable form. The estimated reporting burdens are based on an individual response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. This proposed rule would not change existing collection-of-information requirements or estimated reporting burdens. Send comments regarding the burden estimates, or any other aspect of this data collection, including suggestions for reducing the burden to Adam Bailey, NMFS Southeast Regional Office (see ADDRESSES), by email to [email protected], or fax to 202-395-5806.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is required to respond to, and no person will be subject to penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number. All currently approved collections of information may be viewed at http://www.cio.noaa.gov/services_programs/prasubs.html.

    List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 622

    Commercial, Dealer, Endorsement, Fisheries, Fishing, Gulf of Mexico, License, Permit, South Atlantic.

    Dated: July 27, 2018. Samuel D. Rauch, III, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 622 is proposed to be amended as follows:

    PART 622—FISHERIES OF THE CARIBBEAN, GULF OF MEXICO, AND SOUTH ATLANTIC 1. The authority citation for part 622 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    2. In § 622.4, revise paragraph (g)(1) to read as follows:
    § 622.4 Permits and fees—general.

    (g) * * *

    (1) Vessel permits, licenses, and endorsements, and dealer permits. Unless specified otherwise, a vessel or dealer permit holder who has been issued a permit, license, or endorsement under this part must renew such permit, license, or endorsement on an annual basis. The RA will notify a vessel or dealer permit holder whose permit, license, or endorsement is expiring approximately 2 months prior to the expiration date. A vessel or dealer permit holder who does not receive a notification is still required to submit an application form as specified below. The applicant must submit a completed renewal application form and all required supporting documents to the RA prior to the applicable deadline for renewal of the permit, license, or endorsement, and at least 30 calendar days prior to the date on which the applicant desires to have the permit made effective. Application forms and instructions for renewal are available online at sero.nmfs.noaa.gov or from the RA (Southeast Permits Office) at 1-877-376-4877, Monday through Friday between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., eastern time. If the RA receives an incomplete application, the RA will notify the applicant of the deficiency. If the applicant fails to correct the deficiency within 30 calendar days of the notification date by the RA, the application will be considered abandoned. A permit, license, or endorsement that is not renewed within the applicable deadline will not be reissued.

    [FR Doc. 2018-16462 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    83 148 Wednesday, August 1, 2018 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2017-0097] Texas A&M AgriLife Research; Availability of a Draft Plant Pest Risk Assessment and Draft Environmental Assessment for Cotton Genetically Engineered for Ultra-low Gossypol Levels in the Cottonseed AGENCY:

    Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    We are advising the public that the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service is making available for public comment a draft plant pest risk assessment (PPRA) and draft environmental assessment (EA) for cotton designated as event TAM66274, which has been genetically engineered for ultra-low gossypol levels in the cottonseed. We are making the draft PPRA and draft EA available for public review and comment.

    DATES:

    We will consider all comments that we receive on or before August 31, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by either of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2017-0097.

    Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Send your comment to Docket No. APHIS-2017-0097, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238.

    Supporting documents and any comments we receive on this docket may be viewed at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2017-0097 or in our reading room, which is located in room 1141 of the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call (202) 799-7039 before coming.

    The petition is also available on the APHIS website at: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/biotechnology/petitions_table_pending.shtml under APHIS petition 17-292-01p.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. John Turner, Director, Environmental Risk Analysis Programs, Biotechnology Regulatory Services, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 147, Riverdale, MD 20737-1236; (301) 851-3954, email: [email protected] To obtain copies of the petition, contact Ms. Cindy Eck at (301) 851-3892, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the authority of the plant pest provisions of the Plant Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 7701 et seq.), the regulations in 7 CFR part 340, “Introduction of Organisms and Products Altered or Produced Through Genetic Engineering Which Are Plant Pests or Which There Is Reason to Believe Are Plant Pests,” regulate, among other things, the introduction (importation, interstate movement, or release into the environment) of organisms and products altered or produced through genetic engineering that are plant pests or that there is reason to believe are plant pests. Such genetically engineered (GE) organisms and products are considered “regulated articles.”

    The regulations in § 340.6(a) provide that any person may submit a petition to the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) seeking a determination that an article should not be regulated under 7 CFR part 340. APHIS received a petition (APHIS Petition Number 17-292-01p) from Texas A&M AgriLife Research of College Station, TX (Texas A&M), seeking a determination of nonregulated status of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) designated as event TAM66274, which has been genetically engineered for ultra-low gossypol levels in the cottonseed. The Texas A&M petition states that information collected during field trials and laboratory analyses indicates that TAM66274 cotton is not likely to be a plant pest and therefore should not be a regulated article under APHIS' regulations in 7 CFR part 340.

    According to our process 1 for soliciting public comment when considering petitions for determinations of nonregulated status of GE organisms, APHIS accepts written comments regarding a petition once APHIS deems it complete. In a notice 2 published in the Federal Register on December 5, 2017 (82 FR 57426-57427, Docket No. APHIS-2017-0097), APHIS announced the availability of the Texas A&M petition for public comment. APHIS solicited comments on the petition for 60 days ending on February 5, 2018, in order to help identify potential environmental and interrelated economic issues and impacts that APHIS may determine should be considered in our evaluation of the petition. APHIS received 47 comments on the petition. Of those, 44 were supportive, two opposed, and one was not related to the petition. APHIS has evaluated the issues raised during the comment period and, where appropriate, has provided a discussion of these issues in our draft environmental assessment (EA).

    1 On March 6, 2012, APHIS published in the Federal Register (77 FR 13258-13260, Docket No. APHIS-2011-0129) a notice describing our public review process for soliciting public comments and information when considering petitions for determinations of nonregulated status for GE organisms. To view the notice, go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2011-0129.

    2 To view the notice, the petition, and the comments we received, go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2017-0097.

    After public comments are received on a completed petition, APHIS evaluates those comments and then provides a second opportunity for public involvement in our decisionmaking process. According to our public review process (see footnote 1), the second opportunity for public involvement follows one of two approaches, as described below.

    If APHIS decides, based on its review of the petition and its evaluation and analysis of comments received during the 60-day public comment period on the petition, that the petition involves a GE organism that raises no substantive new issues, APHIS will follow Approach 1 for public involvement. Under Approach 1, APHIS announces in the Federal Register the availability of APHIS' preliminary regulatory determination along with its draft EA, preliminary finding of no significant impact (FONSI), and its draft plant pest risk assessment (PPRA) for a 30-day public review period. APHIS will evaluate any information received related to the petition and its supporting documents during the 30-day public review period.

    If APHIS decides, based on its review of the petition and its evaluation and analysis of comments received during the 60-day public comment period on the petition, that the petition involves a GE organism that raises substantive new issues, APHIS will follow Approach 2. Under Approach 2, APHIS first solicits written comments from the public on a draft EA and draft PPRA for a 30-day comment period through the publication of a Federal Register notice. Then, after reviewing and evaluating the comments on the draft EA and draft PPRA and other information, APHIS will revise the PPRA as necessary and prepare a final EA and, based on the final EA, a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) decision document (either a FONSI or a notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement). For this petition, we are using Approach 2.

    As part of our decisionmaking process regarding a GE organism's regulatory status, APHIS prepares a PPRA to assess the plant pest risk of the article. APHIS also prepares the appropriate environmental documentation—either an EA or an environmental impact statement—in accordance with NEPA, to provide the Agency and the public with a review and analysis of any potential environmental impacts that may result if the petition request is approved.

    APHIS has prepared a draft PPRA and has concluded that cotton designated as event TAM66274, which has been genetically engineered for ultra-low gossypol levels in the cottonseed, is unlikely to pose a plant pest risk. In section 403 of the Plant Protection Act, “plant pest” is defined as any living stage of any of the following that can directly or indirectly injure, cause damage to, or cause disease in any plant or plant product: A protozoan, a nonhuman animal, a parasitic plant, a bacterium, a fungus, a virus or viroid, an infectious agent or other pathogen, or any article similar to or allied with any of the foregoing.

    APHIS has also prepared a draft EA in which we present two alternatives based on our analysis of data submitted by Texas A&M, a review of other scientific data, field tests conducted under APHIS oversight, and comments received on the petition. APHIS is considering the following alternatives: (1) Take no action, i.e., APHIS would not change the regulatory status of cotton designated as event TAM66274, or (2) make a determination of nonregulated status of cotton designated as event TAM66274.

    The draft EA was prepared in accordance with (1) NEPA, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), (2) regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality for implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), (3) U.S. Department of Agriculture regulations implementing NEPA (7 CFR part 1b), and (4) APHIS' NEPA Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part 372).

    In accordance with our process for soliciting public input when considering petitions for determinations of nonregulated status for GE organisms, we are publishing this notice to inform the public that APHIS will accept written comments on our draft EA and our draft PPRA regarding the petition for a determination of nonregulated status from interested or affected persons for a period of 30 days from the date of this notice. Copies of the draft EA and the draft PPRA, as well as the previously published petition, are available as indicated under ADDRESSES and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT above.

    After the 30-day comment period closes, APHIS will review and evaluate any information received during the comment period and any other relevant information. After reviewing and evaluating the comments on the draft EA and the draft PPRA and other information, APHIS will revise the PPRA as necessary and prepare a final EA. Based on the final EA, APHIS will prepare a NEPA decision document (either a FONSI or a notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement). If a FONSI is reached, APHIS will furnish a response to the petitioner, either approving or denying the petition. APHIS will also publish a notice in the Federal Register announcing the regulatory status of the GE organism and the availability of APHIS' final EA, PPRA, FONSI, and our regulatory determination.

    Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 7701-7772 and 7781-7786; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.3.

    Done in Washington, DC, this 26th day of July 2018. Kevin Shea, Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16389 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Idaho (Boise, Caribou-Targhee, Salmon-Challis, and Sawtooth National Forests and Curlew National Grassland); Nevada (Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest); Utah (Ashley, Dixie, Fishlake, Manti-La Sal, and Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forests); Wyoming (Bridger-Teton National Forest); and Wyoming/Colorado (Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest and Thunder Basin National Grassland); Amendments to Land Management Plans for Greater Sage-Grouse Conservation AGENCY:

    Forest Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice to extend the public scoping period for supplemental notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement; notice of updated information concerning the Forest Service greater sage-grouse land and resource management plan amendments; correction.

    SUMMARY:

    The USDA Forest Service is issuing this notice to advise the public of a 14-day extension to the public scoping period on the supplemental notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement for the amendments to land management plans for greater sage-grouse conservation.

    DATES:

    Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received by August 15, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send written comments to Sage-grouse Amendment Comment, USDA Forest Service Intermountain Region, Federal Building, 324 25th Street, Ogden, UT 84401.

    Comments may also be sent via email to, [email protected], or via facsimile to 801-625-5277.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    John Shivik at 801-625-5667 or email [email protected] Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The original corrected notice of intent for public comment on the greater sage-grouse plan amendments was published in the Federal Register on July 2, 2018 (83 FR 30909). The original notice of intent provided a 30 day comment period, which may be insufficient for comment preparation from all interested parties. As such, the comment period for the original notice is being extended by 14 days.

    If the Forest Service amends land management plans, we hereby give notice that substantive requirements of the 2012 Planning Rule (36 CFR part 219) that are likely to be directly related, and therefore applicable, to the amendments are in sections 219.8(a) and (b) (ecological and social and economic sustainability), 219.9 (diversity of plant and animal communities), and 219.10(a) (integrated resource management for ecosystem services and multiple use).

    The public is encouraged to help identify any issues, management questions, or concerns that should be addressed in plan amendment(s) or policy or administrative action. The Forest Service will work collaboratively with interested parties to identify the management direction that is best suited to local, regional, and national needs and concerns. The Forest Service will use an interdisciplinary approach as it considers the variety of resource issues and concerns.

    Dated: July 26, 2018. Chris French, Associate Deputy Chief, National Forest System.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16556 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3411-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    The Department of Commerce will submit to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).

    Agency: Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), Commerce.

    Title: Annual Survey of U.S. Direct Investment Abroad.

    OMB Control Number: 0608-0053.

    Form Number: BE-11.

    Type of Request: Regular submission.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 3,150 respondents (U.S. parents). A complete response includes a BE-11 A form for the U.S. parent's domestic operation and one or more BE-11 B, C, or D forms for its foreign affiliates that meet the BE-11 survey requirements. BEA estimates that U.S. parents will submit 3,150 A forms, 25,000 B forms, 1,500 C forms, 200 D forms, and 500 Claim for Exemption forms.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 325,750 hours. Total annual burden is calculated by multiplying the estimated number of submissions of each form by the average hourly burden per form, which is 7 hours for the A form, 12 hours for the B form, 2 hours for the C form, 1 hour for the D form, and 1 hour for the Claim for Exemption form.

    Estimated Time per Respondent: 103.4 hours per respondent (325,750 hours/3,150 U.S. parents) is the average, but may vary considerably among respondents because of differences in company structure, complexity, and the number of foreign affiliates each U.S. parent must report.

    Needs and Uses: The Annual Survey of U.S. Direct Investment Abroad (BE-11) obtains sample data on the financial structure and operations of U.S. parents and their foreign affiliates. The data are needed to provide reliable, useful, and timely measures of U.S. direct investment abroad to assess its impact on the U.S. and foreign economies. The sample data are used to derive universe estimates in nonbenchmark years from similar data reported in the BE-10, Benchmark Survey of U.S. Direct Investment Abroad, which is conducted every five years. The data collected include balance sheets; income statements; property, plant, and equipment; employment and employee compensation; merchandise trade; sales of goods and services; taxes; and research and development activity.

    Affected Public: Businesses or other for-profit organizations.

    Frequency: Annual.

    Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.

    This information collection request may be viewed at www.reginfo.gov. Follow the instructions to view Department of Commerce collections currently under review by OMB. Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to OIRA [email protected] or fax to (202) 395-5806.

    Sheleen Dumas, Departmental Lead PRA Officer, Office of Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16410 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    The Department of Commerce will submit to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).

    Agency: Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), Commerce.

    Title: Annual Survey of Foreign Direct Investment in the United States.

    OMB Control Number: 0608-0034.

    Form Number: BE-15.

    Type of Request: Regular submission.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 5,700 annually, of which approximately 2,300 file A forms, 1,600 file B forms, 1,300 file C forms, and 500 file Claim for Exemption forms.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 112,350 hours. Total annual burden is calculated by multiplying the estimated number of submissions of each form by the average hourly burden per form, which is 44.75 hours for the A form, 3.75 hours for the B form, 2.25 hours for the C form, and 1 hour for the Claim for Exemption form.

    Estimated Time per Respondent: 19.7 hours per respondent (112,350 hours/5,700 respondents) is the average, but may vary considerably among respondents because of differences in company size and complexity.

    Needs and Uses: The Annual Survey of Foreign Direct Investment in the United States (BE-15) obtains sample data on the financial structure and operations of foreign-owned U.S. business enterprises. The data are needed to provide reliable, useful, and timely measures of foreign direct investment in the United States to assess its impact on the U.S. economy. The sample data are used to derive universe estimates in nonbenchmark years from similar data reported in the BE-12, Benchmark Survey of Foreign Direct Investment in the United States, which is conducted every five years. The data collected include balance sheets; income statements; property, plant, and equipment; employment and employee compensation; merchandise trade; sales of goods and services; taxes; and research and development activity for the U.S. operations. In addition to these national data, several data items are collected by state, including employment and property, plant, and equipment.

    Affected Public: Businesses or other for-profit organizations.

    Frequency: Annual.

    Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.

    This information collection request may be viewed at www.reginfo.gov. Follow the instructions to view Department of Commerce collections currently under review by OMB.

    Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to OIRA [email protected] or fax to (202) 395-5806.

    Sheleen Dumas, Departmental Lead PRA Officer, Office of Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16411 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    The Department of Commerce will submit to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act.

    Agency: U.S. Census Bureau.

    Title: Service Annual Survey.

    OMB Control Number: 0607-0422.

    Form Number(s): SA-22010A—SA-81300E (180 forms total).

    Type of Request: Revision of a currently approved collection.

    Number of Respondents: 91,401.

    Average Hours per Response: 1 hour and 32 minutes.

    Burden Hours: 139,889.

    Needs and Uses: Over 50 percent of all economic activity is generated by businesses in the services sectors, defined to exclude retail and wholesale trade. The U.S. Census Bureau currently measures the total output of most of the service industries annually in the Service Annual Survey (SAS). This survey currently covers all or portions of: Utilities; Transportation and Warehousing; Information; Finance and Insurance; Real Estate and Rental and Leasing; Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services; Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services; Educational Services; Health Care and Social Assistance; Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation; Accommodation and Food Services; and Other Services (except Public Administration) as defined by the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). The SAS provides the only official source of annual revenue estimates for the service industries.

    Estimates from the SAS are essential to measurement of economic growth, real output, prices, and productivity for our nation's economy. A broad spectrum of government and private stakeholders use these estimates in analyzing economic activity; forecasting economic growth; and compiling data on productivity, prices and the gross domestic product (GDP). In addition, trade and professional organizations use these estimates to analyze industry trends, benchmark their own statistical products and develop forecasts. Private businesses use these estimates to measure market share, analyze business potential, and plan investments.

    Collected data include operating revenue for both taxable and tax-exempt firms and organizations, sources of revenue and expenses by type for selected industries, operating expenses, and selected industry-specific items. In addition, e-commerce data is collected for all industries, and export and inventory data is collected for selected industries. The availability of these data greatly improves the quality of the intermediate inputs and value-added estimates in the annual input-output and GDP by industry accounts produced by the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA).

    Beginning in survey year 2018, the operating expenses portion of the questionnaire will be condensed substantially in non-Economic Census reference years. This change will relieve respondent burden with the goal of improving the rate and quality of survey response.

    The Census Bureau will also begin measuring telemedicine. The use of telemedicine by mental health professionals is increasing as the nation's behavioral health is a huge concern, especially with the current opioid crisis. With increased insurance coverage for the cost of these services, it is likely that more healthcare professionals will begin delivering services via telemedicine. This question will provide the first federal data on the new business model of telemedicine for outpatient medical providers. It will be an expansion of the current patient visits question, and will appear on forms SA-62000A/E, SA-62150A/E, and SA-62190A/E (total of 6 forms). The question will be subject to cognitive testing, modified based on results if necessary, and implemented when it has cleared testing. Cognitive testing will be conducted under the Census Bureau's generic clearance for questionnaire pretesting research.

    In addition, a new form will be created (SA-52413 A/E) for reinsurance carriers featuring a new variation of the existing “Direct Losses Incurred” question (Item 13). This change will increase clarity for respondents and reduce reporting error.

    Minor changes will also be made to various forms to increase clarity of what is being asked of respondents (e.g., improving instructions or removing parts of a question), improve the quality of data the Census Bureau receives, and further reduce respondent burden.

    Affected Public: Business or other for-profit; Not-for-profit institutions; Federal government.

    Frequency: Annually.

    Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.

    Legal Authority: Title 13, United States Code, Sections 131 and 182 authorize the collection. Sections 224 and 225 make reporting mandatory.

    This information collection request may be viewed at www.reginfo.gov. Follow the instructions to view Department of Commerce collections currently under review by OMB.

    Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to [email protected] or fax to (202) 395-5806.

    Sheleen Dumas, Departmental Lead PRA Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16409 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-07-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board [S-106-2018] Foreign-Trade Zone 163—Ponce, Puerto Rico; Application for Subzone; Liquilux Gas Corporation; Ponce, Puerto Rico

    An application has been submitted to the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the Board) by CODEZOL, C.D., grantee of FTZ 163, requesting subzone status for the facility of Liquilux Gas Corporation, located in Ponce, Puerto Rico. The application was submitted pursuant to the provisions of the Foreign-Trade Zones Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), and the regulations of the Board (15 CFR part 400). It was formally docketed on July 27, 2018.

    The proposed subzone (1.96 acres) is located at Carr. Del Muelle #215 in Ponce, Puerto Rico. No authorization for production activity has been requested at this time. The proposed subzone would be subject to the existing activation limit of FTZ 163.

    In accordance with the Board's regulations, Camille Evans of the FTZ Staff is designated examiner to review the application and make recommendations to the Executive Secretary.

    Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions shall be addressed to the Board's Executive Secretary at the address below. The closing period for their receipt is September 10, 2018. Rebuttal comments in response to material submitted during the foregoing period may be submitted during the subsequent 15-day period to September 25, 2018.

    A copy of the application will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Executive Secretary, Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room 21013, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230-0002, and in the “Reading Room” section of the Board's website, which is accessible via www.trade.gov/ftz.

    For further information, contact Camille Evans at [email protected] or (202) 482-2350.

    Dated: July 27, 2018. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16444 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C-570-087] Steel Propane Cylinders From the People's Republic of China: Postponement of Preliminary Determination in the Countervailing Duty Investigation AGENCY:

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

    DATES:

    Applicable August 1, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Samuel Brummitt at (202) 482-7851, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On June 11, 2018, the Department of Commerce (Commerce) initiated a countervailing duty (CVD) investigation of imports of steel propane cylinders from the People's Republic of China (China).1 Currently, the preliminary determination is due no later than August 15, 2018.

    1See Steel Propane Cylinders From the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation, 83 FR 28189 (June 18, 2018) (Initiation Notice).

    Postponement of Preliminary Determinations

    Section 703(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires Commerce to issue the preliminary determination in a countervailing duty investigation within 65 days after the date on which Commerce initiated the investigation. However, section 703(c)(1) of the Act permits Commerce to postpone the preliminary determination until no later than 130 days after the date on which Commerce initiated the investigation if: (A) The petitioner 2 makes a timely request for a postponement; or (B) Commerce concludes that the parties concerned are cooperating, that the investigation is extraordinarily complicated, and that additional time is necessary to make a preliminary determination. Under 19 CFR 351.205(e), the petitioner must submit a request for postponement 25 days or more before the scheduled date of the preliminary determination and must state the reasons for the request. Commerce will grant the request unless it finds compelling reasons to deny the request.

    2 The petitioners are Worthington Industries and Manchester Tank & Equipment Co.

    On July 20, 2018, the petitioners submitted a timely request that Commerce postpone the preliminary CVD determination.3 The petitioners stated that the purpose of their request is to provide Commerce with adequate time to analyze fully questionnaire responses from the Government of China and the mandatory respondents and to determine the extent to which the respondents received countervailable subsidies.4 In accordance with 19 CFR 351.205(e), the petitioners have stated the reasons for requesting a postponement of the preliminary determination, and Commerce finds no compelling reason to deny the request. Therefore, in accordance with section 703(c)(1)(A) of the Act, Commerce is postponing the deadline for the preliminary determination to no later than 130 days after the date on which this investigation was initiated, i.e., October 19, 2018. Pursuant to section 705(a)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(1), the deadline for the final determination of this investigation will continue to be 75 days after the date of the preliminary determination.

    3See the petitioners' letter, “Steel Propane Cylinders from the People's Republic of China—Petitioners' Request to Postpone Preliminary Determination,” dated July 20, 2018.

    4Id.

    This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 703(c)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(f)(1).

    Dated: July 26, 2018. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16447 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Initiation of Five-Year (Sunset) Reviews AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department of Commerce (Commerce) is automatically initiating the five-year reviews (Sunset Reviews) of the antidumping and countervailing duty (AD/CVD) order(s) listed below. The International Trade Commission (the Commission) is publishing concurrently with this notice its notice of Institution of Five-Year Reviews which covers the same order(s).

    DATES:

    Applicable (August 1, 2018).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Commerce official identified in the Initiation of Review section below at AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230. For information from the Commission, contact Mary Messer, Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission at (202) 205-3193.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    Commerce's procedures for the conduct of Sunset Reviews are set forth in its Procedures for Conducting Five-Year (Sunset) Reviews of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 63 FR 13516 (March 20, 1998) and 70 FR 62061 (October 28, 2005). Guidance on methodological or analytical issues relevant to Commerce's conduct of Sunset Reviews is set forth in Antidumping Proceedings: Calculation of the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Duty Proceedings; Final Modification, 77 FR 8101 (February 14, 2012).

    Initiation of Review

    In accordance with section 751(c) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(c), we are initiating the Sunset Reviews of the following antidumping and countervailing duty order(s):

    DOC Case No. ITC Case No. Country Product Commerce contact A-475-818 731-TA-734 Italy Certain Pasta, (4th Review) Jacqueline Arrowsmith, (202) 482-5255. C-475-819 701-TA-365 Italy Certain Pasta, (4th Review) Jacqueline Arrowsmith, (202) 482-5255. A-489-805 731-TA-735 Turkey Certain Pasta, (4th Review) Joshua Poole, (202) 482-1293. C-489-806 701-TA-366 Turkey Certain Pasta, (4th Review) Joshua Poole, (202) 482-1293. Filing Information

    As a courtesy, we are making information related to sunset proceedings, including copies of the pertinent statute and Commerces's regulations, Commerce's schedule for Sunset Reviews, a listing of past revocations and continuations, and current service lists, available to the public on Commerce's website at the following address: http://enforcement.trade.gov/sunset/. All submissions in these Sunset Reviews must be filed in accordance with Commerce's regulations regarding format, translation, and service of documents. These rules, including electronic filing requirements via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS), can be found at 19 CFR 351.303.1

    1See also Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011).

    Any party submitting factual information in an AD/CVD proceeding must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.2 Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR 351.303(g).3 Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the submitting party does not comply with applicable revised certification requirements.

    2See section 782(b) of the Act.

    3See also Certification of Factual Information to Import Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule). Answers to frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule are available at http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.

    On April 10, 2013, Commerce modified two regulations related to AD/CVD proceedings: the definition of factual information (19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)), and the time limits for the submission of factual information (19 CFR 351.301).4 Parties are advised to review the final rule, available at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/2013/1304frn/2013-08227.txt, prior to submitting factual information in these segments. To the extent that other regulations govern the submission of factual information in a segment (such as 19 CFR 351.218), these time limits will continue to be applied. Parties are also advised to review the final rule concerning the extension of time limits for submissions in AD/CVD proceedings, available at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/2013/1309frn/2013-22853.txt, prior to submitting factual information in these segments.5

    4See Definition of Factual Information and Time Limits for Submission of Factual Information: Final Rule, 78 FR 21246 (April 10, 2013).

    5See Extension of Time Limits, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013).

    Letters of Appearance and Administrative Protective Orders

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.103(d), Commerce will maintain and make available a public service list for these proceedings. Parties wishing to participate in any of these five-year reviews must file letters of appearance as discussed at 19 CFR 351.103(d)). To facilitate the timely preparation of the public service list, it is requested that those seeking recognition as interested parties to a proceeding submit an entry of appearance within 10 days of the publication of the Notice of Initiation. Because deadlines in Sunset Reviews can be very short, we urge interested parties who want access to proprietary information under administrative protective order (APO) to file an APO application immediately following publication in the Federal Register of this notice of initiation. Commerce's regulations on submission of proprietary information and eligibility to receive access to business proprietary information under APO can be found at 19 CFR 351.304-306.

    Information Required From Interested Parties

    Domestic interested parties, as defined in section 771(9)(C), (D), (E), (F), and (G) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.102(b), wishing to participate in a Sunset Review must respond not later than 15 days after the date of publication in the Federal Register of this notice of initiation by filing a notice of intent to participate. The required contents of the notice of intent to participate are set forth at 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(ii). In accordance with Commerce's regulations, if we do not receive a notice of intent to participate from at least one domestic interested party by the 15-day deadline, Commerce will automatically revoke the order without further review.6

    6See 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(iii).

    If we receive an order-specific notice of intent to participate from a domestic interested party, Commerce's regulations provide that all parties wishing to participate in a Sunset Review must file complete substantive responses not later than 30 days after the date of publication in the Federal Register of this notice of initiation. The required contents of a substantive response, on an order-specific basis, are set forth at 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3). Note that certain information requirements differ for respondent and domestic parties. Also, note that Commerce's information requirements are distinct from the Commission's information requirements. Consult Commerce's regulations for information regarding Commerce's conduct of Sunset Reviews. Consult Commerce's regulations at 19 CFR part 351 for definitions of terms and for other general information concerning antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings at Commerce.

    This notice of initiation is being published in accordance with section 751(c) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(c).

    Dated: July 26, 2018. James Maeder, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations performing the duties of Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16445 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-469-817] Ripe Olives From Spain: Antidumping Duty Order AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    Based on affirmative final determinations by the Department of Commerce (Commerce) and the International Trade Commission (ITC), Commerce is issuing an antidumping duty order on ripe olives from Spain.

    DATES:

    Applicable August 1, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Bryan Hansen or Peter Zukowski, AD/CVD Operations Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3683 or (202) 482-0189, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    In accordance with sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.210(c), on June 18, 2018, Commerce published its affirmative final determination in the less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation of ripe olives from Spain.1 On July 25, 2018, the ITC notified Commerce of its final determination pursuant to section 735(b)(1)(A) of the Act that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of the LTFV imports of ripe olives from Spain.2

    1See Ripe Olives from Spain: Final Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 83 FR 28193 (June 18, 2018) (Final Determination).

    2See Notification Letter from the ITC dated July 25, 2018 (ITC Letter).

    Scope of the Order

    The merchandise covered by this order is ripe olives. For a complete description of the scope of the order, see the Appendix to this notice.

    Antidumping Duty Order

    On July 25, 2018, in accordance with sections 735(b)(1)(A) and 735(d) of the Act, the ITC notified Commerce of its final determination in this investigation, in which it found that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of imports of ripe olives from Spain that are sold in the United States at LTFV.3 Therefore, in accordance with section 735(c)(2) of the Act, we are issuing this antidumping duty order. Because the ITC determined that imports of ripe olives from Spain are materially injuring a U.S. industry, unliquidated entries of such merchandise from Spain, entered or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, are subject to the assessment of antidumping duties.

    3See ITC Letter.

    Therefore, in accordance with section 736(a)(1) of the Act, Commerce will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess, upon further instruction by Commerce, antidumping duties equal to the amount by which the normal value of the merchandise exceeds the export price (or constructed export price) of the merchandise, for all relevant entries of ripe olives from Spain. Antidumping duties will be assessed on unliquidated entries of ripe olives from Spain entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after January 26, 2018, the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination, 4 but will not be assessed on entries occurring after the expiration of the provisional measures period and before publication of the ITC's final injury determination as further described below.

    4See Ripe Olives from Spain: Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Postponement of Final Determination, and Extension of Provisional Measures, 83 FR 3677 (January 26, 2018) (Preliminary Determination).

    Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, Commerce will instruct CBP to continue to suspend liquidation of all appropriate entries of ripe olives from Spain as described in the Appendix to this notice, which were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after January 26, 2018, the date of publication of the preliminary determination of this investigation in the Federal Register. These instructions suspending liquidation will remain in effect until further notice.

    Pursuant to section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(d), Commerce will instruct CBP to require cash deposits equal to the amounts indicated below. Accordingly, effective on the date of publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determination, CBP will require, at the same time as importers would normally deposit estimated antidumping duties on this subject merchandise, a cash deposit equal to the cash deposit rates listed below.5 The all-others rate applies to producers or exporters not specifically listed, as appropriate. For the purpose of determining cash deposit rates, the estimated weighted-average dumping margins for imports of subject merchandise have been adjusted, as appropriate, for estimated domestic subsidy pass-through rates calculated based on the final determination of the companion countervailing duty investigation of ripe olives from Spain.6

    5See sections 736(a)(3) of the Act.

    6See Final Determination, 83 FR at 28194.

    Provisional Measures

    Section 733(d) of the Act states that suspension of liquidation pursuant to an affirmative preliminary determination may not remain in effect for more than four months, except where exporters representing a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise request Commerce to extend that four-month period to no more than six months. At the request of exporters that account for a significant proportion of ripe olives from Spain, Commerce extended the four-month period to six months.7 In the underlying investigation, Commerce published the preliminary determination on January 26, 2018. Therefore, the extended period, beginning on the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination, ended on July 24, 2018. Furthermore, section 737(b) of the Act states that definitive duties are to begin on the date of publication of the ITC's final injury determination.

    7See Preliminary Determination, 83 FR at 3679.

    Therefore, in accordance with section 733(d) of the Act and our practice,8 we will instruct CBP to terminate the suspension of liquidation and to liquidate, without regard to antidumping duties, unliquidated entries of ripe olives from Spain entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption after July 24, 2018, the date the provisional measures expired, through the day preceding the date of publication of the ITC's final injury determination in the Federal Register. Suspension of liquidation will resume on the date of publication of the ITC's final determination in the Federal Register.

    8See, e.g., Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from India, Italy, the People's Republic of China, the Republic of Korea and Taiwan: Amended Final Affirmative Antidumping Determination for India and Taiwan, and Antidumping Duty Orders, 81 FR 48390 (July 25, 2016).

    Estimated Weighted-Average Dumping Margins

    The weighted-average antidumping duty margin percentages and cash deposit rates are as follows:

    9 The cash deposit rate is equal to the calculated estimated weighted-average dumping margin adjusted for the appropriate subsidy offset(s).

    Exporter producer Estimated
  • weighted-
  • average
  • dumping
  • margin
  • (percent)
  • Cash deposit rate
  • (percent) 9
  • Aceitunas Guadalquivir S.L 17.45 17.46 Agro Sevilla Aceitunas S.COOP Andalusia 25.50 25.39 Angel Camacho Alimentacion S.L 16.88 16.83 All-Others 20.04 19.98
    Notification to Interested Parties

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

    This order is issued and published in accordance with section 736(a) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.211(b).

    Dated: July 25, 2018. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix Scope of the Order

    The products covered by this order are certain processed olives, usually referred to as “ripe olives.” The subject merchandise includes all colors of olives; all shapes and sizes of olives, whether pitted or not pitted, and whether whole, sliced, chopped, minced, wedged, broken, or otherwise reduced in size; all types of packaging, whether for consumer (retail) or institutional (food service) sale, and whether canned or packaged in glass, metal, plastic, multilayered airtight containers (including pouches), or otherwise; and all manners of preparation and preservation, whether low acid or acidified, stuffed or not stuffed, with or without flavoring and/or saline solution, and including in ambient, refrigerated, or frozen conditions.

    Included are all ripe olives grown, processed in whole or in part, or packaged in Spain. Subject merchandise includes ripe olives that have been further processed in Spain or a third country, including but not limited to curing, fermenting, rinsing, oxidizing, pitting, slicing, chopping, segmenting, wedging, stuffing, packaging, or heat treating, or any other processing that would not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of the order if performed in Spain.

    Subject merchandise includes ripe olives that otherwise meet the definition above that are packaged together with non-subject products, where the smallest individual packaging unit (e.g., can, pouch, jar, etc.) of any such product—regardless of whether the smallest unit of packaging is included in a larger packaging unit (e.g., display case, etc.)—contains a majority (i.e., more than 50 percent) of ripe olives by net drained weight. The scope does not include the non-subject components of such product.

    Excluded from the scope are: (1) Specialty olives 10 (including “Spanish-style,” “Sicilian-style,” and other similar olives) that have been processed by fermentation only, or by being cured in an alkaline solution for not longer than 12 hours and subsequently fermented; and (2) provisionally prepared olives unsuitable for immediate consumption (currently classifiable in subheading 0711.20 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS)).

    10 Some of the major types of specialty olives and their curing methods are:

    • “Spanish-style” green olives: Spanish-style green olives have a mildly salty, slightly bitter taste, and are usually pitted and stuffed. This style of olive is primarily produced in Spain and can be made from various olive varieties. Most are stuffed with pimento; other popular stuffings are jalapeno, garlic, and cheese. The raw olives that are used to produce Spanish-style green olives are picked while they are unripe, after which they are submerged in an alkaline solution for typically less than a day to partially remove their bitterness, rinsed, and fermented in a strong salt brine, giving them their characteristic flavor.

    • “Sicilian-style” green olives: Sicilian-style olives are large, firm green olives with a natural bitter and savory flavor. This style of olive is produced in small quantities in the United States using a Sevillano variety of olive and harvested green with a firm texture. Sicilian-style olives are processed using a brine-cured method, and undergo a full fermentation in a salt and lactic acid brine for 4 to 9 months. These olives may be sold whole unpitted, pitted, or stuffed.

    • “Kalamata” olives: Kalamata olives are slightly curved in shape, tender in texture, and purple in color, and have a rich natural tangy and savory flavor. This style of olive is produced in Greece using a Kalamata variety olive. The olives are harvested after they are fully ripened on the tree, and typically use a brine-cured fermentation method over 4 to 9 months in a salt brine.

    • Other specialty olives in a full range of colors, sizes, and origins, typically fermented in a salt brine for 3 months or more.

    The merchandise subject to this order is currently classifiable under subheadings 2005.70.0230, 2005.70.0260, 2005.70.0430, 2005.70.0460, 2005.70.5030, 2005.70.5060, 2005.70.6020, 2005.70.6030, 2005.70.6050, 2005.70.6060, 2005.70.6070, 2005.70.7000, 2005.70.7510, 2005.70.7515, 2005.70.7520, and 2005.70.7525 HTSUS. Subject merchandise may also be imported under subheadings 2005.70.0600, 2005.70.0800, 2005.70.1200, 2005.70.1600, 2005.70.1800, 2005.70.2300, 2005.70.2510, 2005.70.2520, 2005.70.2530, 2005.70.2540, 2005.70.2550, 2005.70.2560, 2005.70.9100, 2005.70.9300, and 2005.70.9700. Although HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and U.S. Customs purposes, they do not define the scope of the order; rather, the written description of the subject merchandise is dispositive.

    [FR Doc. 2018-16450 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [Application No. 01-1A001] Export Trade Certificate of Review ACTION:

    Notice of Application To Amend the Export Trade Certificate of Review Held by Ginseng Board of Wisconsin, Inc., Application No. 01-1A001.

    SUMMARY:

    The Secretary of Commerce, through the International Trade Administration, Office of Trade and Economic Analysis (“OTEA”), received an application to amend the Export Trade Certificate of Review (“Certificate”) held by Ginseng Board of Wisconsin, Inc. (“GBW”). This notice summarizes the proposed amendment and seeks public comments on whether the amended Certificate should be issued.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Joseph Flynn, Director, Office of Trade and Economic Analysis, International Trade Administration, by telephone at (202) 482-5131 (this is not a toll-free number) or email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title III of the Export Trading Company Act of 1982 (15 U.S.C. 4001-21) 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 Federal Register identifying the applicant and summarizing its proposed export conduct.

    Request for Public Comments

    Interested parties may submit written comments relevant to the determination whether an amended Certificate should be issued. If the comments include any privileged or confidential business information, it must be clearly marked and a nonconfidential 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 nonconfidential.

    An original and five (5) copies, plus two (2) copies of the nonconfidential version, should be submitted no later than 20 days after the date of this notice to: Office of Trade and Economic Analysis, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 21028, Washington, DC 20230.

    Information submitted by any person is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). However, nonconfidential versions of the comments will be made available to the applicant if necessary for determining whether or not to issue the amended Certificate. Comments should refer to this application as “Export Trade Certificate of Review, application number 01-1A001.”

    A summary of the current application follows.

    Summary of the Application

    Applicant: Ginseng & Herb Cooperative, 3899 Co Rd B, Marathon, WI 54448.

    Contact: Glenn Heier, President, (715) 443-3355.

    Application No.: 01-1A001.

    Date Deemed Submitted: July 18, 2018.

    Proposed Amendment: GBW (the Certificate holder) and Ginseng & Herb Cooperative (“GHC”; currently a Member) seek to amend the Certificate as follows:

    1. Remove GBW as the Certificate holder and issue the Certificate to GHC,

    2. Remove all references to GBW and the GBW Seal,

    3. Remove all references to Members,

    4. Remove all references to Mechthild Handke,

    5. Remove all references to Ginseng Research Institute of America, Inc. (“GRIA”), and

    6. Remove reference to the supplier lottery.

    Additionally, GHC seeks to change the list of Products under the Export Trade section of the Certificate from “cultivated ginseng and cultivated ginseng products; cultivated golden seal and cultivated golden seal products; cultivated echinacea and cultivated echinacea products” to “cultivated ginseng and cultivated ginseng products, including wholesale ginseng roots, ginseng capsules 500 mg, ginseng slices, ginseng tea, ginseng powder and fiber, and ginseng retail root.”

    The Export Trade Activities and Methods of Operation currently covered by the Certificate as published in the Federal Register on January 31, 2001 (66 FR 8386) will be amended consistent with the above listed proposed changes.

    Dated: July 27, 2018. Joseph Flynn, Director, Office of Trade and Economic Analysis, International Trade Administration
    [FR Doc. 2018-16486 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DR-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Advance Notification of Sunset Review AGENCY:

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

    Background

    Every five years, pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department of Commerce (Commerce) and the International Trade Commission automatically initiate and conduct reviews to determine whether revocation of a countervailing or antidumping duty order or termination of an investigation suspended under section 704 or 734 of the Act would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping or a countervailable subsidy (as the case may be) and of material injury.

    Upcoming Sunset Reviews for September 2018

    Pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act, the following Sunset Reviews are scheduled for initiation in September 2018 and will appear in that month's Notice of Initiation of Five-Year Sunset Reviews (Sunset Review).

    Antidumping duty proceedings Department contact Silicomanganese from India (A-533-823) (3rd Review) Jacqueline Arrowsmith (202) 482-5255 Welded Large Diameter Line Pipe from Japan (A-588-857) (3rd Review) Jacqueline Arrowsmith (202) 482-5255 Silicomanganese from Kazakhstan (A-834-807) (3rd Review) Jacqueline Arrowsmith (202) 482-5255 Silicomanganese from Venezuela (A-307-820) (3rd Review) Jacqueline Arrowsmith (202) 482-5255 Countervailing Duty Proceedings

    No Sunset Review of countervailing duty orders is scheduled for initiation in September 2018.

    Suspended Investigations

    No Sunset Review of suspended investigations is scheduled for initiation in September 2018.

    Commerce's procedures for the conduct of Sunset Review are set forth in 19 CFR 351.218. The Notice of Initiation of Five-Year (Sunset) Review provides further information regarding what is required of all parties to participate in Sunset Review.

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.103(c), Commerce will maintain and make available a service list for these proceedings. To facilitate the timely preparation of the service list(s), it is requested that those seeking recognition as interested parties to a proceeding contact Commerce in writing within 10 days of the publication of the Notice of Initiation.

    Please note that if Commerce receives a Notice of Intent to Participate from a member of the domestic industry within 15 days of the date of initiation, the review will continue.

    Thereafter, any interested party wishing to participate in the Sunset Review must provide substantive comments in response to the notice of initiation no later than 30 days after the date of initiation.

    This notice is not required by statute but is published as a service to the international trading community.

    Dated: July 26, 2018. James Maeder, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations performing the duties of Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16446 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-064] Stainless Steel Flanges From the People's Republic of China: Antidumping Duty Order AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    Based on affirmative final determinations by the Department of Commerce (Commerce) and the International Trade Commission (ITC), Commerce is issuing an antidumping duty order on stainless steel flanges from the People's Republic of China (China).

    DATES:

    Applicable August 1, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ian Hamilton, AD/CVD Operations, Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4798.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    In accordance with section 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.210(c), on June 11, 2018, Commerce published its affirmative Final Determination in the less than fair value (LTFV) investigation of stainless steel flanges from China.1 On July 25, 2018, the ITC notified Commerce of its final determination pursuant to section 735(d) of the Act, that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of LTFV imports of stainless steel flanges from China, within the meaning of section 735(b)(1)(A) of the Act.2

    1See Stainless Steel Flanges from the People's Republic of China: Final Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 83 FR 26959 (June 11, 2018) (Final Determination).

    2See ITC Letter regarding stainless steel flanges from China, dated July 25, 2018 (ITC Notification); see also Stainless Steel Flanges from China, Inv. No. 731-TA-1383 (Final), USITC Pub. 4807, (July 2018).

    Scope of the Order

    The products covered by this order are stainless steel flanges from China. For a complete description of the scope of the order, see the Appendix to this notice.

    Antidumping Duty Order

    In accordance with sections 735(b)(1)(A) and 735(d) of the Act, the ITC has notified Commerce of its final determination in this investigation, in which it found that imports of stainless steel flanges from China are materially injuring a U.S. industry.3 Therefore, in accordance with sections 735(c)(2) and 736(a) of the Act, we are publishing this antidumping duty order.

    3See ITC Notification.

    As a result of the ITC's final determination, in accordance with section 736(a)(1) of the Act, Commerce will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess, upon further instruction by Commerce, antidumping duties equal to the amount by which the normal value of the merchandise exceeds the export price (or constructed export price) of the merchandise, for all relevant entries of stainless steel flanges from China. These antidumping duties will be assessed on unliquidated entries of stainless steel flanges from China entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after March 28, 2018, the date on which Commerce published the Preliminary Determination, 4 but will not include entries occurring after the expiration of the provisional measures period and before publication of the ITC's final injury determination, as further described below.

    4See Stainless Steel Flanges from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 83 FR 13244 (March 28, 2018) (Preliminary Determination).

    Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, we will instruct CBP to continue to suspend liquidation on entries of subject merchandise from China. We will also instruct CBP to require cash deposits equal to the estimated amount by which the normal value exceeds the U.S. price as indicated in the chart below. These instructions suspending liquidation will remain in effect until further notice.

    Accordingly, effective on the date of publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determination, CBP will require, at the same time as importers would normally deposit estimated duties on this subject merchandise, a cash deposit equal to the estimated antidumping duty margin.5 The “China-wide” rate applies to all exporters of subject merchandise not specifically listed in the table below.

    5See section 736(a)(3) of the Act.

    Provisional Measures

    Section 733(d) of the Act states that instructions to suspend liquidation issued pursuant to an affirmative preliminary determination may not remain in effect for more than four months, except where exporters representing a significant proportion of exports of subject merchandise request to extend the four-month period to six months. Therefore, the four-month period beginning on March 28, 2018, the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination, ended on July 25, 2018. Furthermore, section 737(b) of the Act states that definitive duties are to begin on the date of publication of the ITC's final injury determination.

    Therefore, in accordance with section 733(d) of the Act and our practice, we will instruct CBP to terminate the suspension of liquidation and to liquidate, without regard to antidumping duties, unliquidated entries of stainless steel flanges from China entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after July 26, 2018, the day after which the provisional measures expired, until and through the day preceding the date of publication of the ITC's final injury determination in the Federal Register. Suspension of liquidation will resume on the date of publication of the ITC's final determination in the Federal Register.

    Estimated Dumping Margins

    Commerce determines that the estimated final weighted-average dumping margins are as follows:

    Exporter/producer Weighted-average
  • dumping margins
  • (percent)
  • Shanxi Guanjiaying Flange Forging Group Co., Ltd 257.11 China-wide Entity 257.11
    Notification to Interested Parties

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

    This order is issued and published in accordance with section 736(a) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.211(b).

    Dated: July 25, 2018. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix Scope of the Order

    The products covered by this order are certain forged stainless steel flanges, whether unfinished, semi-finished, or finished (certain forged stainless steel flanges). Certain forged stainless steel flanges are generally manufactured to, but not limited to, the material specification of ASTM/ASME A/SA182 or comparable domestic or foreign specifications. Certain forged stainless steel flanges are made in various grades such as, but not limited to, 304, 304L, 316, and 316L (or combinations thereof). The term “stainless steel” used in this scope refers to an alloy steel containing, by actual weight, 1.2 percent or less of carbon and 10.5 percent or more of chromium, with or without other elements.

    Unfinished stainless steel flanges possess the approximate shape of finished stainless steel flanges and have not yet been machined to final specification after the initial forging or like operations. These machining processes may include, but are not limited to, boring, facing, spot facing, drilling, tapering, threading, beveling, heating, or compressing. Semi-finished stainless steel flanges are unfinished stainless steel flanges that have undergone some machining processes.

    The scope includes six general types of flanges. They are: (1) Weld neck, generally used in butt-weld line connection; (2) threaded, generally used for threaded line connections; (3) slip-on, generally used to slide over pipe; (4) lap joint, generally used with stub-ends/butt-weld line connections; (5) socket weld, generally used to fit pipe into a machine recession; and (6) blind, generally used to seal off a line. The sizes and descriptions of the flanges within the scope include all pressure classes of ASME B16.5 and range from one-half inch to twenty-four inches nominal pipe size. Specifically excluded from the scope of this order are cast stainless steel flanges. Cast stainless steel flanges generally are manufactured to specification ASTM A351.

    The country of origin for certain forged stainless steel flanges, whether unfinished, semi-finished, or finished is the country where the flange was forged. Subject merchandise includes stainless steel flanges as defined above that have been further processed in a third country. The processing includes, but is not limited to, boring, facing, spot facing, drilling, tapering, threading, beveling, heating, or compressing, and/or any other processing that would not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of the investigation if performed in the country of manufacture of the stainless steel flanges.

    Merchandise subject to the order is typically imported under headings 7307.21.1000 and 7307.21.5000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). While HTSUS subheadings and ASTM specifications are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope is dispositive.

    [FR Doc. 2018-16348 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C-469-818] Ripe Olives From Spain: Amended Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Countervailing Duty Order AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    Based on affirmative final determinations by the Department of Commerce (Commerce) and the International Trade Commission (the ITC), Commerce is issuing a countervailing duty (CVD) order on ripe olives from Spain. In addition, Commerce is amending its final CVD determination with respect to ripe olives from Spain to correct ministerial errors.

    DATES:

    Applicable August 1, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mary Kolberg or Lana Nigro, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-1785 or (202) 482-1779, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    In accordance with sections 705(a), 705(d), and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.210(c), on June 18, 2018, Commerce published in the Federal Register an affirmative final determination in the CVD investigation of ripe olives from Spain.1 Interested parties submitted timely filed allegations that Commerce made certain ministerial errors in the final CVD determination of ripe olives from Spain. Section 705(e) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.224(f) define ministerial errors as errors in addition, subtraction, or other arithmetic function, clerical errors resulting from inaccurate copying, duplication, or the like, and any other type of unintentional error which the Commerce considers ministerial. We reviewed the allegations and determined that we made certain ministerial errors. See “Amendment to the Final Determination” section below for further discussion.

    1See Ripe Olives from Spain: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, 83 FR 28186 (June 18, 2018) (Final Determination) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum.

    On July 25, 2018, the ITC notified Commerce of its affirmative determination pursuant to sections 705(b)(1)(A)(i) and 705(d) of the Act, that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of subsidized imports of ripe olives from Spain.2

    2See Letter from the ITC to Commerce, dated July 25, 2018; see also Ripe Olives from Spain (Investigation Nos. 701-TA-582 and 731-TA-1377 (Final), USITC Publication 4805, July 2018).

    Scope of the Order

    The merchandise covered by this order is ripe olives from Spain. For a complete description of the scope of this order, see the Appendix to this notice.

    Amendment to the Final Determination

    On June 19, 2018, the petitioner,3 Aceitunas Guadalquivir S.L.U. (Aceitunas Guadalquivir), and Angel Camacho Alimentación, S.L. (Angel Camacho) timely alleged that the Final Determination contained certain ministerial errors and requested that Commerce correct such errors. On June 25, 2018, the petitioner filed rebuttal comments.

    3 The petitioner to this investigation is the Coalition for Fair Trade in Ripe Olives, whose individual member are BellCarter Foods, Inc. and Musco Family Olive Co.

    Commerce reviewed the record and, on July 12, 2018, agreed that certain errors referenced in the petitioner's and Angel Camacho's allegations constitute ministerial errors within the meaning of section 705(e) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.224(f).4 Commerce did not agree that the error alleged in Aceitunas Guadalquivir's submission constituted a ministerial error. Commerce found that it made errors in calculating Angel Camacho's benefit under the European Union Common Agricultural Policy Pillar I: Basic Payment Scheme—Greening program, and in attributing to Angel Camacho subsidies received by its cross-owned input suppliers.5 Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.224(e), Commerce is amending the Final Determination to reflect the correction of the ministerial errors described above. Based on our correction of the ministerial errors in Angel Camacho's calculation, the subsidy rate for Angel Camacho increased from 13.22 percent ad valorem to 13.76 percent ad valorem. 6 Because in the Final Determination we based the “all-others” rate, in part, on Angel Camacho's ad valorem subsidy rate,7 the correction described above also required that we recalculate the “all-others” rate. This recalculation increases the “all-others” rate determined in the Final Determination from 14.75 percent ad valorem to 14.97 percent ad valorem. 8

    4See Memorandum, “Ripe Olives from Spain: Amended Final Determination of Countervailing Duty Investigation Pursuant to Ministerial Error Allegation,” dated July 12, 2018 (Ministerial Error Memorandum).

    5Id.

    6Id.

    7Final Determination, 83 FR at 28187.

    8See Ministerial Error Memorandum.

    Countervailing Duty Order

    On July 25, 2018, in accordance with sections 705(b)(1)(A)(i) and 705(d) of the Act, the ITC notified Commerce of its final determination in this investigation, in which it found that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of subsidized imports of ripe olives from Spain. Therefore, in accordance with section 705(c)(2) of the Act, we are issuing this CVD order. Because the ITC determined that imports of ripe olives from Spain are materially injuring a U.S. industry, unliquidated entries of such merchandise from Spain, entered or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, are subject to the assessment of countervailing duties.

    Therefore, in accordance with section 706(a) of the Act, Commerce will direct United States Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess, upon further instruction by Commerce, countervailing duties equal to the net countervailable subsidy rates, for all relevant entries of ripe olives from Spain. Upon further instruction by Commerce, countervailing duties will be assessed on unliquidated entries of ripe olives from Spain entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after November 28, 2017, the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination. 9

    9See Ripe Olives from Spain: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, and Alignment of Final Determination with Final Antidumping Duty Determination, 82 FR 56218 (November 28, 2017) (Preliminary Determination) and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum (Preliminary Decision Memorandum). However, as described further below, entries that occurred after the final day on which provisional measures were in effect, until and through the day preceding the date of publication of the ITC's final injury determination in the Federal Register, are not subject to countervailing duties.

    Cash Deposits and Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 706 of the Act, we will instruct CBP to suspend liquidation on all relevant entries of ripe olives from Spain, as further described below. These instructions suspending liquidation will remain in effect until further notice. Commerce will also instruct CBP to require cash deposits equal to the amounts as indicated below. Accordingly, effective on the date of publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determination, CBP will require, at the same time as importers would normally deposit estimated duties on this subject merchandise, a cash deposit equal to the subsidy rates listed below.10 The all-others rate applies to all producers or exporters not specifically listed, as appropriate.

    10See section 706(a)(3) of the Act.

    Company Subsidy rate
  • (%)
  • Aceitunas Guadalquivir S.L.U 11 27.02 Agro Sevilla Aceitunas S.Coop.And 7.52 Angel Camacho Alimentación, S.L 12 13.76 All-Others 14.97
    Provisional Measures

    11 Commerce found the following companies to be cross-owned with Aceitunas Guadalquivir S.L.U.: Coromar Inv., S.L., AG Explotaciones Agricolas, S.L.U., and Grupo Aceitunas Guadalquivir, S.L. See Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 9, unchanged in Final Determination.

    12 Commerce found the following companies to be cross-owned with Angel Camacho Alimentación, S.L.: Grupo Angel Camacho Alimentacíon, Cuarterola S.L., and Cucanoche S.L. See Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 11, unchanged in Final Determination.

    Section 703(d) of the Act states that the suspension of liquidation pursuant to an affirmative preliminary CVD determination may not remain in effect for more than four months. In the underlying investigation, Commerce published the Preliminary Determination on November 28, 2017. Therefore, the four-month period beginning on the date of the publication of the Preliminary Determination ended on March 27, 2018, the final day on which provisional measures were in effect. Furthermore, section 707(b) of the Act states that definitive duties are to begin on the date of publication of the ITC's final injury determination. Therefore, in accordance with section 703(d) of the Act and our practice, we instructed CBP to terminate the suspension of liquidation of and to liquidate, without regard to duties, unliquidated entries of ripe olives from Spain made on or after March 28, 2018. Suspension of liquidation will resume on the date of publication of the ITC's final determination in the Federal Register.

    Notification to Interested Parties

    This notice constitutes the CVD order with respect to ripe olives from Spain pursuant to section 706(a) of the Act. Interested parties can find a list of CVD orders currently in effect at http://enforcement.trade.gov/stats/iastats1.html.

    This order and amended final determination are published in accordance with section 705(d)-(e), 706(a), and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.211(b).

    Dated: July 25, 2018. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix Scope of the Order

    The products covered by this order are certain processed olives, usually referred to as “ripe olives.” The subject merchandise includes all colors of olives; all shapes and sizes of olives, whether pitted or not pitted, and whether whole, sliced, chopped, minced, wedged, broken, or otherwise reduced in size; all types of packaging, whether for consumer (retail) or institutional (food service) sale, and whether canned or packaged in glass, metal, plastic, multilayered airtight containers (including pouches), or otherwise; and all manners of preparation and preservation, whether low acid or acidified, stuffed or not stuffed, with or without flavoring and/or saline solution, and including in ambient, refrigerated, or frozen conditions.

    Included are all ripe olives grown, processed in whole or in part, or packaged in Spain. Subject merchandise includes ripe olives that have been further processed in Spain or a third country, including but not limited to curing, fermenting, rinsing, oxidizing, pitting, slicing, chopping, segmenting, wedging, stuffing, packaging, or heat treating, or any other processing that would not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of the order if performed in Spain.

    Subject merchandise includes ripe olives that otherwise meet the definition above that are packaged together with non-subject products, where the smallest individual packaging unit (e.g., can, pouch, jar, etc.) of any such product—regardless of whether the smallest unit of packaging is included in a larger packaging unit (e.g., display case, etc.)—contains a majority (i.e., more than 50 percent) of ripe olives by net drained weight. The scope does not include the non-subject components of such product.

    Excluded from the scope are: (1) Specialty olives 13 (including “Spanish-style,” “Sicilian-style,” and other similar olives) that have been processed by fermentation only, or by being cured in an alkaline solution for not longer than 12 hours and subsequently fermented; and (2) provisionally prepared olives unsuitable for immediate consumption (currently classifiable in subheading 0711.20 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS)).

    13 Some of the major types of specialty olives and their curing methods are:

    • “Spanish-style” green olives: Spanish-style green olives have a mildly salty, slightly bitter taste, and are usually pitted and stuffed. This style of olive is primarily produced in Spain and can be made from various olive varieties. Most are stuffed with pimento; other popular stuffings are jalapeno, garlic, and cheese. The raw olives that are used to produce Spanish-style green olives are picked while they are unripe, after which they are submerged in an alkaline solution for typically less than a day to partially remove their bitterness, rinsed, and fermented in a strong salt brine, giving them their characteristic flavor.

    • “Sicilian-style” green olives: Sicilian-style olives are large, firm green olives with a natural bitter and savory flavor. This style of olive is produced in small quantities in the United States using a Sevillano variety of olive and harvested green with a firm texture. Sicilian-style olives are processed using a brine-cured method, and undergo a full fermentation in a salt and lactic acid brine for 4 to 9 months. These olives may be sold whole unpitted, pitted, or stuffed.

    • “Kalamata” olives: Kalamata olives are slightly curved in shape, tender in texture, and purple in color, and have a rich natural tangy and savory flavor. This style of olive is produced in Greece using a Kalamata variety olive. The olives are harvested after they are fully ripened on the tree, and typically use a brine-cured fermentation method over 4 to 9 months in a salt brine.

    • Other specialty olives in a full range of colors, sizes, and origins, typically fermented in a salt brine for 3 months or more.

    The merchandise subject to this order is currently classifiable under subheadings 2005.70.0230, 2005.70.0260, 2005.70.0430, 2005.70.0460, 2005.70.5030, 2005.70.5060, 2005.70.6020, 2005.70.6030, 2005.70.6050, 2005.70.6060, 2005.70.6070, 2005.70.7000, 2005.70.7510, 2005.70.7515, 2005.70.7520, and 2005.70.7525 HTSUS. Subject merchandise may also be imported under subheadings 2005.70.0600, 2005.70.0800, 2005.70.1200, 2005.70.1600, 2005.70.1800, 2005.70.2300, 2005.70.2510, 2005.70.2520, 2005.70.2530, 2005.70.2540, 2005.70.2550, 2005.70.2560, 2005.70.9100, 2005.70.9300, and 2005.70.9700. Although HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and U.S. Customs purposes, they do not define the scope of the order; rather, the written description of the subject merchandise is dispositive.

    [FR Doc. 2018-16449 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-580-839] Polyester Staple Fiber From the Republic of Korea: Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2017-2018 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (Commerce) is rescinding the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on polyester staple fiber (PSF) from the Republic of Korea (Korea), based on the timely withdrawal of requests for review. The period of review (POR) is May 1, 2017, through April 30, 2018.

    DATES:

    Applicable August 1, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Robert Brown, AD/CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3702.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On May 1, 2018, Commerce published a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on PSF from Korea for the POR of May 1, 2017, through April 30, 2018.1 On May 31, 2018, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213, Commerce received a timely-filed request from DAK Americas LLC and Auriga Polymers, Inc. (collectively, the petitioners) for an administrative review of, among others, Huvis Corporation (Huvis).2 Also on May 31, 2018, Huvis Corporation (Huvis) requested an administrative review of its POR sales.3 On July 12, 2018, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), Commerce published a notice of initiation of an administrative review of Huvis.4 On July 17 and 18, 2018, respectively, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), both the petitioners and Huvis timely withdrew their requests for an administrative review of Huvis.5

    1See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity to Request Administrative Review, 83 FR 19047 (May 1, 2018).

    2See Letter from the petitioners, “Polyester Staple Fiber from Korea—Request for Annual Administrative Review” (May 31, 2018). The petitioners also requested an administrative review of Toray Chemical Korea, Inc. (Toray). However, the petitioners withdrew their request for Toray before the review was initiated. See Letter from the petitioners, “Polyester Staple Fiber from Korea—Withdrawal of Review Request for Toray Chemical Korea” (June 26, 2018). Thus, a review was not initiated for Toray.

    3See Letter from Huvis, “Certain Polyester Staple Fiber from Korea; Request for Administrative Review for 2017-2018 Period” (May 31, 2018).

    4See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 83 FR 32270 (July 12, 2018) (Notice of Initiation).

    5See Letter from the petitioners, “Polyester Staple Fiber from Korea—Withdrawal of Review Request for Huvis Corporation” (July 17, 2018); see also Letter from Huvis, “Certain Polyester Staple Fiber from Korea; Withdrawal of Request for Administrative Review for 2017-2018 Period” (July 18, 2018).

    Rescission of Review

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(l), Commerce will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if the party, or parties, that requested a review withdraw(s) the request(s) within 90 days of the publication date of the notice of initiation of the requested review. As noted above, both the petitioners and Huvis withdrew their requests for review of Huvis within 90 days of the publication date of the notice of initiation. No other parties requested an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on PSF from Korea. Therefore, in response to the timely withdrawal of requests for review and, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(l), Commerce is rescinding this review.

    Assessment

    Commerce will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of PSF from Korea during the POR. Antidumping duties shall be assessed at rates equal to the cash deposit of estimated antidumping duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(l)(i). Commerce intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after publication of this notice in the Federal Register.

    Notification to Importers

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

    Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders

    This notice also serves as a final reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under an APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which continues to govern the business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.

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

    Dated: July 27, 2018. James Maeder, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations performing the duties of Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16448 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XG354 Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; General Provisions for Domestic Fisheries; Monkfish Research Set-Aside Exempted Fishing Permit Adjustment AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Acting Assistant Regional Administrator for Sustainable Fisheries, Greater Atlantic Region, NMFS, has made a preliminary determination that an adjustment to increase the total weight of monkfish allowed to be harvested under the two existing exempted fishing permits issued for the 2017 monkfish research set-aside program warrants further consideration. This notice provides interested parties the opportunity to comment on the proposed change to these exempted fishing permits.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before August 16, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit written comments by any of the following methods:

    Email: [email protected] Include in the subject line “Comments on 2017 Monkfish RSA DAS Pound Increase.”

    Mail: Michael Pentony, Regional Administrator, NMFS, Greater Atlantic Regional Office, 55 Great Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930. Mark the outside of the envelope “Comments on 2017 Monkfish RSA DAS Pound Increase.”

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Cynthia Hanson, Fishery Management Specialist, 978-281-9180, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Exempted Fishing Permits (EFP) that waive monkfish landing limits for designated Research Set-Aside (RSA) days-at-sea (DAS) have been routinely issued since 2007 to increase operational efficiency and to optimize research funds generated under the Monkfish RSA Program. Amendment 2 to the Monkfish Fishery Management Plan (FMP) (70 FR 21929; April 28, 2005) specifies that 500 RSA DAS are set aside each year to support approved monkfish research projects. Award recipients receive an allocation of those 500 RSA DAS, and their EFP limits the maximum weight of monkfish that may be landed under their allocated RSA DAS. Projects are constrained to the total DAS, maximum landing weight, or EFP expiration date, whichever is reached first. Since the origination of the RSA program in 2007, no project has reached the total DAS or maximum landing weight.

    Allowing vessels an exemption from monkfish landing limits provides an incentive for vessel owners to participate in the Monkfish RSA Program. Constraining each project to a maximum harvest limit ensures that the overall Monkfish RSA catch will be consistent with DAS effort and total mortality controls established for the fishery as a whole. To calculate the maximum weight allocation for each year's 500 RSA DAS, we assign each RSA DAS to be equal to twice the limit for a Permit Category A or C monkfish vessel fishing in the Southern Fishery Management Area (i.e., the highest permissible landing limit within the fishery). This means that annually, a maximum weight of 500 times this calculated RSA DAS pound value may be harvested under the Monkfish RSA program, and each project is limited to this assigned weight value multiplied by their allocated number of RSA DAS.

    On April 28, 2017, we issued RSA compensation fishing EFPs to the Cornell Cooperative Extension (Cornell) and the University of Massachusetts School for Marine Science and Technology (SMAST) for their 2017 Monkfish RSA projects. At the time, the associated monkfish landing weight for each 2017 RSA DAS was 3,552 lb (1,611 kg). Cornell was allocated 300 DAS for a maximum weight limit of 1,065,600 lb (483,348 kg) to fund their research. SMAST was allocated the remaining 200 DAS, allowing 710,400 lb (322,232 kg) to be caught for their project. However, on July 12, 2017, Framework Adjustment 10 to the Monkfish FMP (82 FR 32145) increased the industry's DAS allocation and trip limits across the whole monkfish fishery. As a part of the Framework 10 changes, the possession limit for Category A and C vessels in the Southern Area increased from 1,776 lb (806 kg) to 2,037 lb (924 kg).

    On June 8 and July 12, 2018, we received requests from Cornell and SMAST, to increase assigned pound value of the 2017 RSA DAS from 3,552 lb (1,611 kg) to 4,074 lb (1,848 kg), commensurate with the Framework 10 possession limit increase already implemented in the fishery. The adjusted total weight limit of each project under this higher DAS valuation would be 1,222,200 lb (554,381 kg) for Cornell and 814,800 lb (369,587 kg) for SMAST. Investigators from Cornell and SMAST have stated there is less incentive for industry to buy RSA DAS now that the possession limits in the fishery have increased through the Framework 10 measures. The requested weight adjustment to RSA DAS would help maintain the relative value of the Monkfish RSA Program, and potentially attract and maintain participants from the fishing industry.

    The revised EFPs would not alter the previously approved exemptions, and all participating vessels and allocated RSA DAS would remain the same. The only revision would be the maximum total weight that may be landed under each project. This adjustment would be consistent with changes implemented in the monkfish fishery under Framework 10, and the minimal additional effort that may occur within the RSA program is negligible and within the scope of the analysis originally conducted. The proposed adjustment does not change any of the determinations made during the review and approval of the original 2017 Monkfish RSA EFPs. These EFPs are scheduled to expire April 30, 2019. Because the RSA program is a unique entitlement within the monkfish fishery, we are soliciting public input on the increase in per RSA DAS weight requested by the participating research institutions.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: July 27, 2018. Jennifer M. Wallace, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16437 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XG106 Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the Ketchikan Berth IV Expansion Project AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; Issuance of an Incidental Harassment Authorization.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given that NMFS has issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to the Ketchikan Dock Company (KDC) to incidentally harass, by Level A and B harassment, marine mammals during construction activities associated with the Ketchikan Berth IV Expansion project in Ketchikan, AK.

    DATES:

    This Authorization is applicable from October 1, 2018 through August 31, 2019.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jonathan Molineaux, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the application and supporting documents, as well as a list of the references cited in this document, may be obtained online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-construction-activities. In case of problems accessing these documents, please call the contact listed above.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

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

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

    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 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).

    Summary of Request

    On February 13, 2018, NMFS received a request from the KDC for an IHA to take marine mammals incidental to construction activities associated with the Ketchikan Berth IV Expansion Project. The IHA application was determined adequate and complete on March 28, 2018. The KDC's request is for take of eight species of marine mammals by Level B harassment and Level A harassment of a small number of harbor porpoises and harbor seals. Neither the KDC nor NMFS expect serious injury or mortality to result from this activity and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate.

    Description of Activity

    The KDC will expand Berth IV, its dock adjacent to downtown Ketchikan, Alaska, located in East Tongass Narrows, in order to accommodate a new fleet of large cruise ships that are expected to reach Alaska in the summer of 2019.

    The expansion will include the removal of some existing piles and structures and the installation of new piles and structures. All pile driving and removal will take place at the existing dock facility and is expected to occur over the course of 29 days (not necessarily consecutive). The project will occur in marine waters that support several marine mammal species. The pile driving, pile removal, and drilling activities associated with the project may result in behavioral harassment (Level B harassment and small numbers of Level A harassment) of marine mammal species.

    The purpose of this project is to reconfigure Berth IV so that it can accommodate larger cruise ships. This project is needed because the existing Berth IV cannot support the modern fleet of larger cruise ships. Once the project is constructed Berth IV will be able to accommodate these large cruise ships.

    Construction activities associated with impact pile driving, vibratory pile driving/removal, and drilling are expected to take three to four months beginning in Fall 2018. The project is likely to begin in October of 2018 and complete in January of 2019, depending on the start date, construction could extend into March of 2019. Regardless of start date, construction will occur within a four-month (maximum) work window. The total number of days for pile removal, pile installation and drilling is expected to occur over 29 days (not necessarily consecutive days). The total construction duration accounts for the time required to mobilize materials and resources and construct the project. The duration also accounts for potential delays in material deliveries, equipment maintenance, inclement weather, and shutdowns that may occur to prevent impacts to marine mammals. Please see Table 1 below for the specific amount of time required to install and remove piles.

    Table—1 Pile Driving Construction Summary Description Project component Existing pile
  • removal
  • Temporary pile installation Temporary pile removal Permanent pile installation Permanent pile installation Max installation/removal per day
    Pile Diameter and Type 24, 30, and 36-inch steel 30-inch steel 30-inch steel 30-inch steel 48-inch steel # of Piles 2, 6, and 4 respectively; 12 total 16 16 1 17 Vibratory Pile Driving Max # of Piles Vibrated Per Day 4 4 4 1 2 4 temporary or 2 permanent. Vibratory Time Per Pile 15 minutes 30 minutes 10 minutes 1 hour 1 hour Vibratory Time per day 1 hour 2 hours 40 minutes 1 hour 2 hours 2 hours. Vibratory Time Total 3 hours 8 hours 2 hours 40 minutes 1 hour 17 hours Impact Pile Driving Max # of Piles Impacted Per Day 0 0 0 0 3 3. # of Strikes Per Pile 0 0 0 0 50 strikes 150 strikes. Impact Time Per Pile 0 0 0 0 5 minutes Impact Time per Day 0 0 0 0 15 minutes 15 minutes. Impact Time Total 0 0 0 0 1 hour 25 minutes Socketing Pile Installation (Drilling) Max # of Piles Socketed per Day 0 0 0 1 0 1. Socket Time Per Pile 0 0 0 3 hours 0 Socket Time per Day 0 0 0 3 hours 0 3 hours. Socket Time Total 0 0 0 3 hours 0 Anchor Drilling Max # of Piles drilled per Day 0 0 0 3 0 3. Drilling Time Per Pile 0 0 0 2.5 hours 0 Drilling Time per Day 0 0 0 7.5 hours 0 7.5 hours. Anchor Time Total 0 0 0 42.5 hours 0

    A detailed description of the planned activities is provided in the proposed IHA for this action found in the following Federal Register notice (83 FR 22009, May 11, 2018). Since that time, the only alteration that has been made to the planned activities is the activity duration for impact piling of the 48-inch piles. The number of strikes per pile will be no more than 50 strikes per pile (See Table 1). As a result of this change in duration, the Level A zone for the activity and take numbers were also modified. In addition, take will now be authorized for anchor drilling. The new Level A zones for impact piling of 48-inch piles, the modeled zones for anchor drilling, and the revised take numbers are presented and discussed further in the Estimated Take Section. Due to only slight changes in the activity duration for impact piling, a detailed description of the action is not provided here. Please refer to the Federal Register notice (83 FR 22009, May 11, 2018) for the proposed IHA for the description of the specific activity.

    Comments and Responses

    A notice of NMFS's proposal to issue an IHA was published in the Federal Register on May 11, 2018 (83 FR 22009). During the 30-day public comment period, the Marine Mammal Commission (Commission) submitted a letter on April 2, 2018. The Commission recommended that NMFS issue the IHA, subject to inclusion of the mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures.

    Comment 1: The Commission recommends that NMFS review more thoroughly both the applications prior to deeming them complete and its notices prior to submitting them for publication in the Federal Register. For example, the Commission stated that NMFS incorrectly assumed a pile casing would inhibit sound transmission during drilling of 30-in anchors into bedrock, which underestimated the numbers of Level B harassment takes for harbor seals and Steller sea lions.

    Response: NMFS thanks the Commission for pointing out the errors in the Federal Register notice for the proposed authorization. NMFS has addressed those errors in this notice of issuance of the authorization. NMFS makes every effort to read notices thoroughly prior to publication and will continue this effort to publish the best possible product for public comment. In addition, NMFS notes that recent drilling techniques which have not been authorized in the past require further review due to the novelty of such actions. Due to this, NMFS continues to welcome suggestions from the Commission on how to approach new drilling techniques until acoustic monitoring data is available for such actions.

    Comment 2: The Commission recommends that NMFS refrain from implementing its proposed renewal process and instead use abbreviated Federal Register notices and reference existing documents to streamline the incidental harassment authorization process. The Commission also suggested that NMFS should discuss the possibility of renewals through a more general route, such as a rulemaking, instead of notice in a specific authorization. The Commission further recommended that if NMFS did not pursue a more general route, that the agency provide the Commission and the public with a legal analysis supporting our conclusion that this process is consistent with the requirements of section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA.

    Response: The process of issuing a renewal IHA does not bypass the public notice and comment requirements of the MMPA. The notice of the proposed IHA expressly notifies the public that under certain, limited conditions an applicant could seek a renewal IHA for an additional year. The notice describes the conditions under which such a renewal request could be considered and expressly seeks public comment in the event such a renewal is sought. Additional reference to this solicitation of public comment has recently been added at the beginning of FR notices that consider renewals. NMFS appreciates the streamlining achieved by the use of abbreviated FR notices and intends to continue using them for proposed IHAs that include minor changes from previously issued IHAs, but which do not satisfy the renewal requirements. We believe our proposed method for issuing renewals meets statutory requirements and maximizes efficiency. Importantly, such renewals would be limited to circumstances where: the activities are identical or nearly identical to those analyzed in the proposed IHA; monitoring does not indicate impacts that were not previously analyzed and authorized; and, the mitigation and monitoring requirements remain the same, all of which allow the public to comment on the appropriateness and effects of a renewal at the same time the public provides comments on the initial IHA. NMFS has, however, modified the language for future proposed IHAs to clarify that all IHAs, including renewal IHAs, are valid for no more than one year and that the agency would consider only one renewal for a project at this time. In addition, notice of issuance or denial of a renewal IHA would be published in the Federal Register, as they are for all IHAs. Last, NMFS will publish on our website a description of the renewal process before any renewal is issued utilizing the new process.

    Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities

    A detailed description of the of the species likely to be affected by the construction project, including brief introductions to the species and relevant stocks as well as available information regarding population trends and threats, and information regarding local occurrence, were provided in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (83 FR 22009, May 11, 2018); since that time, we are not aware of any changes in the status of these species and stocks; therefore, detailed descriptions are not provided here. Please refer to that Federal Register notice for these descriptions. Please also refer to NMFS' website (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/topic/population-assessments/marine-mammals) for generalized species accounts. All species that could potentially occur in the planned survey area are included in Table 2.

    Table 2—Marine Mammals That Could Occur in the Project Area During the Specified Activity Common name Scientific name MMPA Stock ESA/MMPA
  • status;
  • Strategic
  • (Y/N) 1
  • Stock
  • abundance
  • Nbest,
  • (CV, Nmin, most recent abundance survey) 2
  • PBR Annual
  • M/SI 3
  • Order Cetartiodactyla—Cetacea—Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales) Family Balaenidae Humpback whale Megaptera novaeangliae Central North Pacific E, D,Y 10,103 (0.3; 7,890; 2006) 83 21 Minke whale Balaenoptera acutorostrata Alaska -, N N.A. N.A. N.A. Order Cetartiodactyla—Cetacea—Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises) Family Delphinidae Killer whale Orcinus orca Alaska Resident -, N 2,347 (N.A.; 2,347; 2012) 4 23.4 1 West Coast Transient -, N 243 (N.A, 243, 2009) 4 2.4 1 Northern Resident -, N 290 (N.A; 290; 2014) 6 1.96 0 Pacific white-sided dolphin Lagenorhynchus obliquidens North Pacific -/-; N 26,880 (N.A.; N.A.; 1990) N.A. 0 Family Phocoenidae Harbor porpoise Phocoena phocoena Southeast Alaska -, Y 975 (0.10; 896; 2012) 5 8.9 5 34 5 Dall's porpoise Phocoenoides dalli Alaska -, N 83,400 N.A. 38 Order Carnivora—Superfamily Pinnipedia Family Otariidae (eared seals and sea lions) Steller sea lion Eumatopia jubatus Eastern U.S. -,-, N 41,638 (N/A; 41,638; 2015) 2,498 108 Family Phocidae (earless seals) Harbor seal Phoca vitulina richardii Clarence Strait -, N 31,634 (N.A.; 29,093; 2011) 1,222 41 1 ESA status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (−) indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR or which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock. 2 NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable (N/A). 3 These values, found in NMFS's SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial fisheries, ship strike). 4 N is based on counts of individual animals identified from photo-identification catalogs. 5 In the SAR for harbor porpoise (NMFS 2017), NMFS identified population estimates and PBR for porpoises within inland Southeast Alaska waters (these abundance estimates have not been corrected for g(0); therefore, they are likely conservative). The calculated PBR is considered unreliable for the entire stock because it is based on estimates from surveys of only a portion (the inside waters of Southeast Alaska) of the range of this stock as currently designated. The Annual M/SI is for the entire stock, including coastal waters. 6 Abundance estimates obtained from Towers et al., 2015.
    Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat

    The effects of underwater noise from pile driving/removal and drilling activities for the Ketchikan Berth IV Expansion project have the potential to result in Level A and Level B harassment of marine mammals in the vicinity of the action area. The Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (83 FR 22009, May 11, 2018) included a discussion of the effects of anthropogenic noise on marine mammals and their habitat in the action area, therefore that information is not repeated here; please refer to the Federal Register notice (83 FR 22009, May 11, 2018) for that information.

    Estimated Take

    This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes for authorization through this IHA, which will inform both NMFS's consideration of “small numbers” 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, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines “harassment” as any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment); or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering (Level B harassment).

    Authorized takes would primarily be by Level B harassment, as use of impact pile driving, vibratory pile driving/removal, and drilling has the potential to result in disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals. There is also some potential for auditory injury (Level A harassment) to result, primarily for harbor seals and harbor porpoises due to larger predicted auditory injury zones. Auditory injury is unlikely to occur for other species. The mitigation and monitoring measures are expected to minimize the severity of such taking to the extent practicable.

    As described previously, no mortality or serious injury is anticipated or authorized for this activity. Below we describe how the take is estimated.

    Described in the most basic way, we estimate take by considering: (1) Acoustic thresholds above which NMFS believes the best available science indicates marine mammals will be behaviorally harassed or incur some degree of hearing impairment; (2) the area or volume of water that will be ensonified above these levels in a day; (3) the density or occurrence of marine mammals within these ensonified areas; and, (4) the number of days of activities. Below, we describe these components in more detail and present the take estimate.

    Acoustic Thresholds

    Using the best available science, NMFS has developed acoustic thresholds that identify the received level of underwater sound above which exposed marine mammals would be reasonably expected to be behaviorally harassed or experience TTS (equated to Level B harassment) or to incur PTS of some degree (equated to Level A harassment).

    Level B Harassment for non-explosive sources—Though significantly driven by received level, the onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic noise exposure is also informed to varying degrees by other factors related to the source (e.g., frequency, predictability, duty cycle), the environment (e.g., bathymetry), and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation, experience, demography, behavioral context) and can be difficult to predict (Southall et al., 2007, Ellison et al., 2011). Based on what the available science indicates and the practical need to use a threshold based on a factor that is both predictable and measurable for most activities, NMFS uses a generalized acoustic threshold based on received level to estimate the onset of behavioral harassment. NMFS predicts that marine mammals are likely to be behaviorally harassed in a manner we consider Level B harassment when exposed to underwater anthropogenic noise above received levels of 120 dB re 1 μPa rms for continuous (e.g., vibratory pile-driving, drilling) and above 160 dB re 1 μPa rms for non-explosive impulsive (e.g., impact pile driving) or intermittent (e.g., scientific sonar) sources.

    KDC's construction activity includes the use of continuous (vibratory pile driving and drilling) and impulsive (impact pile driving) sources, and therefore the 120 and 160 dB re 1 μPa rms thresholds for Level B behavioral harassment are applicable.

    Level A harassment for non-explosive sources—NMFS' Technical Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing (Technical Guidance, 2016) identifies dual criteria to assess auditory injury (Level A harassment) to five different marine mammal groups (based on hearing sensitivity) as a result of exposure to noise from two different types of sources (impulsive or non-impulsive). KDC's activity includes the use of impulsive (impact pile driving) and non-impulsive (vibratory pile driving and drilling) sources.

    These thresholds are provided in the table below. The references, analysis, and methodology used in the development of the thresholds are described in NMFS 2016 Technical Guidance, which may be accessed at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/acoustics/guidelines.htm.

    EN01AU18.009 Ensonified Area

    Here, we describe operational and environmental parameters of the activity that will feed into identifying the area ensonified above the acoustic thresholds.

    Reference sound levels used by KDC for all vibratory and impact piling activities were derived from source level data from construction projects at the Port of Anchorage (Austin et al., 2016) and Ketchikan Ferry Terminal (Denes et al., 2016). To determine the ensonfied areas for both the Level A and Level B zones for vibratory piling of 48-inch/36-inch steel piles and 30-inch/24-inch steel piles, KDC used Sound Pressure Levels (SPLs) of 168.2 dB re 1 μPa rms and 161.9 dB re 1 μPa rms respectively. These were derived from vibratory pile driving data (of the same pile sizes) during the Port of Anchorage test pile project (Austin et al., 2016, Tables 9 and 16) and the Ketchikan Ferry Terminal (Denes et al., 2016, Table 72).

    For impact pile driving, KDC used both SPLs and Sound Exposure Levels (SEL) derived from SSV studies conducted on 48-inch steel piles during the Port of Anchorage test pile project. To determine Level A ensonified zones from impact piling, KDC utilized an SEL of 186.7 dB. When determining Level A zones, SELs are more accurate than SPLs, as they incorporate the pulse duration explicitly rather than assuming a proxy pulse duration and they provide a more refined estimation of impacts. However, to determine the Level B zone for impact piling, an SPL of 198.6 dB re 1 μPa rms was used. In addition, for drilling (socket and anchor pile installation), KDC used a reference sound level of 167.7 dB re 1 μPa rms from SSV studies conducted during drilling activities at the Kodiak Ferry Terminal to calculate both the Level A and Level B ensonified zones for the Berth IV Expansion project. More information on the source levels used are presented in Table 4 below.

    Table 4—Project Source Levels Activity Source level at 10 meters (dB) Vibratory Pile Driving/Removal 24-inch steel removal (2 piles) (~1 hour on 1 day) 1 161.9 SPL 2 30-inch steel removal (6 piles) (~1 hour per day on 2 days) 161.9 SPL 2 36-inch steel removal (4 piles) (~1 hour on 1 day) 168.2 SPL 2 30-inch steel temporary installation (16 piles) (~2 hours per day on 4 days) 161.9 SPL 2 30-inch steel permanent installation (1 pile) (~2 hours on 1 day) 161.9 SPL 2 48-inch steel permanent installation (17 piles) (~2 hours per day on 9 days) 168.2 SPL 2 Impact Pile Driving 48-inch steel permanent installation (17 piles) (~15 minutes per day on 6 days) 186.7 SEL/198.6 SPL 3 Socketing Installation (Drilling) 30-inch steel permanent installation (1 pile) (~3 hours on 1 day) 167.7 SPL 4 Anchoring Installation (Drilling) 30-inch steel permanent installation (17 piles) (~2.5 hours per day) 167.7 SPL 4 1 This project will only remove two 24-inch diameter steel piles total for a maximum of 30 minutes of removal in one day. However, because a maximum of 4 piles could be removed each day, we used 1 hour (the time it would take to remove four piles) of removal time instead of 30 minutes to calculate the distance threshold. 2 The 36-inch and 48-inch diameter pile source levels are proxy from median measured source levels from pile driving of 48-inch piles for the Port of Anchorage test pile project (Austin et al. 2016, Tables 9 and 16). The 24-inch and 30-inch diameter source levels are proxy from median measured sources levels from pile driving of 30-inch diameter piles to construct the Ketchikan Ferry Terminal (Denes et al. 2016, Table 72). 3 Sound pressure level root-mean-square (SPL rms) values were used to calculate distance to Level B harassment isopleths for impact pile driving. The source level of 186.7 SEL is the median measured from the Port of Anchorage test pile project for 48-inch piles (Austin et al. 2016, Table 9). We calculated the distances to Level A thresholds assuming 50 strikes per pile at 3 piles per day. 4 The 30-inch diameter socketing and anchor source levels are derived from rom mean measured source levels from drilling of 24-inch diameter piles to construct the Kodiak Ferry Terminal (Denes et al. 2016, Table 72). The mean was chosen as a proxy due to it being more conservative than the median source level. Level B Zones

    The practical spreading model was used by KDC to generate the Level B harassment zones for all piling and drilling activities. Practical Spreading, a form of transmission loss, is described in full detail below.

    Pile driving and drilling generates underwater noise that can potentially result in disturbance to marine mammals in the project area. Transmission loss (TL) is the decrease in acoustic intensity as an acoustic pressure wave propagates out from a source. TL parameters vary with frequency, temperature, sea conditions, current, source and receiver depth, water depth, water chemistry, and bottom composition and topography. The general formula for underwater TL is:

    TL = B * log10(R1/R2), Where: R1 = the distance of the modeled SPL from the driven pile, and R2 = the distance from the driven pile of the initial measurement.

    This formula neglects loss due to scattering and absorption, which is assumed to be zero here. The degree to which underwater sound propagates away from a sound source is dependent on a variety of factors, most notably the water bathymetry and presence or absence of reflective or absorptive conditions including in-water structures and sediments. Spherical spreading occurs in a perfectly unobstructed (free-field) environment not limited by depth or water surface, resulting in a 6 dB reduction in sound level for each doubling of distance from the source (20*log[range]). Cylindrical spreading occurs in an environment in which sound propagation is bounded by the water surface and sea bottom, resulting in a reduction of 3 dB in sound level for each doubling of distance from the source (10*log[range]). A practical spreading value of 15 is often used under conditions where water increases with depth as the receiver moves away from the shoreline, resulting in an expected propagation environment that would lie between spherical and cylindrical spreading loss conditions.

    Utilizing the practical spreading loss model, KDC determined underwater noise will fall below the behavioral effects threshold of 120 dB rms for marine mammals at a max radial distance of 16,343 meters and 15,136 meters for vibratory piling and drilling, respectively.1 With these radial distances, and due to the occurrence of landforms (See Figure 5 of IHA Application), the largest Level B zone calculated for vibratory piling and drilling equaled 10.3 km2. For calculating the Level B zone for impact driving, the practical spreading loss model was used with a behavioral threshold of 160 dB rms. The maximum radial distance of the Level B ensonified zone for impact piling equaled 3,744 meters. At this radial distance, the entire Level B zone for impact piling equaled 4.9 km2. Table 5 below provides all Level B radial distances and their corresponding areas for each activity during KDC's Berth IV Expansion project.

    1 These distances represent calculated distances based on the practical spreading model; however, landforms will block sound transmission at closer distances. The farthest distance that sound will transmit from the source is 13,755 m before transmission is stopped by Annette Island.

    Table 5—Level B Zones Calculated Using the Practical Spreading Model Source Level B zones
  • (meters)
  • Level B zone
  • (square
  • kilometers)
  • Vibratory Pile Driving 24-inch steel removal (2 piles) (~1 hour on 1 day 3) 6,215 5.9 30-inch steel removal (6 piles) (~1 hour per day on 2 days) 6,215 5.9 36-inch steel removal (4 piles) (~1 hour on 1 day) *16,343 10.3 30-inch steel temporary installation (16 piles) (~2 hours per day on 4 days) 6,215 5.9 30-inch steel permanent installation (1 pile) (~2 hours on 1 day) 6,215 5.9 48-inch steel permanent installation (17 piles) (~2 hours per day on 9 days) *16,343 10.3 Impact Pile Driving 48-inch steel (17 piles) (~15 minutes per day on 6 days) 3,745 4.9 Socketing Pile Installation (Drilling) 30-inch steel (1 pile) (~3 hours on 1 day) *15,136 10.3 * These distances represent calculated distances based on the practical spreading model; however, landforms will block sound transmission at closer distances. The farthest distance that sound will transmit from the source is 13,755 m before transmission is stopped by Annette Island.
    Level A Zones

    When NMFS's Technical Guidance (2016) was published, in recognition of the fact that ensonified area/volume could be more technically challenging to predict because of the duration component in the new thresholds, we developed a User Spreadsheet that includes tools to help predict a simple isopleth that can be used in conjunction with marine mammal density or occurrence to help predict takes. We note that because of some of the assumptions included in the methods used for these tools, we anticipate that isopleths produced are typically going to be overestimates of some degree, which will result in some degree of overestimate of Level A take. However, these tools offer the best way to predict appropriate isopleths when more sophisticated 3D modeling methods are not available, and NMFS continues to develop ways to quantitatively refine these tools, and will qualitatively address the output where appropriate. For stationary sources (i.e., pile driving and drilling), NMFS's User Spreadsheet predicts the closest distance at which, if a marine mammal remained at that distance the whole duration of the activity, it would not incur PTS. Inputs used in the User Spreadsheet, and the resulting Level A isopleths are reported below.

    Table 6—NMFS's Optional User Spreadsheet Inputs User spreadsheet input Equipment type Socket drill Anchor drill Vibratory pile driver
  • (removal of 30-inch and 24-inch steel piles)
  • Vibratory pile driver
  • (installation of 30-inch steel piles)
  • Vibratory pile driver
  • (installation of 36-inch steel piles)
  • Vibratory pile driver
  • (installation of 48-inch steel piles)
  • Impact pile
  • driver
  • Spreadsheet Tab Used Non-impulsive, continuous Non-impulsive, continuous Non-impulsive, continuous Non-impulsive, continuous Non-impulsive, continuous Non-impulsive, continuous Impulsive,
  • Non-continuous
  • Source Level 167.7 SPL 167.7 SPL 161.9 SPL 161.9 SPL 168.2 SPL 168.2 SPL 186.7 SEL Weighting Factor Adjustment (kHz) 2 2 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2 (a) Activity duration within 24 hours
  • (b) Number of strikes per pile
  • (c) Number of piles per day
  • (a) 3 (a) 7.5 (a) 1 (a) 2 (a) 1 (a) 2 (b) 150
  • (c) 3
  • Propagation (xLogR) 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 Distance of source level measurement (meters) + 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
    Table 7—NMFS Optional User Spreadsheet Outputs User spreadsheet output Source type Low-frequency cetaceans Mid-frequency cetaceans High-
  • frequency
  • cetaceans
  • Phocid pinnipeds Otariid pinnipeds
    PTS Isopleth (meters) Socket Drilling 40 2.3 35 21.4 1.6 Anchor Drilling 73.6 4.1 64.5 39.4 2.9 Vibratory Pile Driver (Removal of 30-inch and 24-inch steel piles) 7.8 0.7 11.6 4.8 0.3 Vibratory Pile Driver (Installation of 30-inch steel piles) 12.4 1.1 18.4 7.6 0.5 Vibratory Pile Driver (Installation of 36-inch steel piles) 20.6 1.8 30.5 12.5 0.9 Vibratory Pile Driver (Installation of 48-inch steel piles) 32.7 2.9 48.4 19.9 1.4 Impact Pile Driver 497.5 17.7 592.6 266.2 19.4 Daily ensonified area (km 2) Socket Drilling 0.003 0.000008 0.002 0.00078 0.000004 Anchor Drilling 0.02 0.00005 0.01 0.005 0.00003 Vibratory Pile Driver (Removal of 30-inch and 24-inch steel piles) 0.0001 0.0000008 0.0002 0.00004 0.0000001 Vibratory Pile Driver (Installation of 30-inch steel piles) 0.0002 0.000002 0.0005 0.00009 0.0000004 Vibratory Pile Driver (Installation of 36-inch steel piles) 0.001 0.00001 0.003 0.0005 0.000003 Vibratory Pile Driver (Installation of 48-inch steel piles) 0.003 0.00003 0.007 0.001 0.000006 Impact Pile Driver 0.8 0.001 1.1 0.22 0.0019
    Marine Mammal Occurrence

    In this section we provide the information about the presence, density, or group dynamics of marine mammals that will inform the take calculations. Potential exposures to impact pile driving, vibratory pile driving/removal and drilling noises for each acoustic threshold were estimated using group size estimates and local observational data. As previously stated, Level B take as well as small numbers of Level A take will be considered for this action. Level B and Level A take are calculated differently for some species based on monthly and daily sightings data based on Freitag (2017) and average group sizes within the action area. Below gives a description of estimated habitat use and group sizes for the eight species of marine mammals known to occur within the action area.

    Humpback Whale

    Humpback whales frequent the action area and could be encountered during any given day of dock construction. In the project vicinity, humpback whales typically occur in groups of 1-2 animals, with an estimated maximum group size of four animals. Humpback whales can pass through the action area 0-3 times a month (Freitag 2017).

    Minke Whale

    Minke whales are rare in the action area, but they could be encountered during any given day of dock construction. These whales are usually sighted individually or in small groups of 2-3, but there are reports of loose aggregations of hundreds of animals (NMFS 2018). Freitag (2017) estimates that a group of three whales may occur near or within the action over the four-month period.

    Killer Whales

    Killer whales pass through the action area and could be encountered during any given day of dock construction. In the project vicinity, typical killer whale pod size varies from between 1-2 and 7-10 individuals, with an estimated maximum group size of 10 animals. Killer whales are estimated to pass through the action area one time a month (Freitag 2017).

    Pacific White-Sided Dolphin

    Pacific white-sided dolphins are rare in the action area, but they could be encountered during any given day of dock construction (Freitag 2017). Pacific-white sided dolphins have been observed in Alaska waters in groups ranging from 20 to 164 animals (Muto et al 2016a).

    Dall's Porpoise

    Dall's porpoises are seen infrequently in the action area (Freitag 2017), but they could be encountered during any given day of dock construction. In the project vicinity, Dall's porpoises typically occur in groups of 10-15 animals, with an estimated maximum group size of 20 animals. Dall's porpoises have been observed passing through the action area 0-1 times a month (Freitag 2017).

    Harbor Porpoise

    Harbor porpoises are seen infrequently in the action area, but they could be encountered during any given day of dock construction. In the project vicinity, harbor porpoises typically occur in groups of one to five animals, with an estimated maximum group size of eight animals. Harbor porpoises have been observed passing through the action area 0-1 times a month (Freitag 2017).

    Harbor Seals

    Harbor seals are common in the action area and are expected to be encountered in low numbers during dock construction. In the action area harbor seals typically occur in groups of one to three animals, with an estimated maximum group size of three animals. Harbor seals can occur every day of the month in the project area (Freitag 2017).

    Steller Sea Lions

    Steller sea lions are common in the action area and are expected to be encountered in low numbers during dock construction. In the project vicinity Steller sea lions typically occur in groups of 1-10 animals (Freitag 2017), with an estimated maximum group size of 80 animals (HDR 2003). Steller sea lions can occur every day of the month in the project area (Freitag 2017).

    Take Calculation and Estimation

    Here we describe how the information provided above is brought together to produce a quantitative take estimate. Table 8 below shows take as a percentage of population for each of the species.

    Humpback Whale

    Based on observational and group data it is estimated that a group of 2 humpback whales may occur within the Level B harassment zone three times each month over the four-month construction window during active pile driving (2 animals in a group × 3 groups each month × 4 months = 24 animals). Therefore, NMFS authorizes 24 Level B takes of humpback whales.

    Minke Whale

    Based on local sighting information (Freitag 2017), it is estimated that a group of three whales may occur within the Level B harassment zone once over the four-month construction window during active pile driving (three animals in a group × one group in four months = 3 animals). Therefore, NMFS authorizes three Level B takes of minke whale.

    Killer Whales

    Based on observational and group data it is estimated that a group of 10 killer whales may occur within the Level B harassment zone one time each month over the four-month construction window during active pile driving (10 animals in a group × 1 group each month × 4 months = 40 animals). Therefore, NMFS authorizes 40 Level B takes of killer whales. (To clarify, this request is for 40 takes from all stocks combined, not 40 takes from each stock).

    Pacific White-Sided Dolphin

    Based on observational and group data it is estimated that a group of 92 (median between 20 and 164) Pacific-white sided dolphins may occur within the Level B harassment zone once over the four-month construction window during active pile driving (92 animals in a group × one group in four months = 92 animals). Therefore, NMFS authorizes 92 Level B takes of Pacific white-sided dolphins.

    Dall's Porpoise

    Based on observational and group data it is estimated that a group of 15 Dall's porpoises may occur within the Level B harassment zone one time each month over the four-month construction window during active pile driving (15 animals in a group × one group each month × four months = 60 animals). Therefore, NMFS authorizes 60 Level B takes of Dall's porpoise.

    Harbor Porpoise

    Based on observational and group data it is conservatively estimated that a group of 5 harbor porpoise may occur within the Level B harassment zone one time each month over the four-month construction window during active pile driving (five animals in a group × one group each month × four months = 20 animals). In addition, NMFS authorizes Level A take for two groups of harbor porpoises to safeguard against the possibility of PSOs not being able detect a group of harbor porpoises within their largest corresponding shutdown (see table 9). Therefore, NMFS authorizes 20 Level B takes and 10 Level A takes of harbor porpoises.

    Harbor Seals

    Based on observational and group data it is conservatively estimated that two groups of three harbor seals may occur within the Level B harassment zone every day that pile driving may occur, and pile driving is estimated to occur on 29 days during the four-month long construction duration (three animals in a group × two groups per day × 29 days = 174 animals). In addition, NMFS authorizes Level A take for six groups of harbor seals to safeguard against the possibility of PSOs not being able detect a group of harbor seals within their largest corresponding shutdown zone (see Table 9). Therefore, NMFS authorizes 174 Level B takes and 18 Level A takes of harbor seals.

    Steller Sea Lions

    Based on observational and group data it is estimated that a group of 10 Steller sea lions may occur within the Level B harassment zone every day that pile driving may occur, and pile driving is estimated to occur on 29 days during the 4-month long construction duration (10 animals in a group × 20 days = 290 animals). Therefore, NMFS authorizes 290 Level B takes of Steller sea lions.

    Table 8—Take Estimates as a Percentage of Stock Abundance Species Stock
  • (NEST) a
  • Level A Level B Percent
  • of stock
  • Humpback Whale Hawaii DPS (11,398) b 0 b 22 0.20 Mexico DPS (3,264) b 2 0.03 Minke Whale Alaska (N/A) 0 3 N/A Killer Whale Alaska Resident (2,347) 0 40 1.70 Northern Resident (261) 15.33 West Coast Transient (243) d 16.46 Pacific White-Sided Dolphin North Pacific (26,880) 0 92 0.34 Dall's Porpoise Alaska (83,400) 0 60 0.07 Harbor Porpoise Southeast Alaska (975) c 10 20 3.07 Harbor Seal Clarence Strait (31,634) 18 174 0.61 Steller Sea Lion Eastern U.S. (49,497) 0 290 0.59 a Stock estimate from Muto, M. M. et al. 2016. Appendix 2. Stock Summary Table (last revised 12.30.16). NOAA-TM-AFSC-355Muto,M.M., et al. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/pdf/ak_2016_sars_appendix_2.pdf unless otherwise noted. b Under the MMPA humpback whales are considered a single stock (Central North Pacific); however, we have divided them here to account for DPSs listed under the ESA. Based on calculations in Wade et al. 2016, 93.9 percent of the humpback whales in Southeast Alaska are expected to be from the Hawaii DPS and 61 percent are expected to be from the Mexico DPS. c In the SAR for harbor porpoise (NMFS 2017), NMFS identified population estimates and PBR for porpoises within inland Southeast Alaska waters (these abundance estimates have not been corrected for g(0); therefore, they are likely conservative. d These percentages assume all 40 takes come from each individual stock, thus the percentage should be inflated if multiple stocks are actually impacted.
    Mitigation

    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 consider 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. This considers the nature of the potential adverse impact being mitigated (likelihood, scope, range). It further considers the likelihood that the measure will be effective if implemented (probability of accomplishing the mitigating result if implemented as planned) the likelihood of effective implementation (probability implemented as planned); 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.

    The following mitigation measures are in the IHA:

    Timing Restrictions

    All work shall be conducted during daylight hours. If poor environmental conditions restrict visibility full visibility of the shutdown zone, pile installation would be delayed.

    Sound Attenuation

    To minimize noise during vibratory and impact pile driving, pile caps (pile softening material) shall be used. KDC shall use high-density polyethylene (HDPE) or ultra-high-molecular- weight polyethylene (UHMW) softening material on all templates to eliminate steel on steel noise generation.

    Shutdown Zone for in-water Heavy Machinery Work

    For in-water heavy machinery work (using, e.g., standard barges, tug boats, barge-mounted excavators, or clamshell equipment used to place or remove material), a minimum 10 meter shutdown zone shall be implemented. If a marine mammal comes within 10 meters of such operations, operations shall cease and vessels shall reduce speed to the minimum level required to maintain steerage and safe working conditions. This type of work could include (but is not limited to) the following activities: (1) Movement of the barge to the pile location; (2) positioning of the pile on the substrate via a crane (i.e., stabbing the pile); or (3) removal of the pile from the water column/substrate via a crane (i.e., deadpull).

    Additional Shutdown Zones

    For all pile driving/removal and drilling activities, KDC shall establish a shutdown zone for a marine mammal species that is greater than its corresponding Level A zone. The purpose of a shutdown zone is generally to define an area within which shutdown of the activity would occur upon sighting of a marine mammal (or in anticipation of an animal entering the defined area). The shutdown zones for each of the pile driving and drilling activities are listed below in Table 9.

    Table 9—Shutdown zones Source Shutdown zones (meters) Low-frequency
  • cetaceans
  • (humpback
  • whale,
  • minke whale)
  • Mid-frequency
  • cetaceans
  • (killer whale, pacific-white
  • sided dolphin)
  • High-
  • frequency
  • cetaceans
  • (dall's
  • porpoise,
  • harbor
  • porpoise)
  • Phocid
  • (harbor seal)
  • Otariid
  • (sea lion)
  • In-Water Construction Activities* In Water Heavy Construction (i.e., Barge movements, pile positioning, deadpulling, and sound attenuation) 10 10 10 10 10 Vibratory Pile Driving 24-inch steel removal (2 piles) (~1 hour on 1 day) 25 25 25 25 25 30-inch steel removal (6 piles) (~1 hour per day on 2 days) 25 25 25 25 25 36-inch steel removal (4 piles) (~1 hour on 1 day) 25 25 50 25 25 30-inch steel temporary installation (16 piles) (~2 hours per day on 4 days) 25 25 25 25 25 30-inch steel permanent installation (1 pile) (~2 hours on 1 day) 25 25 25 25 25 48-inch steel permanent installation (17 piles) (~2 hours per day on 9 days) 50 25 50 25 25 Impact Pile Driving 48-inch steel permanent installation (17 piles) (~15 minutes per day on 6 days) 500 25 600 270 25 Socketing Pile Installation (Drilling) 30-inch steel permanent installation (1 pile) (3 hours per day on 1 day) 50 25 50 25 25 Anchor Pile Installation (Drilling) 30-inch steel permanent installation (7.5 hours per day) 80 25 80 50 25
    Monitoring Zones

    KDC shall establish and observe a monitoring zone. The monitoring zones for this project are areas where SPLs are equal to or exceed 120 dB rms (for vibratory pile driving and drilling) and 160 dB rms (for impact driving). These areas are equal to Level B harassment zones and are presented in Table 10 below. These zones provide utility for monitoring conducted for mitigation purposes (i.e., shutdown zone monitoring) by establishing monitoring protocols for areas adjacent to the shutdown zones. Monitoring of disturbance zones enables observers to be aware of and communicate the presence of marine mammals in the project area, but outside the shutdown zone, and thus prepare for potential shutdowns of activity. However, the primary purpose of disturbance zone monitoring is for documenting instances of Level B harassment; disturbance zone monitoring is discussed in detail later (see Monitoring and Reporting).

    Table 10—Monitoring Zones Source Level B
  • zones
  • (meters)
  • Level B
  • zone
  • (square
  • kilometers)
  • Vibratory Pile Driving 24-inch steel removal (2 piles) (~1 hour on 1 day) 6,215 5.9 30-inch steel removal (6 piles) (~1 hour per day on 2 days) 6,215 5.9 36-inch steel removal (4 piles) (~1 hour on 1 day) 13,755 10.3 30-inch steel temporary installation (16 piles) (~2 hours per day on 4 days) 6,215 5.9 30-inch steel permanent installation (1 pile) (~2 hours on 1 day) 6,215 5.9 48-inch steel permanent installation (17 piles) (~2 hours per day on 9 days) 13,755 10.3 Impact Pile Driving 48-inch steel (17 piles) (~15 minutes per day on 6 days) 3,745 4.9 Socketing Pile Installation (Drilling) 30-inch steel (1 pile) (~3 hours on 1 day) 13,755 10.3 Anchor Pile Installation (Drilling) 30-inch steel (17 piles) (~7.5 hours on 1 day) 13,755 10.3
    Non-Authorized Take Prohibited

    If a species enters or approaches the Level B zone and that species is either not authorized for take or its authorized takes are met, pile driving, pile removal, and drilling activities must shut down immediately using delay and shut-down procedures. Activities must not resume until the animal has been confirmed to have left the area or an observation time period of 15 minutes has elapsed.

    Soft Start

    The use of a soft-start procedure are believed to provide additional protection to marine mammals by providing warning and/or giving marine mammals a chance to leave the area prior to the impact hammer operating at full capacity. For impact pile driving, contractors shall be required to provide an initial set of strikes from the hammer at 40 percent energy, each strike followed by no less than a 30-second waiting period. This procedure shall be conducted a total of three times before impact pile driving begins. Soft Start is not required during vibratory pile driving/removal or drilling activities.

    Pre-Activity Monitoring

    Prior to the start of daily in-water construction activity, or whenever a break in pile driving or drilling of 30 minutes or longer occurs, the observer shall observe the shutdown and monitoring zones for a period of 30 minutes. The shutdown zone shall be cleared when a marine mammal has not been observed within the zone for that 30-minute period. If a marine mammal is observed within the shutdown zone, a soft-start cannot proceed until the animal has left the zone or has not been observed for 15 minutes. If the Monitoring zone has been observed for 30 minutes and non-permitted species are not present within the zone, soft start procedures can commence and work can continue even if visibility becomes impaired within the Monitoring zone. When a marine mammal permitted for Level B take is present in the Monitoring zone, pile driving, pile removal, and drilling activities may begin and Level B take shall be recorded. As stated above, if the entire Level B zone is not visible at the start of construction, piling or drilling activities can begin. As shown, the largest Level B zone is equal to 78.9 km2, making it impossible for the PSOs to view the entire harassment area. Due to this, Level B exposures shall be recorded and extrapolated based upon the number of observed take and the percentage of the Level B zone that was not visible. If work ceases for more than 30 minutes, the pre-activity monitoring of both the Monitoring zone and shutdown zone shall commence.

    Based on our evaluation of the applicant's measures, as well as other measures considered by NMFS, NMFS has determined that the mitigation measures provide the means 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.

    Monitoring and Reporting

    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 authorizations must include the suggested means of accomplishing the necessary monitoring and reporting that shall 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 action area. Effective reporting is critical both to compliance as well as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the required monitoring.

    Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following:

    • Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area in which take is anticipated (e.g., presence, abundance, distribution, density).

    • 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 (e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2) affected species (e.g., life history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence of marine mammal species with the action; or (4) biological or behavioral context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or feeding areas).

    • 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 (e.g., marine mammal prey species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of marine mammal habitat).

    • Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.

    Visual Monitoring

    Monitoring would be conducted 30 minutes before, during, and 30 minutes after all pile driving/removal and drilling activities. In addition, observers shall record all incidents of marine mammal occurrence, regardless of distance from activity, and shall document any behavioral reactions in concert with distance from piles being driven, removed, or pile holes being drilled. Pile driving and drilling activities include the time to install, remove, or drill a hole for a single pile or series of piles, as long as the time elapsed between uses of the pile driving equipment is no more than thirty minutes.

    Monitoring shall be conducted by NMFS approved Protected Species Observers (PSOs). The number of PSOs shall vary from two to four, depending on the type of pile driving/drilling and size of pile, which determines the size of the harassment zones. Two land-based PSOs shall monitor during all impact pile driving activity, three land-based PSOs shall monitor during vibratory pile driving/removal of of 24 and 30-inch piles, and four land-based PSOs shall monitor during vibratory pile driving/removal of 36-inch and 48-inch diameter piles and during all socket and anchor drilling.

    One PSO shall be stationed at Berth IV and shall be able to view across Tongass Narrows south and west to Gravina Island. The second and third PSOs shall be located in increments along the road systems at locations that provide the best vantage points for viewing Tongass Narrows west and east of Berth IV. These locations shall vary depending on type of pile driving. The fourth PSO shall be located on the road system near Mountain Point and shall be able to view Tongass Narrows to the northwest and Revillagigedo Channel to the southeast.

    PSOs shall scan the waters using binoculars, and/or spotting scopes, and shall use a handheld GPS or range-finder device to verify the distance to each sighting from the project site. All PSOs shall be trained in marine mammal identification and behaviors and are required to have no other project-related tasks while conducting monitoring. In addition, monitoring shall be conducted by qualified observers, who shall be placed at the best vantage point(s) practicable to monitor for marine mammals and implement shutdown/delay procedures when applicable by calling for the shutdown to the hammer operator. Qualified observers are trained and/or experienced professionals, with the following minimum qualifications:

    • At least one PSO must have prior experience working as a marine mammal observer during construction activities;

    • Independent observers (i.e., not construction personnel);

    • Other PSOs may substitute education (degree in biological science or related field) or training for experience;

    • Where a team of three or more PSOs are required, a lead observer or monitoring coordinator shall be designated. The lead observer must have prior experience working as a marine mammal observer during construction;

    • KDC shall submit PSO CVs for approval by NMFS; KDC shall ensure that observers have the following additional qualifications:

    • Visual acuity in both eyes (correction is permissible) sufficient for discernment of moving targets at the water's surface with ability to estimate target size and distance; use of binoculars may be necessary to correctly identify the target;

    • Ability to conduct field observations and collect data according to assigned protocols;

    • Experience or training in the field identification of marine mammals, including the identification of behaviors;

    • Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the construction operation to provide for personal safety during observations;

    • Writing skills sufficient to prepare a report of observations including but not limited to the number and species of marine mammals observed; dates and times when in-water construction activities were conducted; dates, times, and reason for implementation of mitigation (or why mitigation was not implemented when required); and marine mammal behavior;

    • Ability to communicate orally, by radio or in person, with project personnel to provide real-time information on marine mammals observed in the area as necessary; and

    • Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the construction operations to provide for personal safety during observations.

    KDC shall submit a draft report to NMFS not later than 90 days following the end of construction activities. KDC shall provide a final report within 30 days following resolution of NMFS' comments on the draft report. Reports shall contain, at minimum, the following:

    • Date and time that monitored activity begins and ends for each day conducted (monitoring period);

    • Construction activities occurring during each daily observation period, including how many and what type of piles driven;

    • Deviation from initial proposal in pile numbers, pile types, average driving times, etc.;

    • Weather parameters in each monitoring period (e.g., wind speed, percent cloud cover, visibility);

    • Water conditions in each monitoring period (e.g., sea state, tide state);

    • For each marine mammal sighting:

    • Species, numbers, and, if possible, sex and age class of marine mammals;

    • Description of any observable marine mammal behavior patterns, including bearing and direction of travel and distance from pile driving activity;

    • Location and distance from pile driving activities to marine mammals and distance from the marine mammals to the observation point;

    • Estimated amount of time that the animals remained in the Level B zone;

    • Description of implementation of mitigation measures within each monitoring period (e.g., shutdown or delay);

    • Other human activity in the area within each monitoring period; and

    • A summary of the following:

    • Total number of individuals of each species detected within the Level B Zone, and estimated as taken if correction factor appropriate;

    • Total number of individuals of each species detected within the Level A Zone and the average amount of time that they remained in that zone; and

    • Daily average number of individuals of each species (differentiated by month as appropriate) detected within the Level B Zone, and estimated as taken, if appropriate.

    Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination

    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 (50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-level effects). An estimate of the number of takes alone is not enough information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be “taken” through harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the likely nature of any responses (e.g., intensity, duration), the context of any responses (e.g., critical reproductive time or location, migration), as well as effects on habitat, and the likely effectiveness of the mitigation. We also assess the number, intensity, and context of estimated takes by evaluating this information relative to population status. Consistent with the 1989 preamble for NMFS's implementing regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, 1989), the impacts from other past and ongoing anthropogenic activities are incorporated into this analysis via their impacts on the environmental baseline (e.g., as reflected in the regulatory status of the species, population size and growth rate where known, ongoing sources of human-caused mortality, or ambient noise levels).

    As stated in the mitigation section, shutdown zones, greater than Level A harassment zones, shall be implemented. Level A take is only authorized as a precautionary measure for two species (harbor seals and harbor porpoises) in case PSOs are unable to detect them within their larger shutdown zones while impact piling 48-inch steel piles. Exposures to elevated sound levels produced during pile driving activities may cause behavioral responses by an animal, but they are expected to be mild and temporary. Effects on individuals that are taken by Level B harassment, on the basis of reports in the literature as well as monitoring from other similar activities, will likely be limited to reactions such as increased swimming speeds, increased surfacing time, or decreased foraging (if such activity were occurring) (e.g., Thorson and Reyff, 2006; Lerma, 2014). Most likely, individuals will simply move away from the sound source and be temporarily displaced from the areas of pile driving, although even this reaction has been observed primarily only in association with impact pile driving. These reactions and behavioral changes are expected to subside quickly when the exposures cease.

    To minimize noise during vibratory and impact pile driving, KDC shall use pile caps (pile softening material). Much of the noise generated during pile installation comes from contact between the pile being driven and the steel template used to hold the pile in place. The contractor shall use high-density polyethylene (HDPE) or ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene (UHMW) softening material on all templates to eliminate steel on steel noise generation.

    During all impact driving, implementation of soft start procedures and monitoring of established shutdown zones shall be required, significantly reducing any possibility of injury. Given sufficient notice through use of soft start (for impact driving), marine mammals are expected to move away from an irritating sound source prior to it becoming potentially injurious. In addition, PSOs shall be stationed within the action area whenever pile driving and drilling operations are underway. Depending on the activity, KDC shall employ the use of two to four PSOs to ensure all monitoring and shutdown zones are properly observed.

    Although the expansion of Berth IV's facilities would have some permanent removal of habitat available to marine mammals, the area lost would negligible. Most of the project footprint would be within previously disturbed areas adjacent to existing Berth IV structures and within an active marine commercial and industrial area. There are no known pinniped haulouts near the action area.

    In addition, impacts to marine mammal prey species are expected to be minor and temporary. Overall, the area impacted by the project is very small compared to the available habitat around Ketchikan. The most likely impact to prey will be temporary behavioral avoidance of the immediate area. During pile driving and drilling, it is expected that fish and marine mammals would temporarily move to nearby locations and return to the area following cessation of in-water construction activities. Therefore, indirect effects on marine mammal prey during the construction are not expected to be substantial.

    In summary and as described above, the following factors primarily support our determination that the impacts resulting from this activity are not expected to adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:

    • Mortality is neither anticipated nor authorized for the project;

    • The impacts to marine mammal habitat that are anticipated are minimal;

    • The action area is located in an industrial and commercial marina;

    • The project area does not include any rookeries, or known areas or features of special significance for foraging or reproduction in the project area;

    • The anticipated incidents of Level B harassment consist of, at worst, temporary modifications in behavior; and

    • The required mitigation measures (i.e. shutdown zones and pile caps) are anticipated to be effective in reducing the impacts of the specified activity.

    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 monitoring and mitigation measures, NMFS finds that the total marine mammal take from the activity will have a negligible impact on all affected marine mammal species or stocks.

    Small Numbers

    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, where estimated numbers are available, NMFS compares the number of individuals taken to the most appropriate estimation of abundance of the relevant species or stock in our determination of whether an authorization is limited to small numbers of marine mammals. Additionally, other qualitative factors may be considered in the analysis, such as the temporal or spatial scale of the activities.

    Take of eight of the ten marine mammal stocks authorized for take is approximately three percent or less of the stock abundance. For northern resident and west coast transient killer whales, we acknowledge that 15.33 percent and 16.46 percent of the stocks are to be taken by Level B harassment, respectively. However, since three stocks of killer whales could occur in the action area, the 40 total killer whale takes are likely split among the three stocks. Nonetheless, since NMFS does not have a good way to predict exactly how take will be split, NMFS analyzed at the most conservative scenario, which is that all 40 takes could potentially occur to each of the three stocks. This is a highly unlikely scenario to occur and the percentages of each stock taken are predicted to be significantly lower than values presented in Table 8 for killer whales.

    Based on the analysis contained herein of the activity (including the mitigation and monitoring measures) and the anticipated take of marine mammals, NMFS finds that small numbers of marine mammals will be taken relative to the population size of the affected species or stocks.

    Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis and Determination

    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.

    Endangered Species Act (ESA)

    Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal agency insure that any action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat. To ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of IHAs, NMFS consults internally, in this case with NMFS' Alaska Regional Office, whenever we propose to authorize take for endangered or threatened species.

    NMFS's Alaska Region issued a Biological Opinion on July 26, 2018 to NMFS's Office of Protected Resources which concluded that the Ketchikan Berth IV Expansion project is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of Mexico DPS humpback whales or adversely modify critical habitat because none exists within the action area.

    National Environmental Policy Act

    To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 216-6A, NMFS must review our action (i.e., the issuance of an incidental harassment authorization) with respect to potential impacts on the human environment. This action is consistent with categories of activities identified in Categorical Exclusion B4 (incidental harassment authorizations with no anticipated serious injury or mortality) of the Companion Manual for NOAA Administrative Order 216-6A, which do not individually or cumulatively have the potential for significant impacts on the quality of the human environment and for which we have not identified any extraordinary circumstances that would preclude this categorical exclusion. Accordingly, NMFS has determined that the issuance of the IHA qualifies to be categorically excluded from further NEPA review.

    Authorization

    As a result of these determinations, we have issued an IHA to ADOT&PF for conducting the described construction activities related to city dock and ferry terminal improvements from June 1, 2019 through May 31, 2020 provided the previously described mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated.

    Dated: July 27, 2018. Elaine T. Saiz, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16473 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office [Docket No. PTO-P-2018-0046] Patent Public Advisory Committee Public Hearing on the Proposed Patent Fee Schedule AGENCY:

    United States Patent and Trademark Office, Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of public hearing.

    SUMMARY:

    Under Section 10 of the America Invents Act (AIA), the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) may set or adjust by rule any patent or trademark fee established, authorized, or charged, respectively.

    The USPTO currently is planning to propose to set or adjust patent fees pursuant to its Section 10 fee setting authority. As part of the rulemaking process to set or adjust patent fees, the Patent Public Advisory Committee (PPAC) is required under Section 10 of the AIA to hold a public hearing about any proposed patent fees, and the USPTO is required to assist PPAC in carrying out that hearing. To that end, the USPTO will make its proposed patent fees available as set forth in the Supplementary Information section of this Notice before any PPAC hearing and will help the PPAC to notify the public about the hearing. Accordingly, this document announces the dates and logistics for the PPAC public hearing regarding USPTO proposed patent fees. Interested members of the public are invited to testify at the hearing and/or submit written comments about the proposed patent fees and the questions posed on PPAC's website about the proposed fees.

    DATES:

    Public hearing: September 6, 2018.

    Comments: For those wishing to submit written comments on the fee proposal that will be published by August 29, 2018, the deadline for receipt of those written comments is September 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Public hearing: The PPAC will hold a public hearing on September 6, 2018 beginning at 9:00 a.m., Eastern Standard Time (EST), and ending at 11:00 a.m., EST, at the USPTO, Madison Auditorium North, Concourse Level, Madison Building, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia 22314.

    Written comments may be submitted by email addressed to [email protected] or by postal mail to United States Patent and Trademark Office, Mail Stop CFO, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450, ATTN: Brendan Hourigan.

    Although comments may be submitted by postal mail, the USPTO prefers to receive comments via email. Written comments should be identified in the subject line of the email or postal mailing as “Fee Setting.”

    Because comments will be made available for public inspection, information that is not desired to be made public, such as an address or telephone number, should not be included in the comments.

    Web cast: The public hearing will be available via Web cast. Information about the Web cast will be posted on the USPTO's internet website (www.uspto.gov/about-us/performance-and-planning/fee-setting-and-adjusting) before the public hearing.

    Transcripts: Transcript of the hearing will be available on the USPTO internet website (www.uspto.gov/about-us/performance-and-planning/fee-setting-and-adjusting) shortly after the hearing.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brendan Hourigan, Office of the Chief Financial Officer, by phone (571) 272-8966, or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Effective September 16, 2011, with the passage of the AIA, the USPTO is authorized under Section 10 of the AIA to set or adjust by rule all patent and trademark fees established, authorized, or charged under Title 35 of the United States Code and the Trademark Act of 1946, respectively. Patent and trademark fees set or adjusted by rule under Section 10 of the AIA may only recover the aggregate estimated costs to the Office for processing, activities, services, and materials relating to patents and trademarks, respectively, including administrative costs of the Office with respect to each as the case may be. Congress set forth the process for the USPTO to follow in setting or adjusting patent and trademark fees by rule under Section 10 of the AIA, including additional procedural steps in the rulemaking proceeding for the issuance of regulations under this section. In particular, Congress requires the relevant advisory committee to hold a public hearing about the USPTO fee proposals after receiving them from the agency. Congress likewise requires the relevant advisory committee to prepare a written report on the proposed fees and the USPTO to consider the relevant advisory committee's report before finally setting or adjusting the fees.

    Presently, the USPTO is planning to exercise its fee setting authority to set or adjust patent fees. As part of the rulemaking proceeding for the issuance of regulations under Section 10, the USPTO will publish a proposed patent fee schedule and related supplementary information for public viewing no later than August 29, 2018, on the USPTO internet website (address: www.uspto.gov/about-us/performance-and-planning/fee-setting-and-adjusting). In turn, the PPAC will hold a public hearing about the proposed patent fee schedule on the date indicated herein. The USPTO will assist the PPAC in holding the hearing by providing resources to organize the hearing and by notifying the public about the hearing, such as through this notice. Following the PPAC public hearing, the USPTO will publish a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the Federal Register, setting forth its proposed patent fees.

    Requests to Present Oral Testimony

    Interested members of the public are invited to testify at the PPAC hearing about the proposed patent fees and the questions posed on PPAC's website about the proposed fees. Those wishing to present oral testimony at the hearing must submit a request in writing no later than August 29, 2018. Requests to testify should indicate the following: (1) The name of the person wishing to testify; (2) the person's contact information (telephone number and email address); (3) the organization(s) the person represents, if any; and (4) an indication of the amount of time needed for the testimony. Requests to testify must be submitted by email to Jennifer Lo at [email protected] Speakers providing testimony at the hearing should submit a written copy of their testimony for inclusion in the record of the proceedings no later than September 13, 2018.

    Based upon the requests received, an agenda for witness testimony will be sent to testifying requesters and posted on the USPTO internet website (address: www.uspto.gov/about-us/performance-and-planning/fee-setting-and-adjusting). If time permits, the PPAC may permit unscheduled testimony as well.

    Dated: July 25, 2018. Andrei Iancu, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16432 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-16-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY State Energy Advisory Board (STEAB) AGENCY:

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Notice of open teleconference.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces a teleconference call of the State Energy Advisory Board (STEAB). The Federal Advisory Committee Act requires that public notice of these meetings be announced in the Federal Register.

    DATES:

    Thursday, August 16, 2018 from 2:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. (EDT). To receive the call-in number and passcode, please contact the Board's Designated Federal Officer at the address or phone number listed below.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Michael Li, Designated Federal Officer, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20585. Phone number 202-287-5718; and email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Purpose of the Board: To make recommendations to the Assistant Secretary for the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy regarding goals and objectives, programmatic and administrative policies, and to otherwise carry out the Board's responsibilities as designated in the State Energy Efficiency Programs Improvement Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-440).

    Tentative Agenda: Welcome new STEAB members. Discuss recommendations from STEAB to the Assistant Secretary for the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.

    Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the meeting. Members of the public who wish to make oral statements pertaining to agenda items should contact Michael Li at the address or telephone number listed above. Requests to make oral comments must be received five days prior to the meeting; reasonable provision will be made to include requested topic(s) on the agenda. The Chair of the Board is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business.

    Issued at Washington, DC, on July 27, 2018. Latanya Butler, Deputy Committee Management Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16458 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Notice of Request for Information (RFI) on National Offshore Wind Energy R&D Test Facilities AGENCY:

    Wind Energy Technologies Office, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Request for information (RFI).

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) invites public comment on its Request for Information (RFI) regarding national-level test facilities for offshore wind-specific research and development. The Wind Energy Technologies Office (WETO) is seeking information on facilities that can conduct unique offshore wind research and development (R&D) in the U.S., what upgrades to existing facilities or new facilities are needed for the U.S. to be at the cutting edge of offshore wind R&D, and what specific tests and analyses could be carried out at existing, upgraded, or new facilities in order to advance the U.S. offshore wind industry.

    DATES:

    Responses to the RFI must be received by September 14, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested parties are to submit comments electronically to [email protected] Include “National Offshore Wind Energy R&D Test Facilities” in the subject of the title. Responses must be provided as attachments to an email. It is recommended that attachments with file sizes exceeding 25MB be compressed (i.e., zipped) to ensure message delivery. Responses must be provided as a Microsoft Word (.docx) attachment to the email, and no more than 10 pages in length, 12 point font, 1 inch margins. Only electronic responses will be accepted. The complete RFI document is located at https://eere-exchange.energy.gov/.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Questions may be addressed to Alana Duerr, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585, (202) 287-6953, or [email protected] Further instruction can be found in the RFI document number DE-FOA-0001963 posted on EERE Exchange (https://eere-exchange.energy.gov/).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The purpose of this RFI is to solicit feedback from industry, academia, research laboratories, government agencies, and other stakeholders on issues related to national offshore wind test facilities. WETO is specifically interested in information on: The facilities in the U.S. that are available for offshore wind-specific experimentation and testing; facilities upgrades or new facilities that are required in the U.S. for offshore wind testing in order to perform cutting edge R&D; and, the most pressing R&D needs that would utilize existing, upgraded, or new U.S. offshore wind specific facilities. The RFI is available at: https://eere-exchange.energy.gov/

    Confidential Business Information

    Because information received in response to this RFI may be used to structure future programs, funding and/or otherwise be made available to the public, respondents are strongly advised to not include any information in their responses that might be considered business sensitive, proprietary, or otherwise confidential. If, however, a respondent chooses to submit business sensitive, proprietary, or otherwise confidential information, it must be clearly and conspicuously marked as such in the response as detailed in the RFI [DE-FOA-0001963] at: https://eere-exchange.energy.gov/.

    Factors of interest to DOE when evaluating requests to treat submitted information as confidential include: (1) A description of the items; (2) whether and why such items are customarily treated as confidential within the industry; (3) whether the information is generally known by or available from other sources; (4) whether the information has previously been made available to others without obligation concerning its confidentiality; (5) an explanation of the competitive injury to the submitting person that would result from public disclosure; (6) when such information might lose its confidential character due to the passage of time; and (7) why disclosure of the information would be contrary to the public interest.

    Signed in Washington, DC, on July 27, 2018. Valerie Reed, Acting Director, Wind Energy Technologies Office.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16453 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Notice of Request for Information (RFI) on National Wind Technology Center Facility and Infrastructure Investments AGENCY:

    Wind Energy Technologies Office, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy

    ACTION:

    Request for information (RFI).

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) invites public comment on its Request for Information (RFI) number DE-FOA-0001959 regarding the National Wind Technology Center. The purpose of this RFI is to address the growing research and development (R&D) interest in the use of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's (NREL's) National Wind Technology Center (NWTC) facilities for renewable energy, energy storage, and grid integration technology development and testing.

    DATES:

    Responses to the RFI must be received by no later than 5:00pm (ET) on August 27, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested parties are to submit comments electronically to [email protected] Include National Wind Technology Center Facility and Infrastructure Investments in the subject of the title. Responses must be provided as attachments to an email. It is recommended that attachments with file sizes exceeding 25MB be compressed (i.e., zipped) to ensure message delivery. Responses must be provided as an attachment to the email, and no more than 10 pages in length, 12 point font, 1 inch margins. Only electronic responses will be accepted. The complete RFI document is located at https://eere-exchange.energy.gov/.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Questions may be addressed to Gary Nowakowski who can be reached at (720) 356-1732 or [email protected] Further instruction can be found in the RFI document posted on EERE Exchange.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The purpose of this RFI is to solicit feedback from industry, academia, research laboratories, government agencies, and other stakeholders on energy efficiency and renewable energy R&D testing needs and the associated equipment, facilities and infrastructure needed to ensure continued world class energy technology development at the NWTC. This is solely a request for information and NOT a Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA). EERE is not accepting applications. The RFI is available at: https://eere-exchange.energy.gov/.

    Confidential Business Information

    Because information received in response to this RFI may be used to structure future programs, funding and/or otherwise be made available to the public, respondents are strongly advised to not include any information in their responses that might be considered business sensitive, proprietary, or otherwise confidential. If, however, a respondent chooses to submit business sensitive, proprietary, or otherwise confidential information, it must be clearly and conspicuously marked as such in the response as detailed in the RFI [DE-FOA-0001959] at: https://eere-exchange.energy.gov/.

    Factors of interest to DOE when evaluating requests to treat submitted information as confidential include: (1) A description of the items; (2) whether and why such items are customarily treated as confidential within the industry; (3) whether the information is generally known by or available from other sources; (4) whether the information has previously been made available to others without obligation concerning its confidentiality; (5) an explanation of the competitive injury to the submitting person that would result from public disclosure; (6) when such information might lose its confidential character due to the passage of time; and (7) why disclosure of the information would be contrary to the public interest.

    Signed in Washington, DC, on July 27, 2018. Valerie Reed, Acting Director, Wind Energy Technologies Office.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16454 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Oak Ridge AGENCY:

    Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Notice of open meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), Oak Ridge. The Federal Advisory Committee Act requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in the Federal Register.

    DATES:

    Saturday, August 25, 2018, 9:00 a.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    Black Bear Inn & Suites, 1100 Parkway, Gatlinburg, Tennessee 37738.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Melyssa P. Noe, Alternate Deputy Designated Federal Officer, U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge Office of Environmental Management (OREM), P.O. Box 2001, EM-942, Oak Ridge, TN 37831. Phone (865) 241-3315; Fax (865) 241-6932; E-mail: [email protected] Or visit the website at https://energy.gov/orem/services/community-engagement/oak-ridge-site-specific-advisory-board.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to make recommendations to DOE-EM and site management in the areas of environmental restoration, waste management, and related activities.

    Tentative Agenda:

    • Welcome and Announcements

    • Introduction of New Members

    • Comments from the Deputy Designated Federal Officer

    • Presentations from the DOE, Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, and Environmental Protection Agency Liaisons

    • Discussion of Board Mission, Accomplishments and Operations

    • Presentation of Slate of Candidates for FY19 Officers

    • Motions/Approval of June 13, 2018 Meeting Minutes

    • Motions/Approval of Two Proposed Recommendations to DOE

    • Public Comment Period

    • Follow-on Discussion

    • Adjourn

    Public Participation: The EM SSAB, Oak Ridge, welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special accommodations due to a disability, please contact Melyssa P. Noe at least seven days in advance of the meeting at the phone number listed above. Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements pertaining to the agenda item should contact Melyssa P. Noe at the address or telephone number listed above. Requests must be received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable provision will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comments will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments.

    Minutes: Minutes will be available by writing or calling Melyssa P. Noe at the address and phone number listed above. Minutes will also be available at the following website: https://energy.gov/orem/listings/oak-ridge-site-specific-advisory-board-meetings.

    Issued at Washington, DC on July 27, 2018. Latanya Butler, Deputy Committee Management Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16457 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Biomass Research and Development Technical Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Notice of open meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces an open meeting of the Biomass Research and Development Technical Advisory Committee under the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 amended by the Agricultural Act of 2014. The Federal Advisory Committee Act requires that agencies publish these notices in the Federal Register.

    DATES:

    August 22, 2018, 8:30 a.m.-5:30 p.m., August 23, 2018, 8:00 a.m.-1:30 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    DoubleTree Crystal City, 300 Army Navy Drive, Arlington, VA 22202

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. Mark Elless, Designated Federal Officer, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585; at (202) 586-6501 or Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Purpose of Meeting: To develop advice and guidance that promotes research and development leading to the production of biobased fuels and biobased products.

    Tentative Agenda: Agenda will include the following:

    • Update on USDA Biomass R&D Activities • Update on DOE Biomass R&D Activities • Presentations from national laboratories and federal agencies on their work on the Bioeconomy Initiative and on the opportunities and challenges for biobased plastics R&D.

    Public Participation: In keeping with procedures, members of the public are welcome to observe the business of the Biomass Research and Development Technical Advisory Committee. To attend the meeting and/or to make oral statements regarding any of the items on the agenda, you must contact Dr. Mark Elless at (202) 586-6501 or Email: [email protected] at least 5 business days prior to the meeting. Members of the public will be heard in the order in which they sign up at the beginning of the meeting. Reasonable provision will be made to include the scheduled oral statements on the agenda. The Co-chairs of the Committee will make every effort to hear the views of all interested parties. If you would like to file a written statement with the Committee, you may do so either before or after the meeting. The Co-chairs will conduct the meeting to facilitate the orderly conduct of business.

    Minutes: The summary of the meeting will be available for public review and copying at http://biomassboard.gov/committee/meetings.html.

    Issued at Washington, DC on July 27, 2018.

    Latanya Butler, Deputy Committee Management Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16456 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 12496-002] Rugraw, LLC; Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Lassen Lodge Hydroelectric Project

    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) regulations, 18 CFR part 380, the Office of Energy Projects has reviewed the application for license for the Lassen Lodge Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 12496-002), to be located on the upper South Fork Battle Creek in Tehama County, California, and has prepared a draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the project. The project would occupy no federal land or Indian reservations.

    The final EIS contains staff's evaluations of the applicant's proposal and the alternatives for licensing the proposed Lassen Lodge Hydroelectric Project. The final EIS documents the views of governmental agencies, non-governmental organizations, affected Indian tribes, the public, the license applicant, and Commission staff.

    A copy of the final EIS is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Branch, Room 2A, located at 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. The final EIS also may be viewed on the Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov under the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at [email protected], (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY).

    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    For further information, contact Kenneth Hogan at (202) 502-8434 or at [email protected]

    Dated: July 25, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16397 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP18-525-000] Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP; Notice of Application

    Take notice that on July 13, 2018, Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP (Gulf South), 9 Greenway Plaza, Suite 2800, Houston, Texas 77046, filed in the above referenced docket an application pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), and part 157 of the Commission's regulations requesting authorization to construct and operate the Willis Lateral Project, all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. The filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at [email protected] or call toll-free, (866) 208-3676 or TYY, (202) 502-8659.

    Any questions concerning this application may be directed to Juan Eligio Jr., Supervisor of Regulatory Affairs, Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP, 9 Greenway Plaza, Suite 2800, Houston, Texas 77046, by telephone at (713) 479-3480 or by email at [email protected]; or Payton Barrientos, Senior Regulatory Analyst, Gulf South Pipeline, LP, 9 Greenway Plaza, Suite 2800, Houston, Texas 77046, by telephone at (713) 479-8157 or by email at [email protected]

    The Willis Lateral Project consists of: (i) Approximately 19 miles of 24-inch-diameter natural gas pipeline, (ii) a new 15,876 horsepower Solar Mars 100 turbine engine at Gulf South's existing Goodrich Compressor Station, and appurtenant facilities, (iii) a new delivery meter and regulator station (M&R), and (iv) a new receipt M&R station at Gulf South's existing Goodrich Compressor Station site. The project will allow Gulf South to provide up to 200,000 dekatherms per day of firm transportation service pursuant to Rate Schedule Firm Transportation Service to Entergy Texas, Inc.'s Montgomery County Power Station Project, which will be capable of providing nearly one gigawatt of electricity, proposed to be located on Entergy's existing Lewis Creek Power Station site near Willis, Texas. The estimated cost of the project will be $96,178,176.

    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules (18 CFR 157.9), within 90 days of this Notice, the Commission staff will either: Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.

    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or before the comment date stated below file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit seven copies of filings made in the proceeding with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding.

    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the protest.

    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order.

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 7 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.

    Comment Date: August 16, 2018.

    Dated: July 26, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16460 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 10661-050] Indiana Michigan Power Company; Notice of Intent To File License Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document (PAD), Commencement of Pre-Filing Process, and Scoping; Request for Comments on the PAD and Scoping Document, and Identification of Issues and Associated Study Requests

    a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent to File License Application for a New License and Commencing Pre-filing Process.

    b. Project No.: 10661-050.

    c. Dated Filed: June 4, 2018.

    d. Submitted By: Indiana Michigan Power Company.

    e. Name of Project: Constantine Project.

    f. Location: The Constantine Project is located on the St. Joseph River in the Village of Constantine, Michigan. The project does not occupy federal land.

    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR part 5 of the Commission's Regulations.

    h. Potential Applicant Contact: David Hoffman, Director Field & Support Services, c/o Jonathan Magalski, Environmental Specialist Consultant, American Electric Power Service Corporation, 1 Riverside Plaza, Columbus, Ohio 43215; (614) 716-2240; [email protected]

    i. FERC Contact: Lee Emery at (202) 502-8379 or email at [email protected]

    j. Cooperating agencies: Federal, state, local, and tribal agencies with jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to environmental issues that wish to cooperate in the preparation of the environmental document should follow the instructions for filing such requests described in paragraph o below. Cooperating agencies should note the Commission's policy that agencies that cooperate in the preparation of the environmental document cannot also intervene. See 94 FERC ¶ 61,076 (2001).

    k. With this notice, we are initiating informal consultation with: (a) The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or NOAA Fisheries under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and the joint agency regulations thereunder at 50 CFR part 402 and (b) the State Historic Preservation Officer, as required by section 106, National Historic Preservation Act, and the implementing regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation at 36 CFR 800.2.

    l. With this notice, we are designating Indiana Michigan Power Company as the Commission's non-federal representative for carrying out informal consultation, pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.

    m. Indiana Michigan Power Company filed with the Commission a Pre-Application Document (PAD); including a proposed process plan and schedule, pursuant to 18 CFR 5.6 of the Commission's regulations.

    n. A copy of the PAD is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's website (http://www.ferc.gov), using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number, excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at [email protected], (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY). A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in paragraph h.

    Register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filing and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    o. With this notice, we are soliciting comments on the PAD and Commission's staff Scoping Document 1 (SD1), as well as study requests. All comments on the PAD and SD1, and study requests should be sent to the address above in paragraph h. In addition, all comments on the PAD and SD1, study requests, requests for cooperating agency status, and all communications to and from Commission staff related to the merits of the potential application must be filed with the Commission.

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file all documents using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected] In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include docket number P-10661-050.

    All filings with the Commission must bear the appropriate heading: “Comments on Pre-Application Document,” “Study Requests,” “Comments on Scoping Document 1,” “Request for Cooperating Agency Status,” or “Communications to and from Commission Staff.” Any individual or entity interested in submitting study requests, commenting on the PAD or SD1, and any agency requesting cooperating status must do so by October 2, 2018.

    p. Although our current intent is to prepare an environmental assessment (EA), there is the possibility that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be required. Nevertheless, this meeting will satisfy the NEPA scoping requirements, irrespective of whether an EA or EIS is issued by the Commission.

    Scoping Meetings

    Commission staff will hold two scoping meetings in the vicinity of the project at the time and place noted below. The daytime meeting will focus on resource agency, Indian tribes, and non-governmental organization concerns, while the evening meeting is primarily for receiving input from the public. We invite all interested individuals, organizations, and agencies to attend one or both of the meetings, and to assist staff in identifying particular study needs, as well as the scope of environmental issues to be addressed in the environmental document. The times and locations of these meetings are as follows:

    Daytime Scoping Meeting

    Date and Time: Wednesday, August 29, 2018 at 9:00 a.m.

    Location: Village Hall, 115 White Pigeon Street, Constantine, Michigan 49042.

    Phone Number: (269) 435-2085.

    Evening Scoping Meeting

    Date and Time: Tuesday, August 28, 2018 at 6:30 p.m.

    Location: Village Hall, 115 White Pigeon Street, Constantine, Michigan 49042.

    Phone Number: (269) 435-2085.

    Scoping Document 1 (SD1), which outlines the subject areas to be addressed in the environmental document, was mailed to the individuals and entities on the Commission's mailing list. Copies of SD1 will be available at the scoping meetings, or may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov, using the “eLibrary” link. Follow the directions for accessing information in paragraph n. Based on all oral and written comments, a Scoping Document 2 (SD2) may be issued. SD2 may include a revised process plan and schedule, as well as a list of issues, identified through the scoping process.

    Environmental Site Review

    The potential applicant and Commission staff will conduct an Environmental Site Review of the project on Tuesday, August 28, 2018, starting at 9:00 a.m. All participants should meet at the Constantine Project powerhouse, located at 155 North Washington Avenue, Constantine, Michigan 49042. Please notify Jonathan Magalski at [email protected] (preferred contact) or at (614) 716-2240 by August 17, 2018, if you plan to attend the environmental site review.

    Meeting Objectives

    At the scoping meetings, staff will: (1) Initiate scoping of the issues; (2) review and discuss existing conditions and resource management objectives; (3) review and discuss existing information and identify preliminary information and study needs; (4) review and discuss the process plan and schedule for pre-filing activity that incorporates the time frames provided for in Part 5 of the Commission's regulations and, to the extent possible, maximizes coordination of federal, state, and tribal permitting and certification processes; and (5) discuss the appropriateness of any federal or state agency or Indian tribe acting as a cooperating agency for development of an environmental document.

    Meeting participants should come prepared to discuss their issues and/or concerns. Please review the PAD in preparation for the scoping meetings. Directions on how to obtain a copy of the PAD and SD1 are included in paragraph n of this document.

    Meeting Procedures

    The meetings will be recorded by a stenographer and will be placed in the public records of the project.

    Dated: July 25, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16396 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Notice of Commission Staff Attendance

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) hereby gives notice that members of the Commission's staff may attend the following meetings related to the transmission planning activities of the New York Independent System Operator, Inc. (NYISO):

    NYISO Electric System Planning Working Group Meeting August 8, 2018, 10:00 a.m.-4:00 p.m. (EST)

    The above-referenced meeting will be via web conference and teleconference.

    The above-referenced meeting is open to stakeholders.

    Further information may be found at: http://www.nyiso.com/public/committees/documents.jsp?com=bic_espwg&directory=2018-08-08.

    NYISO Business Issues Committee Meeting August 13, 2018, 10:00 a.m.-4:00 p.m. (EST)

    The above-referenced meeting will be via web conference and teleconference.

    The above-referenced meeting is open to stakeholders.

    Further information may be found at: http://www.nyiso.com/public/committees/documents.jsp?com=bic&directory=2018-08-13.

    NYISO Operating Committee Meeting August 17, 2018, 10:00 a.m.-2:00 p.m. (EST)

    The above-referenced meeting will be via web conference and teleconference.

    The above-referenced meeting is open to stakeholders.

    Further information may be found at: http://www.nyiso.com/public/committees/documents.jsp?com=oc&directory=2018-08-17

    NYISO Electric System Planning Working Group Meeting August 22, 2018, 10:00 a.m.-4:00 p.m. (EST)

    The above-referenced meeting will be via web conference and teleconference.

    The above-referenced meeting is open to stakeholders.

    Further information may be found at: http://www.nyiso.com/public/committees/documents.jsp?com=bic_espwg&directory=2018-08-22

    NYISO Management Committee Meeting August 29, 2018, 10:00 a.m.-2:00 p.m. (EST)

    The above-referenced meeting will be via web conference and teleconference.

    The above-referenced meeting is open to stakeholders.

    Further information may be found at: http://www.nyiso.com/public/committees/documents.jsp?com=mc&directory=2018-08-29

    The discussions at the meetings described above may address matters at issue in the following proceedings:

    New York Independent System Operator, Inc., Docket No. ER13-102.

    New York Independent System Operator, Inc., Docket No. ER15-2059.

    New York Independent System Operator, Inc., Docket No. ER17-2327.

    For more information, contact James Eason, Office of Energy Market Regulation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission at (202) 502-8622 or [email protected]

    Dated: July 26, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16455 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket Nos. CP18-524-000, CP12-39-000] D'Lo Gas Storage, LLC; Notice of Application

    Take notice that on July 13, 2018, D'Lo Gas Storage, LLC (D'Lo) 1000 East St. Mary Blvd., Lafayette, Louisiana 70503, filed in Docket No. CP18-524-000, an application pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act and Part 157 of the Commission's regulations to approve an amendment to the originally certificated Project design issued in Docket No. CP12-39-000. Specifically, D'Lo proposes to eliminate the Gulf South Interconnect Lateral, relocate two primary source water wells, and relocate two primary brine disposals wells, all located in Simpson and Rankin Counties, Mississippi. Additionally, D'Lo request a new Rate Schedule for Firm Wheeling Service and an extension of the date by which D'Lo's approved facilities must be ready for service, all as more fully set forth in the application, which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. The filing may also be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at [email protected] or call toll-free, (866) 208-3676 or TTY, (202) 502-8659.

    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to Theo B. Bean, IV, Manager, D'Lo Gas Storage, LLC, 1000 East St. Mary Blvd., Lafayette, Louisiana 70503, by phone (337) 234-4122, by fax (337) 234-2330 or [email protected]

    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9, within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either: Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of the EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's EA.

    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit 7 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding.

    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the protest.

    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order.

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.

    There is an “eSubscription” link on the website that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected], or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on August 16, 2018.

    Dated: July 26, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16459 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RC11-6-007] North American Electric Reliability Corporation; Notice of Staff Review of Enforcement Programs

    Commission staff coordinated with the staff of the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) to conduct the annual oversight of the Find, Fix, Track and Report (FFT) program, as outlined in the March 15, 2012 Order,1 and the Compliance Exception (CE) Program, as proposed by NERC's September 18, 2015 annual Compliance Filing.2 The Commission supported NERC's plan to coordinate with Commission staff to review the same sample of possible violations, thereby reducing the burden on the Regional Entities of providing evidence for two different samples. Furthermore, NERC and Commission staff agreed to exclude the Southwest Power Pool Regional Entity (SPP-RE) from the survey, reducing the burden on SPP-RE as it focused efforts on a planned and approved termination of its responsibilities as a Regional Entity. Commission staff reviewed a sample of 26 FFT possible violations out of 76 FFT possible violations posted by NERC between October 2016 and September 2017 and a sample of 100 CE instances of noncompliance out of 740 CE instances of noncompliance posted by NERC between October 2016 and September 2017.

    1North American Electric Reliability Corp., 138 FERC ¶ 61,193, at P 73 (2012) (discussing Commission plans to survey a random sample of FFTs submitted each year to gather information on how the FFT program is working).

    2North American Electric Reliability Corp., Docket No. RC11-6-004, at 1 (Nov. 13, 2015) (delegated letter order) (stating “NERC's intention to combine the evaluation of Compliance Exceptions with the annual sampling of FFTs to further streamline oversight of the FFT and compliance exception programs”).

    Commission staff believes that the FFT and CE programs are meeting expectations with limited exceptions. Sampling for the 2017 program year indicated that the Regional Entities appropriately included all but two of the 126 sampled possible violations (98.4 percent) in the FFT and CE programs and that all but one of the 126 possible violations (99.2 percent) have been adequately remediated, with the remaining CE to be adequately remediated once the ongoing mitigation is completed. Commission staff's sample analysis indicated a decreasing number of documentation concerns, particularly with regard to the quality of the information contained in the FFT and/or CE postings. For example, Commission staff found that a few FFT or CE issues still lacked some of the information requested in NERC's Guidance for Self Reports document and necessary for the posted FFT or CE.3 This includes information such as start or end dates, or root cause. Specifically, the identification of root cause in FFTs and CEs has improved significantly over the past four years, moving from 38 percent missing an identification of root cause to less than 1 percent. Commission staff subsequently reviewed the supporting information for these FFTs or CEs, which provided a majority of the missing information. Commission staff ultimately agreed with the final risk determinations for 124 of the 126 samples. Commission staff also noted a significant improvement in the clear identification of factors affecting the risk prior to mitigation (such as potential and actual risk), and actual harm, which was identified in all samples. In addition, Commission staff noted that the FFTs and CEs sampled did not contain any material misrepresentations by the registered entities.

    3North American Electric Reliability Corp., 138 FERC ¶ 61,193, at P 60 (2012).

    Dated: July 25, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16398 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP18-531-000] Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC; Notice of Request Under Blanket Authorization

    Take notice that on July 19, 2018, Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC (FGT), 1300 Main St., Houston, Texas 77002, filed in the above referenced docket, a prior notice request pursuant to sections 157.205, 157.208, 157.210, and 157.211 of the Commission's regulations under the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Columbia's blanket certificate issued in Docket No. CP82-553-000, for authorization to (1) construct, install, own, maintain and operate, certain natural gas pipeline facilities (including 3.4 miles of mainline looping) and appurtenant facilities in Hillsborough and Polk Counties, Florida and (2) install an interconnection and appurtenant facilities for gas delivery to a new Meter and Regulation station to be constructed/owned/operated by Florida Public Utilities (FPU) in Martin County, Florida. The approximate cost of the Okeechobee Expansion Project is approximately $19,500,000. This Project will enable FGT to provide additional capacity of 12,000 million British thermal units per day (MMBtu/d) of available firm transportation service to the proposed interconnection with FPU in Martin County, Florida, all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection.

    The filing may also be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected] or toll free at (866) 208-3676, or TTY, contact (202) 502-8659.

    Any questions regarding this application may be directed to Blair Lichtenwalter, Senior Director of Certificates, Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC, 1300 Main St., Houston, Texas 77002, at (713) 989-2605 or fax (713) 989-1205 or [email protected]

    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9, within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either: Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of the EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's EA.

    Any person may, within 60 days after the issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to intervene or notice of intervention. Any person filing to intervene or the Commission's staff may, pursuant to section 157.205 of the Commission's Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.205) file a protest to the request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefore, the proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day after the time allowed for protest. If a protest is filed and not withdrawn within 30 days after the time allowed for filing a protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for authorization pursuant to section 7 of the NGA.

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests, and interventions via the internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov) under the “e-Filing” link.

    Dated: July 26, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16461 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families Notice for Proposed Model Family Foster Home Licensing Standards AGENCY:

    Administration for Children and Families, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice; Request for Comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Family First Prevention Services Act (FFPSA) directs the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to identify “reputable model licensing standards with respect to the licensing of foster family homes. In response to this directive, the Children's Bureau (CB) solicits comments on the proposed National Model Family Foster Home Licensing Standards.

    DATES:

    Submit comments on or before October 1, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by one of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. All comments received will be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.

    Email: [email protected] Include [docket number and/or RIN number] in subject line of the message.

    Mail: Submit written comments to Kathleen McHugh, United States Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Director, Policy Division, 330 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20024. Please be aware that mail may take an additional 3 to 4 days to process due to security screening of mail.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kathleen McHugh, Director, Policy Division, Children's Bureau, 330 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20201. Email address: [email protected] Deaf and hearing impaired individuals may call the Federal Dual Party Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 between 8:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Eastern Time.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Table of Contents I. Background II. Overview of the Proposed National Model Family Foster Home Licensing III. Standards Summary of the Proposed National Model Foster Care Licensing Standards I. Background (1) Legislative Context

    The President signed the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, Public Law (Pub. L.) 115-123 into law on February 9, 2018. Public Law 115-123 includes the FFPSA in Division E, Title VII. Section 50731 of the FFPSA directs HHS to “identify reputable model licensing standards with respect to the licensing of foster family homes (as defined in section 472(c)(1) of the Social Security Act).”

    By April 1, 2019, title IV-E agencies, which include all states and 12 tribes, must provide the HHS specific and detailed information about:

    ○ Whether the state or tribal agency foster family home licensing standards are consistent with the model licensing standards identified by HHS, and if not, the reason; and

    ○ Whether the state or tribal agency waives non-safety licensing standards for relative foster family homes (pursuant to waiver authority provided by section 471(a)(10)(D) of the Act), and if so, how caseworkers are trained to use the waiver authority and whether the agency has developed a process or provided tools to assist caseworkers in waiving these non-safety standards to quickly place children with relatives.

    States and tribes have a long history of developing and implementing their own foster family home licensing standards. These standards are typically included in statutes, codes, or regulations, but may also be included in policy documents or guidance. In reference to the title IV-E program, section 471(a)(10) of the Act requires title IV-E agencies to develop plans that provide for the establishment and maintaining of standards for foster family homes and child care institutions. These standards must be reasonably in accord with related standards developed by national organizations, including standards related to admission policies, safety, sanitation, protection of civil rights, and permit the use of the reasonable prudent parent standard.

    (2) Reviewing Foster Family Home Licensing Standards

    We are proposing one set of standards for comment to apply to relatives and non-relatives, as well as state and tribal title IV-E agencies.

    Prior to drafting these standards, CB:

    • Reviewed several state and tribal foster family licensing standards that represented a mix of population densities, state and county administered states, and a range of geographic locations;

    • examined the “Model Family Foster Home Licensing Standards” published by the National Association for Regulatory Administration (NARA Standards);

    • reviewed the “Development and Implementation of Tribal Foster Care Standards” published by the National Indian Child Welfare Association (NICWA); and

    • consulted guidelines, recommendations, and best practices for foster care services including the following:

    • Council on Accreditation Family Foster Care and Kinship Care Program Accreditation Guidelines; and

    • Child Welfare League of America (CWLA) Standards of Excellence for Family Foster Care Services.

    The CB relied heavily upon the NARA standards in drafting the proposed National Model Family Foster Home Licensing Standards. The NARA standards were developed by attorneys at Generations United and the American Bar Association who researched family foster care licensing standards in state codes, regulations, and policies for each state and the District of Columbia.1 The current NARA standards use model language from state licensing standards and language from the CWLA and the Council on Accreditation with the goal to create reasonable and achievable safety standards for family foster home licensing. NICWA assisted the Council on Accreditation with developing foster care and kinship care standards used to accredit public and private agencies that address the unique needs of Native children and account for the protections of the Indian Child Welfare Act.

    1 For the research results, please see: http://www.grandfamilies.org/Portals/0/Improving%20Foster%20Care%20Licensing%20Standards.pdf.

    CB assessed whether these materials shared purposes, standards, and categories to support the conclusion that the NARA standards were appropriate to use as a main source for the National Model Family Foster Home Licensing Standards. Through this review, CB determined that while it is important for standards to be flexible for title IV-E agency implementation, overall, the standards reviewed shared many commonalities. Further, the NARA standards are based in significant research and input from experts in the field; therefore, we consider them the best available resource to base a federal standard on, and reasonably flexible for title IV-E agency implementation.

    CB did not examine the following subject areas because this was outside the scope of the legislative requirement:

    • Foster home licensing procedures;

    • Emergency placement procedures;

    • Re-licensure procedures;

    • Procedures for pre-service training;

    • Care of children after placement in a licensed foster home; and

    • Post-licensing requirements, such as foster parent recordkeeping and reporting.

    II. Overview of the Proposed National Model Family Foster Home Licensing Standards

    The proposed standards are categorized into eight categories that closely resemble the NARA standards:

    A. Foster Home Eligibility a. Threshold Requirements b. Physical and Mental Health c. Background Checks d. Home Study B. Foster Family Home Health and Safety a. Living Space b. Condition of Home C. Foster Home Capacity D. Foster Home Sleeping Arrangements E. Emergency Preparedness, Fire Safety, and Evacuation Plans F. Transportation G. Training H. Foster Parent Assurances

    These categories cover the essential components of licensing a foster family in terms of ensuring the applicant's capacity to care for a child in foster care, and also provide parameters for licensing the physical home of the family to ensure it is appropriate and safe for a child in foster care.

    The National Model Family Foster Home Licensing Standards, based on the NARA Standards, are designed to be broad and flexible enough to respond to individual circumstances, state and tribal jurisdictions, and help ensure children in out-of-home care have safe and appropriate homes. The standards do not include the many other agency practices for how to conduct assessments, good practice standards, guidelines on re-licensing, or other requirements that must be undertaken with licensing foster family homes. In addition, there are numerous state and federal laws that agencies must consider when licensing foster family homes that we did not address. We encourage agencies to utilize best practices, such as engaging tribal communities or others as appropriate in licensing families; however, these standards do not address such practices.

    III. Summary of the Proposed National Model Foster Care Licensing Standards Subject standard Standard and summary Foster Home Eligibility A. Foster Home Eligibility: A family foster home license includes the following: a. Threshold Requirements: i. Applicants must be age 18 or older.
  • ii. Applicants must have income or resources to make timely payments for shelter, food, utility costs, clothing, and other household expenses prior to the addition of a child or children in foster care.
  • iii. Applicants must be able to communicate with the child in the child's own language and applicants must be able to communicate with the title IV-E agency, health care providers, and other service providers.
  • iv. At least one applicant in the home must have functional literacy, such as having the ability to read medication labels.
  • Summary—Foster Home Eligibility The proposed eligibility standards provide threshold requirements for a family foster home license to establish a first step in assessing the applicant's age, financial stability, and ability to communicate with the child and agency. We propose that adult applicants are financially stable to meet their family's needs prior to placing a child in the home. We proposed communication standards which are flexible for both the applicant and agency in that applicants must be able to follow agency and service provider instructions as well as communicate directly with a child. The proposed standards do not include requirements for English literacy so as not to dissuade potential foster family applicants. However, we propose functional literacy to ensure at least one of the applicants has the ability to read and write at the level necessary to participate effectively in the community in which they live. Foster Home Eligibility—Physical and Mental Health b. Physical and Mental Health: All applicants must have recent (conducted within the prior 12 months) physical exams from a licensed health care professional that indicate that the applicants are capable of caring for an additional child or children. i. All household members must disclose current mental health and/or substance abuse issues.
  • ii. All household members must provide information on their physical and mental health history, including any history of drug or alcohol abuse or treatment.
  • iii. The title IV-E agency may require further documentation and/or evaluation to determine the suitability of the home.
  • iv. All children who are household members must be up to date on immunizations consistent with the recommendations of the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the American Academy of Family Physicians, unless the immunization is contrary to the child's health as documented by a licensed health care professional.
  • Summary—Foster Home Eligibility—Physical and Mental Health The proposed physical and mental health standards ensure each applicant is physically, mentally, and emotionally capable of caring for an additional child or children through a required physical exam. We are not requiring that household members undergo a physical exam, however, they must provide a health history, including any history of drug or alcohol abuse or treatment. Foster Home Eligibility—Background Checks c. Background Checks:
  • i. Applicants must submit to criminal record and child abuse and neglect registry checks as required in section 471(a)(20) of the Social Security Act (the Act).
  • Summary—Foster Home Eligibility—Background Checks The proposed background check standards mirror the requirements under section 471(a)(20) of the Act which requires title IV-E agencies to perform criminal and child abuse and neglect registry background checks as part of meeting the IV-E requirements. The state or tribe must not grant final approval to the applicant if a record check reveals a felony conviction for: • Child abuse or neglect;
  • • Spousal abuse;
  • • A crime against children (including child pornography);
  • • A crime involving violence, including rape, sexual assault, or homicide, but not including other physical assault or battery;
  • • Physical assault, battery, or a drug-related offense within the last five (5) years; and
  • Title IV-E agencies must check any child abuse and neglect registry maintained by the state or tribe for information on any applicant and on any other adult living in the prospective foster home. Further, title IV-E agencies must request any other state or tribe in which any such applicant or other adult has resided in the preceding five (5) years. Home Study d. Home Study: Applicant must have completed an agency home study, which is a written comprehensive family assessment in collaboration with the applicants to include the following elements: i. At least one scheduled on-site visit to assess the home to ensure that it meets the state, tribal and/or local standards applicable to the safety and care of the home.
  • ii. At least one scheduled in home interview for each household member to observe family functioning and assess the family's capacity to meet the needs of a child or children in foster care.
  • iii. The title IV-E agency has discretion on whether to interview or observe each household member based on his or her age and development.
  • iv. Multiple applicant references that attest to the capability of the applicant to care for the child, including at least one from a relative and one from a non-relative.
  • Summary—Home Study We propose a broad home study standard that requires the title IV-E agency to conduct in-person and on-site interviews and obtain references for all applicants. Most states have home study requirements in law and regulation which include explicit home study and interview standards. Foster Family Home Health and Safety B. Foster Family Home Health and Safety: a. Living Space: The home must be a house, mobile home, housing unit or apartment occupied by an individual or a family. The home, grounds, and all structures on the grounds of the property must in a reasonable state of repair within community standards. The home must have: i. A continuous supply of safe drinking water.
  • ii. A properly operating kitchen with a sink, refrigerator, stove, and oven;
  • iii. At least one properly operating bathroom with a toilet, sink and tub or shower.
  • iv. Heating and/or cooling as required by the geographic area, consistent with accepted community standards and in safe operating condition.
  • v. A working phone or access to a working phone in close walking proximity.
  • b. Condition of the Home: The applicants' home, grounds, and all structures on the grounds of the property must be properly maintained in a clean, safe, and sanitary condition and in a reasonable state of repair within community standards. The interior and exterior must be free from dangerous objects and conditions, and from hazardous materials. The home must meet the following requirements:
  • i. Have adequate lighting, ventilation and proper trash and recycling disposal.
  • ii. Be free from rodents and insect infestation.
  • iii. Proper water heater temperature.
  • iv. Weapons and ammunition (separately) stored, locked, unloaded, and inaccessible to children.
  • v. Pets are vaccinated in accordance with state, tribal and/or local law.
  • vi. Swimming pools, hot tubs, and spas must meet the following to ensure they are safe and hazard free (and additionally must meet all state, tribal and/or local safety requirements):
  • 1. Swimming pools must have a barrier on all sides.
  • 2. Swimming pools must have their methods of access through the barrier equipped with a safety device, such as a bolt lock.
  • 3. Swimming pools must be equipped with a life saving device, such as a ring buoy.
  • 4. If the swimming pool cannot be emptied after each use, the pool must have a working pump and filtering system.
  • 5. Hot tubs and spas must have safety covers that are locked when not in use.
  • vii. Prevent the child's access, as appropriate for his or her age and development, to all medications, poisonous materials, cleaning supplies, other hazardous materials, and alcoholic beverages.
  • The title IV-E agency may include other specific standards as appropriate to their jurisdiction. Summary—Foster Family Home Health and Safety Foster Family Home Health and Safety—These proposed standards apply to the foster family home itself, which includes the grounds and all structures found on the grounds. These proposed standards are written broadly to: (1) Address the large amount of variance in home hazards across jurisdictions; and (2) prevent potential biases against rural or urban families. These standards are divided into two sections: Living space and condition of the home. The NARA standards as well as the state standards reviewed include specific requirements to address jurisdictional and geographical concerns. For example, requirements around water hazards such as swimming pools may not be a priority in all jurisdictions. a. Living Space—The proposed living space standards are flexible in order to determine that a home includes basic essentials such as safe drinking water (which may include water from a municipal drinking source, a private well, or other source), proper kitchen and bath facilities and such. This ensures that the home is a suitable and safe foster family home, and allows potential foster families to reside in a variety of types of homes and locations, such as low-income or rural areas, may qualify as foster parents. A key factor is whether the home, grounds, and all structures on the grounds of the property are in a reasonable state of repair within community standards taking into account neighborhood norms while being mindful of any potential health and safety risks. b. Condition of the Home—The proposed condition of the home standards, address the overall condition and safety of the home to ensure the home is safe and in a reasonable state of repair considering the community where the home is located. Housing and living arrangements must be safe and clean, and hazardous conditions mitigated. The proposed standards include specific safety requirements for pools, hot tubs and spas as these pose a particular preventable danger to children. Foster Home Capacity C. Foster Home Capacity: The total number of children in foster care in a family foster home, must not exceed six (6) consistent with section 472(c)(1)(A)(ii)(III) of the Act. Per section 472(c)(1)(B) of the Act, the number of foster children cared for in a foster family home may exceed this numerical limitation at the option of the title IV-E agency for any of the following reasons: a. To allow a parenting youth in foster care to remain with the child of the parenting youth.
  • b. To allow siblings to remain together.
  • c. To allow a child with an established meaningful relationship with the family to remain with the family.
  • d. To allow a family with special training or skills to provide care to a child who has a severe disability.
  • Summary—Foster Home Capacity Foster Home Capacity—The proposed foster home capacity standards mirror the requirements section 472(c)(1)(A)(ii)(III) that the total number of children in a foster family home, must not exceed six (6). Per section 472(c)(1)(B) of the Act, the title IV-E agency may make an exception to this numerical limitation for the following reasons: • To allow a parenting youth in foster care to remain with the child of the parenting youth.
  • • To allow siblings to remain together.
  • • To allow a child with an established meaningful relationship with the family to remain with the family.
  • • To allow a family with special training or skills to provide care to a child who has a severe disability.
  • Foster Home Sleeping Arrangements D. Foster Home Sleeping Arrangements: Applicants must provide a safe sleeping space including sleeping supplies, such as mattress and linens, for each individual child, as appropriate for the child's needs and age and similar to other household members. Foster parents must not co-sleep or bed-share with infants. Summary—Foster Home Sleeping Arrangements The proposed sleeping arrangement standard ensures children in foster care sleep in safe and comfortable sleeping spaces with appropriate furnishings to meet their basic needs and ensure privacy. All children in the home must be treated equitably. For example, children in foster care should not sleep in public living spaces if other children have their own bedrooms. Further, sleeping arrangements should be age and developmentally appropriate for the children who are placed in the home. Co-sleeping or bed-sharing, when a parent(s) and infant share a sleeping surface (such as a bed, sofa or chair), is prohibited. We included this prohibition because approximately 3,500 infants (children under 12 months of age) die annually in the United States from sleep-related causes, such as sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) and accidental suffocation and strangulation in bed.2 Both bed sharing with infants and sleeping with infants sleeping on couches or armchairs increase the risk of infant death, including sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), entrapment, and suffocation. Room-sharing, i.e., when an infant shares a room with a parent(s), but sleeps on a separate sleeping surface is not prohibited as it is considered a safe sleep practice that is linked to a reduced risk of SIDS.3 Emergency Preparedness, Fire Safety, and Evacuation Plans E. Emergency Preparedness, Fire Safety, and Evacuation Plans: The applicant must have emergency preparedness plans and items in place as appropriate for the home's geographic location. The applicants' home must meet the following fire safety and emergency planning requirements: a. Have at least one smoke detector on each level of occupancy of the home and at least one near all sleeping areas.
  • b. Have at least one carbon monoxide detector on each level of occupancy of the home and at least one near all sleeping areas.
  • c. Have at least one operable fire extinguisher that is readily accessible.
  • d. Be free of obvious fire hazards, such as defective heating equipment or improperly stored flammable materials.
  • e. Have a written emergency evacuation plan to be reviewed with the child and posted in a prominent place in the home.
  • f. Maintain a comprehensive list of emergency telephone numbers, including poison control, and post those numbers in a prominent place in the home.
  • g. Maintain first aid supplies.
  • Summary—Emergency Preparedness, Fire Safety, and Evacuation Plans Emergency Preparedness, Fire Safety, and Evacuation Plans—The proposed standards help protect children and household members from harm in the event of an emergency, a fire, or a need to evacuate. The proposed standards are written broadly allowing them to be tailored to unique emergencies, such as natural disasters, that may occur in specific jurisdictions. Safety procedures and emergency plans, and the communication thereof, increase the probability of safety and injury prevention for household members. Emergency readiness information provided by the Department of Homeland Security is available at http://www.ready.gov. Transportation F. Transportation: Applicants must ensure that the family has reliable, legal and safe transportation with safety restraints, as appropriate for the child. Reliable transportation would include a properly maintained vehicle or access to reliable public transportation, if one is owned; legal transportation would include having a valid driving license, insurance and registration as appropriate and safe transportation would include safety restraints and only adults in the home having a driving record in good standing transport the child. Summary—Transportation Standards The proposed transportation standards focus broadly on the applicant having a reliable, legal, and safe mode of transportation for a child in foster care to attend appointments, visitation, and meetings. We also propose that only adults in the home be permitted to transport children in foster care and only those having a driving record in good standing. We specifically avoid proposing standards that could impact a foster parent based on geographic location and income. For example, some states require foster parents to have their own vehicle. However, applicants in states with a high urban population may not have access to or need a vehicle. Rather, they rely upon public transportation. Training G. Training: a. Applicants must complete pre-licensing training on the following topics: legal rights, roles, responsibilities and expectations of foster parents; agency structure, purpose, policies, and services; laws and regulations; the impact of childhood trauma; managing child behaviors; first aid (including cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for the ages of the children in placement) and medication administration; and the importance of maintaining meaningful connections between the child and parents, including regular visitation. Foster parents must participate in ongoing training to receive instruction to support their parental roles and ensure the parent is up to date with agency requirements. Further, this training may also include child-specific training and/or may address issues relevant to the general population of children in foster care. Summary—Training The proposed training standards include both pre-licensing and ongoing training and include mandatory training topics. The purpose of the pre-licensing training standards is to provide information to applicants so they can make an informed decision about their commitment to foster a child. In addition, the pre-service training is to prepare the applicant to be licensed as a foster parent. This includes training on the reasonable and prudent parent standard per section 471(a)(24) of the Act. The ongoing training is to ensure the parent receives ongoing instruction to support their parental roles and remain up to date on policies, requirements, and services. Therefore, there are no mandatory topics, as these depend on agency priorities and specific individual needs. Foster Parent Assurances H. Foster Parent Assurances: Applicants must agree to comply with their roles and responsibilities as discussed with the title IV-E agency once a child is placed in their care. The title IV-E agency must require assurances including: a. Applicants will not use corporal or degrading punishment
  • b. Applicants will not use any illegal substances, abuse alcohol by consuming it in excess amounts, or abuse legal prescription and/or nonprescription drugs by consuming them in excess amounts or using them contrary to as indicated.
  • b. Applicants and their guests will not smoke in the family foster home, in any vehicle used to transport the child, or in the presence of the child in foster care.
  • c. Applicants will adhere to the title IV-E agency's reasonable and prudent parent standard per section 472(c)(1)(A)(ii)(I) of the Act.
  • Summary—Foster Parent Assurances There are four proposed foster parent assurances are broadly written to apply across title IV-E jurisdictions which cover corporal punishment, alcohol and drug use, the reasonable and prudent parent standard and smoking. Assurances help potential foster family to have a clear understanding of expectations prior to approval as a foster home, cover behaviors which cannot be verified as part of the home study and typically are expectations after a home is licensed. Title IV-E agencies may wish to develop additional assurances as appropriate to their jurisdiction.
    Dated: July 24, 2018. Steven Wagner, Acting Assistant Secretary for Children and Families.

    2 Task Force on Sudden Infant Death Syndrome. “SIDS and Other Sleep-Related Infant Deaths: Updated 2016 Recommendations for a Safe Infant Sleeping Environment.” Pediatrics, 138, no. 5 (2016): 1, http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/138/5/e20162938.

    3 Ibid., 2-4.

    [FR Doc. 2018-16380 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4148-25-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2017-N-0007] Outsourcing Facility Fee Rates for Fiscal Year 2019 AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the fiscal year (FY) 2019 rates for the establishment and re-inspection fees related to entities that compound human drugs and elect to register as outsourcing facilities under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act). The FD&C Act authorizes FDA to assess and collect an annual establishment fee from outsourcing facilities, as well as a re-inspection fee for each re-inspection of an outsourcing facility. This document establishes the FY 2019 rates for the small business establishment fee ($5,461), the non-small business establishment fee ($18,375), and the re-inspection fee ($16,382) for outsourcing facilities; provides information on how the fees for FY 2019 were determined; and describes the payment procedures outsourcing facilities should follow. These fee rates are effective October 1, 2018, and will remain in effect through September 30, 2019.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For more information on human drug compounding and outsourcing facility fees: Visit FDAs website at: https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/PharmacyCompounding/default.htm.

    For questions relating to this notice: Melissa Hurley, Office of Financial Management, Food and Drug Administration, 8455 Colesville Rd., COLE-14202J, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-402-4585.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    The Drug Quality and Security Act (DQSA) contains important provisions relating to the oversight of compounding human drugs. Title I of this law, the Compounding Quality Act, created a new section 503B in the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 353b). Under section 503B of the FD&C Act, a human drug compounder can become an “outsourcing facility.”

    Outsourcing facilities, as defined in section 503B(d)(4) of the FD&C Act, are facilities that meet all of the conditions described in section 503B(a), including registering with FDA as an outsourcing facility and paying an annual establishment fee. If the conditions of section 503B are met, a drug compounded by or under the direct supervision of a licensed pharmacist in an outsourcing facility is exempt from three sections of the FD&C Act: (1) Section 502(f)(1) (21 U.S.C. 352(f)(1)) concerning the labeling of drugs with adequate directions for use; (2) section 505 (21 U.S.C. 355) concerning the approval of human drug products under new drug applications (NDAs) or abbreviated new drug applications (ANDAs); and (3) section 582 (21 U.S.C. 360eee-1) concerning drug supply chain security requirements. Drugs compounded in outsourcing facilities are not exempt from the requirements of section 501(a)(2)(B) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 351(a)(2)(B)) concerning current good manufacturing practice requirements for drugs.

    Section 744K of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 379j-62) authorizes FDA to assess and collect the following fees associated with outsourcing facilities: (1) An annual establishment fee from each outsourcing facility and (2) a re-inspection fee from each outsourcing facility subject to a re-inspection (see section 744K(a)(1) of the FD&C Act). Under statutorily defined conditions, a qualified applicant may pay a reduced small business establishment fee (see section 744K(c)(4) of the FD&C Act).

    FDA announced in the Federal Register of November 24, 2014 (79 FR 69856), the availability of a final guidance for industry entitled “Fees for Human Drug Compounding Outsourcing Facilities Under Sections 503B and 744K of the FD&C Act.” The guidance provides additional information on the annual fees for outsourcing facilities and adjustments required by law, re-inspection fees, how to submit payment, the effect of failure to pay fees, and how to qualify as a small business to obtain a reduction of the annual establishment fee. This guidance can be accessed on FDA's website at: https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM391102.pdf.

    II. Fees for FY 2019 A. Methodology for Calculating FY 2019 Adjustment Factors 1. Inflation Adjustment Factor

    Section 744K(c)(2) of the FD&C Act specifies the annual inflation adjustment for outsourcing facility fees. The inflation adjustment has two components: One based on FDA's payroll costs and one based on FDA's non-payroll costs for the first 3 of the 4 previous fiscal years. The payroll component of the annual inflation adjustment is calculated by taking the average change in FDA's per-full time equivalent (FTE) personnel compensation and benefits (PC&B) in the first 3 of the 4 previous fiscal years (see section 744K(c)(2)(A)(ii) of the FD&C Act). FDA's total annual spending on PC&B is divided by the total number of FTEs per fiscal year to determine the average PC&B per FTE.

    Table 1 summarizes the actual cost and FTE data for the specified fiscal years, and provides the percent change from the previous fiscal year and the average percent change over the first 3 of the 4 fiscal years preceding FY 2019. The 3-year average is 2.4152 percent.

    Table 1—FDA PC&Bs Each Year and Percent Change Fiscal year 2015 2016 2017 3-year average Total PC&B $2,232,304,000 $2,414,728,159 $2,581,551,000 Total FTE 15,484 16,381 17,022 PC&B per FTE $144,168 $147,408 $151,660 Percent change from previous year 2.1136% 2.2474% 2.8845% 2.4152%

    Section 744K(c)(2)(A)(ii) of the FD&C Act specifies that this 2.4152 percent should be multiplied by the proportion of PC&B to total costs of an average FDA FTE for the same 3 fiscal years.

    Table 2—FDA PC&Bs as a Percent of FDA Total Costs of an Average FTE Fiscal year 2015 2016 2017 3-year average Total PC&B $2,232,304,000 $2,414,728,159 $2,581,551,000 Total Costs $4,510,565,000 $4,666,236,000 $5,104,580,000 PC&B Percent 49.4906% 51.7490% 50.5732% 50.6043%

    The payroll adjustment is 2.4152 percent multiplied by 50.6043 percent, or 1.2222 percent.

    Section 744K(c)(2)(A)(iii) of the FD&C Act specifies that the portion of the inflation adjustment for non-payroll costs for FY 2019 is equal to the average annual percent change in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for urban consumers (U.S. City Average; Not Seasonally Adjusted; All items; Annual Index) for the first 3 years of the preceding 4 years of available data, multiplied by the proportion of all non-PC&B costs to total costs of an average FDA FTE for the same period.

    Table 2 provides the summary data for the percent change in the specified CPI for U.S. cities. These data are published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and can be found on its website: https://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost?cu. The data can be viewed by checking the box marked “U.S. All items, 1982-84 = 100—CUUR0000SA0” and then selecting “Retrieve Data.”

    Table 3—Annual and 3-Year Average Percent Change in U.S. City Average CPI Year 2015 2016 2017 3-year average Annual CPI 237.017 240.007 245.120 Annual Percent Change 0.1187% 1.2615% 2.1304% 1.1702%

    Section 744K(c)(2)(A)(iii) of the FD&C Act specifies that this 1.1702 percent should be multiplied by the proportion of all non-PC&B costs to total costs of an average FTE for the same 3 fiscal years. The proportion of all non-PC&B costs to total costs of an average FDA FTE for FYs 2015 to 2017 is 49.3957 percent (100 percent − 50.6043 percent = 49.3957 percent). Therefore, the non-pay adjustment is 1.1702 percent times 49.3957 percent, or 0.5780 percent.

    The PC&B component (1.2222 percent) is added to the non-PC&B component (0.5780 percent), for a total inflation adjustment of 1.8002 percent (rounded). Section 744K(c)(2)(A)(i) of the FD&C Act specifies that one is added to that figure, making the inflation adjustment 1.018002.

    Section 744K(c)(2)(B) of the FD&C Act provides for this inflation adjustment to be compounded after FY 2015. This factor for FY 2019 (1.8002 percent) is compounded by adding one to it, and then multiplying it by one plus the inflation adjustment factor for FY 2018 (7.2835 percent), as published in the Federal Register of August 2, 2017 (82 FR 35962 at 35965). The result of this multiplication of the inflation factors for the 4 years since FY 2015 (1.018002 × 1.072835) becomes the inflation adjustment for FY 2019. For FY 2019, the inflation adjustment is 9.2148 percent (rounded). We then add one, making the FY 2019 inflation adjustment factor 1.092148.

    2. Small Business Adjustment Factor

    Section 744K(c)(3) of the FD&C Act specifies that in addition to the inflation adjustment factor, the establishment fee for non-small businesses is to be further adjusted for a small business adjustment factor. Section 744K(c)(3)(B) of the FD&C Act provides that the small business adjustment factor is the adjustment to the establishment fee for non-small businesses that is necessary to achieve total fees equaling the amount that FDA would have collected if no entity qualified for the small business exception in section 744K(c)(4) of the FD&C Act. Additionally, section 744K(c)(5)(A) states that in establishing the small business adjustment factor for a fiscal year, FDA shall provide for the crediting of fees from the previous year to the next year if FDA overestimated the amount of the small business adjustment factor for such previous fiscal year.

    Therefore, to calculate the small business adjustment to the establishment fee for non-small businesses for FY 2019, FDA must estimate: (1) The number of outsourcing facilities that will pay the reduced fee for small businesses for FY 2019 and (2) the total fee revenue it would have collected if no entity had qualified for the small business exception (i.e., if each entity that registers as an outsourcing facility for FY 2019 were to pay the inflation-adjusted fee amount of $16,382).

    With respect to (1), FDA estimates that 14 entities will qualify for small business exceptions and will pay the reduced fee for FY 2019. With respect to (2), to estimate the total number of entities that will register as outsourcing facilities for FY 2019, FDA used data submitted by outsourcing facilities through the voluntary registration process, which began in December 2013. Accordingly, FDA estimates that 82 outsourcing facilities, including 14 small businesses, will be registered with FDA in FY 2019.

    If the projected 82 outsourcing facilities paid the full inflation-adjusted fee of $16,382, this would result in total revenue of $1,343,324 in FY 2019 ($16,382 × 82). However, 14 of the entities that are expected to register as outsourcing facilities for FY 2019 are projected to qualify for the small business exception and to pay one-third of the full fee ($5,461 × 14), totaling $76,454 instead of paying the full fee ($16,382 × 14), which would total $229,348. This would leave a potential shortfall of $152,894 ($229,348 − $76,454).

    Additionally, section 744K(c)(5)(A) of the FD&C Act states that in establishing the small business adjustment factor for a fiscal year, FDA shall provide for the crediting of fees from the previous year to the next year if FDA overestimated the amount of the small business adjustment factor for such previous fiscal year. FDA has determined that it is appropriate to credit excess fees collected from the last completed fiscal year, due to the inability to conclusively determine the amount of excess fees from the fiscal year that is in progress at the time this calculation is made. This crediting is done by comparing the small business adjustment factor for the last completed fiscal year, FY 2017 ($1,137), to what would have been the small business adjustment factor for FY 2017 ($892) if FDA had estimated perfectly.

    The calculation for what the small business adjustment would have been if FDA had estimated perfectly begins by determining the total target collections (15,000 × [inflation adjustment factor] × [number of registrants]). For the most recent complete fiscal year, FY 2017, this was $1,219,449 ($15,837 × 77). The actual FY 2017 revenue from the 77 total registrants (i.e., 71 registrants paying FY 2017 non-small business establishment fee and six small business registrants) paying establishment fees is $1,156,101. $1,156,101 is calculated as follows: (FY 2017 Non-Small Business Establishment Fee adjusted for inflation only) × (total number of registrants in FY 2017 paying Non-Small Business Establishment Fee) + (FY 2017 Small Business Establishment Fee) × (total number of small business registrants in FY 2017 paying Small Business Establishment Fee). $15,837 × 71 + $5,279 × 6 = $1,156,101. This left a shortfall of $63,348 from the estimated total target collection amount ($1,219,449 − $1,156,101). $63,348 divided by the total number of registrants in FY 2017 paying Standard Establishment Fee (71) equals $892.

    The difference between the small business adjustment factor used in FY 2017 and the small business adjustment factor that would have been used had FDA estimated perfectly; is $245 ($1,137 − $892). The $245 (rounded to the nearest dollar) is then multiplied by the number of actual registrants who paid the standard fee for FY 2017 (71), which provides us a total excess collection of $17,380 in FY 2017.

    Therefore, to calculate the small business adjustment factor for FY 2019, FDA subtracts $17,380 from the projected shortfall of $152,894 for FY 2019 to arrive at the numerator for the small business adjustment amount, which equals $135,514. This number divided by 68 (the number of expected non-small businesses for FY 2019) is the small business adjustment amount for FY 2019, which is $1,993 (rounded to the nearest dollar).

    B. FY 2019 Rates for Small Business Establishment Fee, Non-Small Business Establishment Fee, and Re-Inspection Fee 1. Establishment Fee for Qualified Small Businesses 1

    1 To qualify for a small business reduction of the FY 2019 establishment fee, entities had to submit their exception requests by April 30, 2018. See section 744K(c)(4)(B) of the FD&C Act. The time for requesting a small business exception for FY 2019 has now passed. An entity that wishes to request a small business exception for FY 2020 should consult section 744K(c)(4) of the FD&C Act and section III.D of FDA's guidance for industry entitled “Fees for Human Drug Compounding Outsourcing Facilities Under Sections 503B and 744K of the FD&C Act,” which can be accessed on FDA's website at https://www.fda.gov/downloads/drugs/guidancecomplianceregulatoryinformation/guidances/ucm391102.pdf.

    The amount of the establishment fee for a qualified small business is equal to $15,000 multiplied by the inflation adjustment factor for that fiscal year, divided by three (see section 744K(c)(4)(A) and (c)(1)(A) of the FD&C Act). The inflation adjustment factor for FY 2019 is 1.092148. See section II.A.1 for the methodology used to calculate the FY 2019 inflation adjustment factor. Therefore, the establishment fee for a qualified small business for FY 2019 is one third of $16,382, which equals $5,461 (rounded to the nearest dollar).

    2. Establishment Fee for Non-Small Businesses

    Under section 744K(c) of the FD&C Act, the amount of the establishment fee for a non-small business is equal to $15,000 multiplied by the inflation adjustment factor for that fiscal year, plus the small business adjustment factor for that fiscal year, and plus or minus an adjustment factor to account for over- or under-collections due to the small business adjustment factor in the prior year. The inflation adjustment factor for FY 2019 is 1.092148. The small business adjustment amount for FY 2019 is $1,993. See section II.A.2 for the methodology used to calculate the small business adjustment factor for FY 2019. Therefore, the establishment fee for a non-small business for FY 2019 is $15,000 multiplied by 1.092148 plus $1,993, which equals $18,375 (rounded to the nearest dollar).

    3. Re-Inspection Fee

    Section 744K(c)(1)(B) of the FD&C Act provides that the amount of the FY 2019 re-inspection fee is equal to $15,000, multiplied by the inflation adjustment factor for that fiscal year. The inflation adjustment factor for FY 2019 is 1.092148. Therefore, the re-inspection fee for FY 2019 is $15,000 multiplied by 1.092148, which equals $16,382 (rounded to the nearest dollar). There is no reduction in this fee for small businesses.

    C. Summary of FY 2019 Fee Rates Table 4—Outsourcing Facility Fees Qualified Small Business Establishment Fee $5,461 Non-Small Business Establishment Fee 18,375 Re-inspection Fee 16,382 III. Fee Payment Options and Procedures A. Establishment Fee

    Once an entity submits registration information and FDA has determined that the information is complete, the entity will incur the annual establishment fee. FDA will send an invoice to the entity, via email to the email address indicated in the registration file, or via regular mail if email is not an option. The invoice will contain information regarding the obligation incurred, the amount owed, and payment procedures. A facility will not be registered as an outsourcing facility until it has paid the annual establishment fee under section 744K of the FD&C Act. Accordingly, it is important that facilities seeking to operate as outsourcing facilities pay all fees immediately upon receiving an invoice. If an entity does not pay the full invoiced amount within 15 calendar days after FDA issues the invoice, FDA will consider the submission of registration information to have been withdrawn and adjust the invoice to reflect that no fee is due.

    Outsourcing facilities that registered in FY 2018 and wish to maintain their status as an outsourcing facility in FY 2019 must register during the annual registration period that lasts from October 1, 2018, to December 31, 2018. Failure to register and complete payment by December 31, 2018, will result in a loss of status as an outsourcing facility on January 1, 2019. Entities should submit their registration information no later than December 10, 2018, to allow enough time for review of the registration information, invoicing, and payment of fees before the end of the registration period.

    B. Re-Inspection Fee

    FDA will issue invoices for each re-inspection after the conclusion of the re-inspection, via email to the email address indicated in the registration file or via regular mail if email is not an option. Invoices must be paid within 30 days.

    C. Fee Payment Procedures

    1. The preferred payment method is online using electronic check (Automated Clearing House (ACH) also known as eCheck) or credit card (Discover, VISA, MasterCard, American Express). Secure electronic payments can be submitted using the User Fees Payment Portal at https://userfees.fda.gov/pay. (Note: only full payments are accepted. No partial payments can be made online.) Once you search for your invoice, click “Pay Now” to be redirected to Pay.gov. Electronic payment options are based on the balance due. Payment by credit card is available for balances less than $25,000. If the balance exceeds this amount, only the ACH option is available. Payments must be made using U.S bank accounts as well as U.S. credit cards.

    2. If paying with a paper check: Checks must be in U.S. currency from a U.S. bank and made payable to the Food and Drug Administration. Payments can be mailed to: Food and Drug Administration, P.O. Box 979033, St. Louis, MO 63197-9000. If a check is sent by a courier that requests a street address, the courier can deliver the check to: U.S. Bank, Attn: Government Lockbox 979033, 1005 Convention Plaza, St. Louis, MO 63101. (Note: This U.S. Bank address is for courier delivery only. If you have any questions concerning courier delivery, contact the U.S. Bank at 314-418-4013).

    3. When paying by wire transfer, the invoice number must be included. Without the invoice number the payment may not be applied. Regarding re-inspection fees, if the payment amount is not applied, the invoice amount will be referred to collections. The originating financial institution may charge a wire transfer fee. If the financial institution charges a wire transfer fee, it is required that the outsourcing facility add that amount to the payment to ensure that the invoice is paid in full. Use the following account information when sending a wire transfer: New York Federal Reserve Bank, U.S. Dept of Treasury, TREAS NYC, 33 Liberty St., New York, NY 10045, Acct. No. 75060099, Routing No. 021030004, SWIFT: FRNYUS33. If needed, FDA's tax identification number is 53-0196965.

    Dated: July 26, 2018. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16416 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2017-N-0007] Prescription Drug User Fee Rates for Fiscal Year 2019 AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the rates for prescription drug user fees for fiscal year (FY) 2019. The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act), as amended by the Prescription Drug User Fee Amendments of 2017 (PDUFA VI), authorizes FDA to collect application fees for certain applications for the review of human drug and biological products, and prescription drug program fees for certain approved products. This notice establishes the fee rates for FY 2019.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Lola Olajide, Office of Financial Management, Food and Drug Administration, 8455 Colesville Rd., COLE-14541B, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-402-4244.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    Sections 735 and 736 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 379g and 379h, respectively) establish two different kinds of user fees. Fees are assessed as follows: (1) Application fees are assessed on certain types of applications for the review of human drug and biological products; and (2) prescription drug program fees are assessed on certain approved products (section 736(a) of the FD&C Act). When specific conditions are met, FDA may waive or reduce fees (section 736(d) of the FD&C Act).

    For FY 2018 through FY 2022, the base revenue amounts for the total revenues from all PDUFA fees are established by PDUFA VI. The base revenue amount for FY 2019 is $935,903,507. The FY 2019 base revenue amount is adjusted for inflation and for the resource capacity needs for the process for the review of human drug applications (the capacity planning adjustment). An additional dollar amount specified in the statute (see section 736(b)(1)(F) of the FD&C Act) is then added to provide for additional full-time equivalent (FTE) positions to support PDUFA VI initiatives. The FY 2019 revenue amount may be adjusted further, if necessary, to provide for sufficient operating reserves of carryover user fees. Finally, the amount is adjusted to provide for additional direct costs to fund PDUFA VI initiatives. Fee amounts are to be established each year so that revenues from application fees provide 20 percent of the total revenue, and prescription drug program fees provide 80 percent of the total revenue.

    This document provides fee rates for FY 2019 for an application requiring clinical data ($2,588,478), for an application not requiring clinical data ($1,294,239), and for the prescription drug program fee ($309,915). These fees are effective on October 1, 2018, and will remain in effect through September 30, 2019. For applications that are submitted on or after October 1, 2018, the new fee schedule must be used.

    II. Fee Revenue Amount for FY 2019

    The base revenue amount for FY 2019 is $935,903,507 prior to adjustments for inflation, capacity planning, additional FTE, operating reserve, and additional direct costs (see section 736(b)(1) of the FD&C Act).

    A. FY 2018 Statutory Fee Revenue Adjustments for Inflation

    PDUFA VI specifies that the $935,903,507 is to be adjusted for inflation increases for FY 2019 using two separate adjustments—one for personnel compensation and benefits (PC&B) and one for non-PC&B costs (see section 736(c)(1) of the FD&C Act).

    The component of the inflation adjustment for payroll costs shall be one plus the average annual percent change in the cost of all PC&B paid per FTE positions at FDA for the first 3 of the preceding 4 FYs, multiplied by the proportion of PC&B costs to total FDA costs of the process for the review of human drug applications for the first 3 of the preceding 4 FYs (see section 736(c)(1)(A) and (c)(1)(B) of the FD&C Act).

    Table 1 summarizes the actual cost and FTE data for the specified FYs and provides the percent changes from the previous FYs and the average percent changes over the first three of the four FYs preceding FY 2019. The 3-year average is 2.4152 percent.

    Table 1—FDA Personnel Compensation and Benefits (PC&B) Each Year and Percent Changes Fiscal year 2015 2016 2017 3-year average Total PC&B $2,232,304,000 $2,414,728,159 $2,581,551,000 Total FTE 15,484 16,381 17,022 PC&B per FTE $144,168 $147,408 $151,660 Percent Change From Previous Year 2.1136 2.2474 2.8845 2.4152

    The statute specifies that this 2.4152 percent be multiplied by the proportion of PC&B costs to the total FDA costs of the process for the review of human drug applications. Table 2 shows the PC&B and the total obligations for the process for the review of human drug applications for the first three of the preceding four FYs.

    Table 2—PC&B as a Percent of Total Cost of the Process for the Review of Human Drug Applications Fiscal year 2015 2016 2017 3-year average Total PC&B $615,483,892 $652,508,273 $711,016,627 Total Costs $1,127,664,528 $1,157,817,695 $1,206,657,269 PC&B Percent 54.5804 56.3567 58.9245 56.6205

    The payroll adjustment is 2.4152 percent from table 1 multiplied by 56.6205 percent (or 1.3675 percent).

    The statute specifies that the portion of the inflation adjustment for non-payroll costs is the average annual percent change that occurred in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for urban consumers (Washington-Baltimore, DC-MD-VA-WV; not seasonally adjusted; all items; annual index) for the first 3 years of the preceding 4 years of available data multiplied by the proportion of all costs other than PC&B costs to total costs of the process for the review of human drug applications for the first 3 years of the preceding 4 FYs (see section 736(c)(1)(B) of the FD&C Act). Table 3 provides the summary data for the percent changes in the specified CPI for the Washington-Baltimore area. The data are published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and can be found on its website at: https://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet?data_tool=dropmap&series_id=CUURA311SA0,CUUSA311SA0.

    Table 3—Annual and Three-Year Average Percent Change in CPI for Washington-Baltimore Area Year 2015 2016 2017 3-year
  • average
  • Annual CPI 155.353 157.180 159.202 Annual Percent Change 0.3268 1.1760 1.2864 0.9297

    The statute specifies that this 0.9297 percent be multiplied by the proportion of all costs other than PC&B to total costs of the process for the review of human drug applications obligated. Since 56.6205 percent was obligated for PC&B (as shown in table 2), 43.3795 percent is the portion of costs other than PC&B (100 percent minus 56.6205 percent equals 43.3795 percent). The non-payroll adjustment is 0.9297 percent times 43.3795 percent, or 0.4033 percent.

    Next, we add the payroll adjustment (1.3675 percent) to the non-payroll adjustment (0.4033 percent), for a total inflation adjustment of 1.7708 percent (rounded) for FY 2019.

    We then multiply the base revenue amount for FY 2019 ($935,903,507) by 1.017708, yielding an inflation-adjusted amount of $952,476,486.

    B. FY 2019 Statutory Fee Revenue Adjustments for Capacity Planning

    The statute specifies that after $935,903,507 has been adjusted for inflation, the inflation-adjusted amount shall be further adjusted to reflect changes in the resource capacity needs for the process of human drug application reviews (see section 736(c)(2) of the FD&C Act). The statute prescribes an interim capacity planning adjustment be utilized until a new methodology can be developed through a process involving an independent evaluation as well as obtaining public comment. The interim capacity planning adjustment is applied to FY 2019 fee setting.

    To determine the FY 2019 capacity planning adjustment, FDA calculated the average number of each of the five elements specified in the capacity planning adjustment provision: (1) Human drug applications (new drug applications (NDAs)/biologics license applications (BLAs)); (2) active commercial investigational new drug applications (INDs) (IND applications that have at least one submission during the previous 12 months); (3) efficacy supplements; (4) manufacturing supplements; and (5) formal meetings, type A, B, B(EoP), C, and written responses only (WRO) issued in lieu of such formal meetings, over the 3-year period that ended on June 30, 2017, and the average number of each of these elements over the most recent three-year period that ended June 30, 2018.

    The calculations are summarized in table 4. The three-year averages for each element are provided in column 1 (“Three-Year Average Ending 2017”) and column 2 (“Three-Year Average Ending 2018”). Column 3 reflects the percent change from column 1 to column 2. Column 4 shows the weighting factor for each element. The weighting factor methodology has been updated for PDUFA VI. The previous methodology relied on the relative value of the standard costs for the elements included in the adjuster, and summed to 100 percent. The weighting factor now is the time invested in activities related to the element expressed as a percentage of total time invested in PDUFA activities, and will adjust only the costs attributed to the elements included in the model (hence the weighting factor does not now sum to 100 percent). Column 5 is the weighted percent change in each element. This is calculated by multiplying the weighting factor in each line in column 4 by the percent change in column 3. The values in column 5 are summed, reflecting an adjustment of 2.9067 percent (rounded).

    Table 4—Capacity Planning Adjuster (Interim Methodology) Calculation for FY 2019 Element Column 1 3-year
  • average
  • ending 2017
  • Column 2 3-year
  • average
  • ending 2018
  • Column 3 Percent change
  • (column 1 to
  • column 2)
  • Column 4 Weighting
  • factor
  • (percent)
  • Column 5 Weighted
  • percent
  • change
  • NDAs/BLAs 153.0000 162.0000 5.8824 20.5015 1.2060 Active Commercial INDs 7,846.6667 8,057.0000 2.6805 22.2771 0.5971 Efficacy Supplements 212.3333 234.3333 10.3611 5.2439 0.5433 Manufacturing Supplements 2,482.6667 2,561.6667 3.1821 3.7243 0.1185 Meetings Scheduled and WROs 2,940.0000 3,136.3333 6.6780 6.6156 0.4418 FY 2019 Capacity Planning Adjuster 2.9067

    Table 5 shows the calculation of the inflation and capacity planning adjusted amount for FY 2019. The FY 2019 base revenue amount, $935,903,507, shown on line 1 is multiplied by the inflation adjustment factor of 1.017708, resulting in the inflation-adjusted amount of $952,476,486 shown on line 3. That amount is then multiplied by one, plus the capacity planning adjustment of 2.9067 percent, resulting in the inflation and capacity planning adjusted amount of $980,162,120 shown on line 5.

    Table 5—PDUFA Inflation and Capacity Planning Adjusted Amount for FY 2019, Summary Calculation FY 2019 Revenue Amount $935,903,507 Line 1. Inflation Adjustment Factor for FY 2019 (1 plus 1.7708 percent) 1.017708 Line 2. Inflation Adjusted Amount 952,476,486 Line 3. Capacity Planning Adjustment Factor for FY 2019 (1 plus 2.9067 percent) 1.029067 Line 4. Inflation and Capacity Planning Adjusted Amount 980,162,120 Line 5.

    The capacity planning adjustment adds $27,685,634 to the fee revenue amount for FY 2019. This increase is driven by the fact that the counts of elements for 2018 (year ending June 30) are at or near the highest levels since the first incorporation of the workload adjuster in 2003. The NDA/BLA count in 2018 is equal to the highest annual number recorded since the advent of the workload adjuster methodology in 2003. Active commercial INDs, efficacy supplements, and meetings/WROs are higher in 2018 than in any previous year recorded in the workload adjuster (note: Meetings/WROs are only counted back to 2014 while the other elements are counted back to 2003). The manufacturing supplement count is approximately 2 percent below the highest number recorded in the history of the workload adjuster. Comparing 2018 to 2015, the first year included in the average in column 1 in the adjustment, NDA/BLAs are 17 percent higher, active commercial INDs are 8 percent higher, efficacy supplements are 36 percent higher, manufacturing supplements are 10 percent higher, and meetings scheduled and WROs are 21 percent higher. This significant and across the board increase in submission activity is the driver of the $27,685,634 upward adjustment to the fee revenue amount.

    Per the commitments made in PDUFA VI, this increase in the revenue amount will be allocated and used by organizational review components engaged in direct review work to enhance resources and expand staff capacity and capability (see II.A.4 on p.37 of the PDUFA VI commitment letter 1 ).

    1 The PDUFA VI commitment letter can be viewed at https://www.fda.gov/downloads/forindustry/userfees/prescriptiondruguserfee/ucm511438.pdf.

    C. FY 2019 Statutory Fee Revenue Adjustments for Additional Dollar Amounts

    PDUFA VI provides an additional dollar amount for each of the five fiscal years covered by PDUFA VI for additional FTE to support PDUFA VI enhancements outlined in the PDUFA VI commitment letter. The amount for FY 2019 is $21,317,472 (see section 736(b)(1)(F) of the FD&C Act). Adding this amount to the inflation and capacity planning adjusted revenue amount, $980,162,120, equals $1,001,479,592.

    D. FY 2019 Statutory Fee Revenue Adjustments for Operating Reserve

    PDUFA VI provides for an operating reserve adjustment to allow FDA to increase the fee revenue and fees for any given fiscal year during PDUFA VI to maintain up to 14 weeks of operating reserve of carryover user fees. If the carryover balance exceeds 14 weeks of operating reserves, FDA is required to decrease fees to provide for not more than 14 weeks of operating reserves of carryover user fees.

    To determine the 14-week operating reserve amount, the FY 2019 annual base revenue adjusted for inflation and capacity planning, $980,162,120, is divided by 52, and then multiplied by 14. The 14-week operating reserve amount for FY 2019 is $263,889,802.

    To determine the end of year operating reserve amount, the Agency must assess actual operating reserve at the end of the third quarter of FY 2018, and forecast collections and obligations in the fourth quarter of FY 2018. The estimated end of year FY 2018 operating reserve is $235,128,646.

    Because the estimated end of year FY 2019 PDUFA operating reserve does not exceed the 14-week operating reserve for FY 2019, FDA will not reduce the FY 2019 PDUFA fee revenue in FY 2019.

    E. FY 2019 Statutory Fee Revenue Adjustments for Additional Direct Cost

    PDUFA VI specifies that $8,730,000, adjusted for inflation, be added in addition to the operating reserve adjustment to account for additional direct costs in FY 2019. This additional direct cost adjustment is adjusted for inflation by multiplying $8,730,000 by the Consumer Price Index for urban consumers (Washington-Baltimore, DC-MD-VA-WV; Not Seasonally Adjusted; All Items; Annual Index) for 2017, which is 159.202, and then divided by such Index for 2016, 157.180 (see section 736(c)(4)(B) of the FD&C Act). This results in an adjustment factor of 1.012864, making the additional direct cost adjustment equal to $8,842,303.

    The final FY 2019 PDUFA target revenue is $1,010,322,000 (rounded to the nearest thousand dollars).

    III. Application Fee Calculations A. Application Fee Revenues and Application Fees

    Application fees will be set to generate 20 percent of the total target revenue amount, or $202,064,400 in FY 2019.

    B. Estimate of the Number of Fee-Paying Applications and Setting the Application Fees

    FDA will estimate the total number of fee-paying full application equivalents (FAEs) it expects to receive during the next FY by averaging the number of fee-paying FAEs received in the three most recently completed FYs. Prior year FAE totals are updated annually to reflect refunds and waivers processed after the close of the FY.

    In estimating the number of fee-paying FAEs, a full application requiring clinical data counts as one FAE. An application not requiring clinical data counts as one-half of an FAE. An application that is withdrawn before filing, or refused for filing, counts as one-fourth of an FAE if the applicant initially paid a full application fee, or one-eighth of an FAE if the applicant initially paid one-half of the full application fee amount. Prior to PDUFA VI, the FAE amount also included supplements; supplements have been removed from the FAE calculation as the supplement fee has been discontinued in PDUFA VI.

    As table 6 shows, the average number of fee-paying FAEs received annually in the most recent three-year period is 78.063013 FAEs. FDA will set fees for FY 2019 based on this estimate as the number of full application equivalents that will pay fees.

    Table 6—Fee-Paying FAEs FY 2015 2016 2017 3-year
  • average
  • Fee-Paying FAEs 81.955603 70.483437 81.750000 78.063013 Note: Prior year FAE totals are updated annually to reflect refunds and waivers processed after the close of the FY.

    The FY 2019 application fee is estimated by dividing the average number of full applications that paid fees over the latest three years, 78.063013, into the fee revenue amount to be derived from application fees in FY 2019, $202,064,400. The result is a fee of $2,588,478 per full application requiring clinical data, and $1,294,239 per application not requiring clinical data.

    IV. Fee Calculations for Prescription Drug Program Fees

    PDUFA VI assesses prescription drug program fees for certain prescription drug products; in addition, an applicant will not be assessed more than five program fees for a fiscal year for prescription drug products identified in a single approved NDA or BLA (see section 736(a)(2)(C)). Applicants are assessed a program fee for a fiscal year only for prescription drug products identified in a human drug application approved as of October 1 of such fiscal year.

    FDA estimates 2,683 program fees will be invoiced in FY 2019 before factoring in waivers, refunds, and exemptions. FDA approximates that there will be 40 waivers and refunds granted. In addition, FDA approximates that another 35 program fees will be exempted in FY 2019 based on the orphan drug exemption in section 736(k) of the FD&C Act. FDA estimates 2,608 program fees in FY 2019, after allowing for an estimated 75 waivers and reductions, including the orphan drug exemptions. The FY 2019 prescription drug program fee rate is calculated by dividing the adjusted total revenue from program fees ($808,257,600) by the estimated 2,608 program fees, for a FY 2019 program fee of $309,915.

    V. Fee Schedule for FY 2019

    The fee rates for FY 2019 are displayed in table 7:

    Table 7—Fee Schedule for FY 2019 Fee category Fee rates for FY 2019 Application: Requiring clinical data $2,588,478 Not requiring clinical data 1,294,239 Program: 309,915 VI. Fee Payment Options and Procedures A. Application Fees

    The appropriate application fee established in the new fee schedule must be paid for any application subject to fees under PDUFA that is received on or after October 1, 2018. Payment must be made in U.S. currency by electronic check, check, bank draft, wire transfer, or U.S. postal money order payable to the order of the Food and Drug Administration. The preferred payment method is online using electronic check (Automated Clearing House (ACH) also known as eCheck) or credit card (Discover, VISA, MasterCard, American Express). Secure electronic payments can be submitted using the User Fees Payment Portal at https://userfees.fda.gov/pay (Note: Only full payments are accepted. No partial payments can be made online). Once you search for your invoice, select “Pay Now” to be redirected to Pay.gov. Electronic payment options are based on the balance due. Payment by credit card is available for balances that are less than $25,000. If the balance exceeds this amount, only the ACH option is available. Payments must be made using U.S bank accounts as well as U.S. credit cards.

    FDA has partnered with the U.S. Department of the Treasury to use Pay.gov, a web-based payment application, for online electronic payment. The Pay.gov feature is available on the FDA website after completing the Prescription Drug User Fee Cover Sheet and generating the user fee ID number.

    Please include the user fee (ID) number on your check, bank draft, or postal money order. Mail your payment to: Food and Drug Administration, P.O. Box 979107, St. Louis, MO 63197-9000. If a check, bank draft, or money order is to be sent by a courier that requests a street address, the courier should deliver your payment to: U.S. Bank, Attention: Government Lockbox 979107, 1005 Convention Plaza, St. Louis, MO 63101. (Note: This U.S. Bank address is for courier delivery only. If you have any questions concerning courier delivery contact the U.S. Bank at 314-418-4013. This telephone number is only for questions about courier delivery). Please make sure that the FDA post office box number (P.O. Box 979107) is written on the check, bank draft, or postal money order.

    If paying by wire transfer, please reference your unique user fee ID number when completing your transfer. The originating financial institution may charge a wire transfer fee. Please ask your financial institution about the fee and add it to your payment to ensure that your fee is fully paid. The account information for wire transfers is as follows: U.S. Department of the Treasury, TREAS NYC, 33 Liberty St., New York, NY 10045, Acct. No.: 75060099, Routing No.: 021030004, SWIFT: FRNYUS33. If needed, FDA's tax identification number is 53-0196965.

    B. Prescription Drug Program Fees

    FDA will issue invoices and payment instructions for FY 2019 program fees under the new fee schedule in August 2018. Payment will be due on October 1, 2018. FDA will issue invoices in December 2018 for FY 2019 program fees that qualify for fee assessments after the August 2018 billing.

    Dated: July 26, 2018. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16387 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Current List of HHS-Certified Laboratories and Instrumented Initial Testing Facilities Which Meet Minimum Standards To Engage in Urine Drug Testing for Federal Agencies AGENCY:

    Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) notifies federal agencies of the laboratories and Instrumented Initial Testing Facilities (IITF) currently certified to meet the standards of the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs (Mandatory Guidelines).

    A notice listing all currently HHS-certified laboratories and IITFs is published in the Federal Register during the first week of each month. If any laboratory or IITF certification is suspended or revoked, the laboratory or IITF will be omitted from subsequent lists until such time as it is restored to full certification under the Mandatory Guidelines.

    If any laboratory or IITF has withdrawn from the HHS National Laboratory Certification Program (NLCP) during the past month, it will be listed at the end and will be omitted from the monthly listing thereafter.

    This notice is also available on the internet at http://www.samhsa.gov/workplace.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Charles LoDico, Division of Workplace Programs, SAMHSA/CSAP, 5600 Fishers Lane, Room 16N02C, Rockville, Maryland 20857; 240-276-2600 (voice).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) notifies federal agencies of the laboratories and Instrumented Initial Testing Facilities (IITF) currently certified to meet the standards of the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs (Mandatory Guidelines). The Mandatory Guidelines were first published in the Federal Register on April 11, 1988 (53 FR 11970), and subsequently revised in the Federal Register on June 9, 1994 (59 FR 29908); September 30, 1997 (62 FR 51118); April 13, 2004 (69 FR 19644); November 25, 2008 (73 FR 71858); December 10, 2008 (73 FR 75122); April 30, 2010 (75 FR 22809); and on January 23, 2017 (82 FR 7920).

    The Mandatory Guidelines were initially developed in accordance with Executive Order 12564 and section 503 of Public Law 100-71. The “Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs,” as amended in the revisions listed above, requires strict standards that laboratories and IITFs must meet in order to conduct drug and specimen validity tests on urine specimens for federal agencies.

    To become certified, an applicant laboratory or IITF must undergo three rounds of performance testing plus an on-site inspection. To maintain that certification, a laboratory or IITF must participate in a quarterly performance testing program plus undergo periodic, on-site inspections.

    Laboratories and IITFs in the applicant stage of certification are not to be considered as meeting the minimum requirements described in the HHS Mandatory Guidelines. A HHS-certified laboratory or IITF must have its letter of certification from HHS/SAMHSA (formerly: HHS/NIDA), which attests that it has met minimum standards.

    In accordance with the Mandatory Guidelines dated January 23, 2017 (82 FR 7920), the following HHS-certified laboratories and IITFs meet the minimum standards to conduct drug and specimen validity tests on urine specimens:

    HHS-Certified Instrumented Initial Testing Facilities Dynacare, 6628 50th Street NW, Edmonton, AB Canada T6B 2N7, 780-784-1190, (Formerly: Gamma-Dynacare Medical Laboratories). HHS-Certified Laboratories ACM Medical Laboratory, Inc., 160 Elmgrove Park, Rochester, NY 14624, 844-486-9226. Alere Toxicology Services, 1111 Newton St., Gretna, LA 70053, 504-361-8989/800-433-3823, (Formerly: Kroll Laboratory Specialists, Inc., Laboratory Specialists, Inc.). Alere Toxicology Services, 450 Southlake Blvd., Richmond, VA 23236, 804-378-9130, (Formerly: Kroll Laboratory Specialists, Inc., Scientific Testing Laboratories, Inc.; Kroll Scientific Testing Laboratories, Inc.). Baptist Medical Center-Toxicology Laboratory, 11401 I-30, Little Rock, AR 72209-7056, 501-202-2783, (Formerly: Forensic Toxicology Laboratory Baptist Medical Center). Clinical Reference Laboratory, Inc., 8433 Quivira Road, Lenexa, KS, 66215-2802, 800-445-6917. DrugScan, Inc., 200 Precision Road, Suite 200, Horsham, PA 19044, 800-235-4890. Dynacare*, 245 Pall Mall Street, London, ONT, Canada N6A 1P4, 519-679-1630, (Formerly: Gamma-Dynacare Medical Laboratories). ElSohly Laboratories, Inc., 5 Industrial Park Drive, Oxford, MS 38655, 662-236-2609. Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings, 7207 N Gessner Road, Houston, TX 77040, 713-856-8288/800-800-2387. Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings, 69 First Ave., Raritan, NJ 08869, 908-526-2400/800-437-4986, (Formerly: Roche Biomedical Laboratories, Inc.). Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings, 1904 TW Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, 919-572-6900/800-833-3984, (Formerly: LabCorp Occupational Testing Services, Inc., CompuChem Laboratories, Inc.; CompuChem Laboratories, Inc., A Subsidiary of Roche Biomedical Laboratory; Roche CompuChem Laboratories, Inc., A Member of the Roche Group). Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings, 1120 Main Street, Southaven, MS 38671, 866-827-8042/800-233-6339, (Formerly: LabCorp Occupational Testing Services, Inc.; MedExpress/National Laboratory Center). LabOne, Inc. d/b/a Quest Diagnostics, 10101 Renner Blvd., Lenexa, KS 66219, 913-888-3927/800-873-8845, (Formerly: Quest Diagnostics Incorporated; LabOne, Inc.; Center for Laboratory Services, a Division of LabOne, Inc.). MedTox Laboratories, Inc., 402 W. County Road D, St. Paul, MN 55112, 651-636-7466/800-832-3244. Legacy Laboratory Services—MetroLab, 1225 NE 2nd Ave., Portland, OR 97232, 503-413-5295/800-950-5295. Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Forensic Toxicology Laboratory, 1 Veterans Drive, Minneapolis, MN 55417, 612-725-2088. Testing for Veterans Affairs (VA) Employees Only. National Toxicology Laboratories, Inc., 1100 California Ave., Bakersfield, CA 93304, 661-322-4250/800-350-3515. One Source Toxicology Laboratory, Inc., 1213 Genoa-Red Bluff, Pasadena, TX 77504, 888-747-3774, (Formerly: University of Texas Medical Branch, Clinical Chemistry Division; UTMB Pathology-Toxicology Laboratory). Pacific Toxicology Laboratories, 9348 DeSoto Ave., Chatsworth, CA 91311, 800-328-6942, (Formerly: Centinela Hospital Airport Toxicology Laboratory). Pathology Associates Medical Laboratories, 110 West Cliff Dr., Spokane, WA 99204, 509-755-8991/800-541-7891x7. Phamatech, Inc., 15175 Innovation Drive, San Diego, CA 92128, 888-635-5840. Quest Diagnostics Incorporated, 1777 Montreal Circle, Tucker, GA 30084, 800-729-6432, (Formerly: SmithKline Beecham Clinical Laboratories; SmithKline Bio-Science Laboratories). Quest Diagnostics Incorporated, 400 Egypt Road, Norristown, PA 19403, 610-631-4600/877-642-2216, (Formerly: SmithKline Beecham Clinical Laboratories; SmithKline Bio-Science Laboratories). Redwood Toxicology Laboratory, 3700 Westwind Blvd., Santa Rosa, CA 95403, 800-255-2159. STERLING Reference Laboratories, 2617 East L Street, Tacoma, WA 98421, 800-442-0438. US Army Forensic Toxicology Drug Testing Laboratory, 2490 Wilson St., Fort George G. Meade, MD 20755-5235, 301-677-7085, Testing for Department of Defense (DoD) Employees Only.

    * The Standards Council of Canada (SCC) voted to end its Laboratory Accreditation Program for Substance Abuse (LAPSA) effective May 12, 1998. Laboratories certified through that program were accredited to conduct forensic urine drug testing as required by U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations. As of that date, the certification of those accredited Canadian laboratories will continue under DOT authority. The responsibility for conducting quarterly performance testing plus periodic on-site inspections of those LAPSA-accredited laboratories was transferred to the U.S. HHS, with the HHS' NLCP contractor continuing to have an active role in the performance testing and laboratory inspection processes. Other Canadian laboratories wishing to be considered for the NLCP may apply directly to the NLCP contractor just as U.S. laboratories do.

    Upon finding a Canadian laboratory to be qualified, HHS will recommend that DOT certify the laboratory (Federal Register, July 16, 1996) as meeting the minimum standards of the Mandatory Guidelines published in the Federal Register on January 23, 2017 (82 FR 7920). After receiving DOT certification, the laboratory will be included in the monthly list of HHS-certified laboratories and participate in the NLCP certification maintenance program.

    Charles P. LoDico, Chemist.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16440 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160-20-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection [CBP Dec. 18-08] COBRA Fees To Be Adjusted for Inflation in Fiscal Year 2019 AGENCY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    General notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This document announces that U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is adjusting certain customs user fees and limitations established by the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) for Fiscal Year 2019 in accordance with the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act) as implemented by CBP regulations.

    DATES:

    The adjusted amounts of customs COBRA user fees and their corresponding limitations set forth in this notice for Fiscal Year 2019 are required as of October 1, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Tina Ghiladi, Director—Office of Finance, 202-344-3722, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On December 4, 2015, the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act, Pub. L. 114-94) was signed into law. Section 32201 of the FAST Act amended section 13031 of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) of 1985 (19 U.S.C. 58c) by requiring certain customs COBRA user fees and corresponding limitations to be adjusted by the Secretary of the Treasury (Secretary) to reflect certain increases in inflation.

    Sections 24.22 and 24.23 of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 24.22 and 24.23) describe the procedures that implement the requirements of the FAST Act. Specifically, paragraph (k) in section 24.22 (19 CFR 24.22(k)) sets forth the methodology to determine the change in inflation as well as the factor by which the fees and limitations will be adjusted, if necessary. The fees and limitations subject to adjustment, which are set forth in Appendix A and Appendix B of part 24, include the commercial vessel arrival fees, commercial truck arrival fees, railroad car arrival fees, private vessel arrival fees, private aircraft arrival fees, commercial aircraft and vessel passenger arrival fees, dutiable mail fees, customs broker permit user fees, barges and other bulk carriers arrival fees, and merchandise processing fees, as well as the corresponding limitations.

    Determination of Whether an Adjustment Is Necessary for Fiscal Year 2019

    In accordance with 19 CFR 24.22, CBP must determine annually whether the fees and limitations must be adjusted to reflect inflation. For fiscal year 2019, CBP is making this determination by comparing the average of the Consumer Price Index—All Urban Consumers, U.S. All items, 1982-84 (CPI-U) for the current year (June 2017-May 2018) with the average of the CPI-U for the comparison year (June 2016-May 2017) to determine the change in inflation, if any. If there is an increase in the CPI of greater than one (1) percent, CBP must adjust the customs COBRA user fees and corresponding limitations using the methodology set forth in 19 CFR 24.22(k). (19 CFR 24.22(k)). Following the steps provided in paragraph (k)(2) of section 24.22, CBP has determined that the increase in the CPI between the most recent June to May 12-month period (June 2017-May 2018) and the comparison year (June 2016-May 2017) is 2.063 1 percent. As the increase in the CPI is greater than one (1) percent, the customs COBRA user fees and corresponding limitations must be adjusted for Fiscal Year 2019.

    1 The figures provided in this notice may be rounded for publication purposes only. The calculations for the adjusted fees and limitations were made using unrounded figures, unless otherwise noted.

    Determination of the Adjusted Fees and Limitations

    Using the methodology set forth in section 24.22(k)(2) of the CBP regulations (19 CFR 24.22(k)), CBP has determined that the factor by which the base fees and limitations will be adjusted is 4.866 percent (base fees and limitations can be found in Appendix A and B to part 24 of title 19). In reaching this determination, CBP calculated the values for each variable found in paragraph (k) of 19 CFR 24.22 as follows:

    • The arithmetic average of the CPI-U for June 2017-May 2018, referred to as (A) in the CBP regulations, is 247.540;

    • The arithmetic average of the CPI-U for Fiscal Year 2014, referred to as (B), is 236.009;

    • The arithmetic average of the CPI-U for the comparison year, referred to as (C), is 242.328;

    • The difference between the arithmetic averages of the CPI-U of the comparison year (June 2016-May 2017) and the current year (June 2017-May 2018), referred to as (D), is 5.212;

    • This difference rounded to the nearest whole number, referred to as (E), is 5;

    • The percentage change in the arithmetic averages of the CPI-U of the comparison year (June 2016-May 2017) and the current year (June 2017-May 2018), referred to as (F), is 2.063 percent;

    • The difference in the arithmetic average of the CPI-U between the current year (June 2017-May 2018) and the base year (Fiscal Year 2014), referred to as (G), is 11.532; and

    • Lastly, the percentage change in the CPI-U from the base year (Fiscal Year 2014) to the current year (June 2017-May 2018), referred to as (H), is 4.886 percent.

    Announcement of New Fees and Limitations

    The adjusted amounts of customs COBRA user fees and their corresponding limitations for Fiscal Year 2019 as adjusted by 4.886 percent set forth below are required as of October 1, 2018. Table 1 provides the fees and limitations found in 19 CFR 24.22 as adjusted for Fiscal Year 2019 and Table 2 provides the fees and limitations found in 19 CFR 24.23 as adjusted for Fiscal Year 2019.

    2 The Commercial Truck Arrival fee is the CBP fee only, it does not include the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services agricultural quarantine and inspection (APHIS/AQI) fee that is collected by CBP on behalf of USDA. See 7 CFR 354.3(c) and 19 CFR 24.22(c)(1). Once 19 Single Crossing Fees have been paid and used for a vehicle identification number (VIN)/vehicle in a Decal and Transponder Online Procurement System (DTOPS) account within a calendar year, the payment required for the 20th (and subsequent) single-crossing is only the APHIS/AQI fee and no longer includes the CBP Commercial Truck Arrival fee (for the remainder of that calendar year).

    3 The Commercial Truck Arrival fee is adjusted down from 5.77 to the nearest lower nickel. See 82 FR 50523 (November 1, 2017).

    4See footnote 2 above.

    5 Although the minimum limitation is published, the fee charged is the fee required by 19 U.S.C. 58c(b)(9)(A)(ii).

    6 Only the limitation is increasing; the ad valorem rate of 0.3464% remains the same. See 82 FR 32661 (July 17, 2017).

    7Id.

    8 For monthly pipeline entries, see: https://www.cbp.gov/trade/entry-summary/pipeline-monthly-entry-processing/pipeline-line-qa.

    Table 1—Customs COBRA User Fees and Limitations Found in 19 CFR 24.22 as Adjusted for Fiscal Year 2019 19 U.S.C. 58c 19 CFR 24.22 Customs COBRA user fee/limitation New fee/
  • limitation
  • adjusted in
  • accordance with the FAST Act
  • (a)(1) (b)(1)(i) Fee: Commercial Vessel Arrival Fee $458.35 (b)(5)(A) (b)(1)(ii) Limitation: Calendar Year Maximum for Commercial Vessel Arrival Fees 6,245.97 (a)(8) (b)(2)(i) Fee: Barges and Other Bulk Carriers Arrival Fee 115.37 (b)(6) (b)(2)(ii) Limitation: Calendar Year Maximum for Barges and Other Bulk Carriers Arrival Fees 1,573.29 (a)(2) (c)(1) Fee: Commercial Truck Arrival Fee 2 3 5.75 (b)(2) (c)(2) and (3) Limitation: Commercial Truck Calendar Year Prepayment Fee 4 104.89 (a)(3) (d)(1) Fee: Railroad Car Arrival Fee 8.65 (b)(3) (d)(2) and (3) Limitation: Railroad Car Calendar Year Prepayment Fee 104.89 (a)(4) (e)(1) and (2) Fee and Limitation: Private Vessel or Private Aircraft First Arrival/Calendar Year Prepayment Fee 28.84 (a)(6) (f) Fee: Dutiable Mail Fee 5.77 (a)(5)(A) (g)(1)(i) Fee: Commercial Vessel or Commercial Aircraft Passenger Arrival Fee 5.77 (a)(5)(B) (g)(1)(ii) Fee: Commercial Vessel Passenger Arrival Fee (from one of the territories and possessions of the United States) 2.02 (a)(7) (h) Fee: Customs Broker Permit User Fee 144.74
    Table 2—Customs COBRA User Fees and Limitations Found in 19 CFR 24.23 as Adjusted for Fiscal Year 2019 19 U.S.C. 58c 19 CFR 24.23 Customs COBRA user fee/limitation New fee/
  • limitation
  • adjusted in
  • accordance with the FAST Act
  • (b)(9)(A) (ii) (b)(1)(i)(A) Fee: Express Consignment Carrier/Centralized Hub Facility Fee, Per Individual Waybill/Bill of Lading Fee $1.05 (b)(9)(B)(i) (b)(1)(i)(B)(2) Limitation: Minimum Express Consignment Carrier/Centralized Hub Facility Fee 5 0.37 (b)(9)(B)(i) (b)(1)(i)(B)(2) Limitation: Maximum Express Consignment Carrier/Centralized Hub Facility Fee 1.05 (a)(9)(B)(i); (b)(8)(A)(i) (b)(1)(i)(B)(1) Limitation: Minimum Merchandise Processing Fee 6 26.22 (a)(9)(B)(i); (b)(8)(A)(i) (b)(1)(i)(B)(1) Limitation: Maximum Merchandise Processing Fee 7 8 508.70 (b)(8)(A)(ii) (b)(1)(ii) Fee: Surcharge for Manual Entry or Release 3.15 (a)(10)(C)(i) (b)(2)(i) Fee: Informal Entry or Release; Automated and Not Prepared by CBP Personnel 2.10 (a)(10)(C)(ii) (b)(2)(ii) Fee: Informal Entry or Release; Manual and Not Prepared by CBP Personnel 6.29 (a)(10)(C)(iii) (b)(2)(iii) Fee: Informal Entry or Release; Automated or Manual; Prepared by CBP Personnel 9.44 (b)(9)(A)(ii) (b)(4) Fee: Express Consignment Carrier/Centralized Hub Facility Fee, Per Individual Waybill/Bill of Lading Fee 1.05

    Tables 1 and 2 setting forth the adjusted fees and limitations for Fiscal Year 2019 will also be maintained for the public's convenience on the CBP website at www.cbp.gov.

    Dated: July 27, 2018. Kevin K. McAleenan, Commissioner, U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16510 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY [Docket ID DHS-2018-0033] The President's National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    National Protection and Programs Directorate, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    Committee Management; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is publishing this notice to announce the following President's National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee (NSTAC) meeting. This meeting is open to the public.

    DATES:

    The NSTAC will meet on Wednesday, August 15, 2018, from 1:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET). Please note that the meeting may close early if the committee has completed its business.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held via conference call. For access to the conference call bridge, information on services for individuals with disabilities, or to request special assistance to participate, please email [email protected] by 5:00 p.m. ET on Friday, August 10, 2018.

    Members of the public are invited to provide comment on the issues that will be considered by the committee as listed in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below. Associated briefing materials that participants may discuss during the meeting will be available at www.dhs.gov/nstac for review as of Wednesday, August 1, 2018. Comments may be submitted at any time and must be identified by docket number DHS-2018-0033. Comments may be submitted by one of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Please follow the instructions for submitting written comments.

    Email: [email protected] Include the docket number DHS-2018-0033 in the subject line of the email.

    Fax: (703) 705-6190, ATTN: Sandy Benevides.

    Mail: Helen Jackson, Designated Federal Official, Stakeholder Engagement and Cyber Infrastructure Resilience Division, National Protection and Programs Directorate, Department of Homeland Security, 245 Murray Lane, Mail Stop 0612, Arlington, VA 20598-0612.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the words “Department of Homeland Security” and docket number DHS-2018-0033. Comments received will be posted without alteration at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.

    Docket: For access to the docket and comments received by the NSTAC, please go to www.regulations.gov and enter docket number DHS-2018-0033.

    A public comment period will be held during the teleconference on August 15, 2018, from 1:40 p.m.-1:55 p.m. ET. Speakers who wish to participate in the public comment period must register in advance by no later than Friday, August 10, 2018, at 5:00 p.m. ET by emailing [email protected] Speakers are requested to limit their comments to three minutes and will speak in order of registration. Please note that the public comment period may end before the time indicated, following the last request for comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Helen Jackson, NSTAC Designated Federal Official, Department of Homeland Security, (703) 705-6276 (telephone) or [email protected] (email).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. Appendix (Pub. L. 92-463). The NSTAC advises the President on matters related to national security and emergency preparedness (NS/EP) telecommunications and cybersecurity policy.

    Agenda: The NSTAC will hold a conference call on Wednesday, August 15, 2018, to discuss a potential new study topic regarding advancing resiliency and fostering innovation in the information and communications technology ecosystem. Additionally, the NSTAC will receive an update on the committee's progress on its current Cybersecurity Moonshot study. The goal of this study is to examine and expedite progress against the Nation's critical cybersecurity challenges. The committee has examined various approaches to a Moonshot and is developing recommendations that steer the Administration towards a shared, strategic vision and an ambitious, outcome-focused cybersecurity end goal.

    Dated: July 26, 2018. Helen Jackson, Designated Federal Official for the NSTAC.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16395 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [LLAZP02000.12X.L54100000.FR0000. LVCLA12A5180.241A; AZA-35886] Notice of Realty Action: Application for Conveyance of Federally Owned Mineral Interests in Pima County, AZ AGENCY:

    Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of realty action.

    SUMMARY:

    The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is processing an application under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) of October 21, 1976, to convey the federally owned mineral interests in 591.21 acres of land located in Pima County, Arizona, to the surface owner, Waste Management of Arizona, Inc. Publication of this notice temporarily segregates the federally owned mineral interests in the land covered by the application from all forms of appropriation under the public land laws, including the mining laws, for up to 2 years while the BLM processes the application.

    DATES:

    Submit written comments to the BLM on or before September 17, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit written comments to the BLM Phoenix District Office, Attn: Benedict Parsons, Realty Specialist, 21605 North 7th Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85027.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Benedict Parsons, Realty Specialist, by telephone: 623-580-5637, or by email at [email protected] Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1-800-877-8339 to contact the above individual during normal business hours. The FRS service is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, to leave a message or question for the above individual. You will receive a reply during normal business hours.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The BLM is processing an application under section 209 of FLPMA, 43 U.S.C. 1719(b), to convey the federally owned mineral interests that aggregate 591.21 acres, situated in Pima County, Arizona. The location of the federally owned mineral interest for conveyance is identical in location as the privately owned surface interest of the applicant, and is described as follows:

    Gila and Salt River Meridian, Arizona T. 12 S, R. 10 E, Section 1 Lots 1-3, S1/2NE1/4, S1/2NW1/4, SW1/4, SE1/4

    The areas described aggregate 591.21 acres.

    Section 209(b) of FLPMA authorizes the conveyance of the federally owned mineral interests in land to the current or prospective surface owner, upon payment of administrative costs and the fair market value of the interest being conveyed. The objective of Section 209 is to allow consolidation of the surface and mineral interests when either one of the following conditions exist: (1) There are no known mineral values in the land; or (2) Where continued Federal ownership of the mineral interests interferes with or precludes appropriate non-mineral development and such development is a more beneficial use of the land than mineral development. The applicant has deposited sufficient funding to cover administrative costs, but not limited to, the cost for the mineral potential report.

    Subject to valid existing rights, on August 1, 2018 the federally owned mineral interests in the land described above are hereby segregated from all forms of appropriation under the public land laws, including the mining laws. The segregative effect shall terminate upon: (1) Issuance of a patent or other document of conveyance as to such mineral interests; (2) Final rejection of the application; or (3) August 3, 2020, whichever occurs first.

    Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, may be made available to the public at any time. While you can ask in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    Authority:

    43 CFR 2720.1-1(b)

    Melissa Warren, Tucson Field Manager.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16385 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-32-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [LLNVC02000 L57000000.BX0000; 241A; MO#4500119602] Notice of Temporary Closures of Public Land in Washoe County, Nevada AGENCY:

    Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    As authorized under the provisions of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) of 1976, certain public land near Stead, Nevada, will be temporarily closed to all public use to provide for public safety during the 2018 Reno Air Racing Association Racing Seminar and the Reno National Championship Air Races.

    DATES:

    The temporary closure period is September 8 through September 16, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Bryant Smith, telephone: 775-885-6000, email: [email protected] Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1-800-877-8339 to contact the above individual during normal business hours. The FRS is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, to leave a message or question with the above individual. You will receive a reply during normal business hours.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This temporary closure applies to all public use, including pedestrian use and vehicles. The public lands affected by this temporary closure are described as follows:

    Mount Diablo Meridian, Nevada T. 21 N, R. 19 E, Sec. 8, E1/2NE1/4, NW1/4NE1/4, and E1/2SE1/4; Sec. 16, SW1/4SW1/4NE1/4, NW1/4, and W1/2SE1/4.

    The areas described aggregate 450 acres in Washoe County, Nevada.

    The temporary closure notice and map of the closure area will be posted at the BLM Nevada State Office, 1340 Financial Boulevard, Nevada and on the BLM website: https://www.blm.gov. BLM law enforcement, in coordination with the Washoe County Sheriff's Office, will provide notification to the public of the temporary closure during the scheduled events. Under the authority of Section 303(a) of the FLPMA, 43 CFR 8360.0-7 and 43 CFR 8364.1, the Bureau of Land Management will enforce the following rules in the area described above. All public use, whether motorized, on foot, or otherwise, is prohibited.

    Exceptions: The temporary closure restrictions do not apply to event officials, medical and rescue personnel, law enforcement, and agency personnel monitoring the events.

    Penalties: Any person who violates this temporary closure may be tried before a United States Magistrate and fined in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 3571, imprisoned no more than 12 months under 43 U.S.C. 1733(a) and 43 CFR 8360.0-7, or both. In accordance with 43 CFR 8365.1-7, State or local officials may also impose penalties for violations of Nevada law.

    Authority:

    43 CFR 8360.0-7 and 8364.1.

    Paul Fuselier, Acting Field Manager, Sierra Front Field Office.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16384 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-HC-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [LLCO-923000.L1440000.ET0000; COC 028647] Public Land Order No. 7871; Partial Withdrawal Revocation, Power Site Classification No. 361 and Modification of Public Land Order No. 7448; Colorado AGENCY:

    Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Public Land Order.

    SUMMARY:

    This Order partially revokes a withdrawal created by Secretarial Order dated October 24, 1944, which established Power Site Classification (PSC) No. 361 insofar as it affects 41.42 acres, and modifies Public Land Order No. 7448 by releasing from the effect of the provisions of Section 24 of the Federal Power Act, approximately 81.88 (formerly 80) acres of National Forest System (NFS) lands. This Order opens the lands to such uses as may be made of NFS lands subject to valid existing rights, the provisions of existing withdrawals, other segregations of record, and the requirements of applicable law.

    DATES:

    This Public Land Order (PLO) is effective on August 1, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    John D. Beck, Bureau of Land Management, Colorado State Office, (303) 239-3882; or write: Branch of Lands and Realty, BLM Colorado State Office, 2850 Youngfield Street, Lakewood, Colorado 80215-7093. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1-800-877-8339 to contact the above individual. The FRS is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week to leave a message or question for the above individual. You will receive a reply during normal business hours.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The United States Forest Service (USFS) requested a partial revocation for PSC No. 361 created by a Secretarial Order dated October 24, 1944, which classified NFS lands for potential waterpower site development. The USFS also requests PLO No. 7448 be modified by removing the Federal Power Act Section 24 reservation provision noted in paragraph 1 of the Order. The Bureau of Land Management, in consultation with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, determined that the interests of the United States will not be injured by conveyance of the land out of Federal ownership. This Order opens some lands within PSC No. 361 to such uses as may be made of NFS lands.

    Order

    By virtue of the authority vested in the Secretary of the Interior by Section 204 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C. 1714, and pursuant to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Determination No. DV17-3-000, it is ordered as follows:

    1. The withdrawal created by Secretarial Order dated October 24, 1944, which established PSC No. 361, is hereby revoked insofar as it affects the following described lands:

    6th Principal Meridian, Colorado T. 6 N, R. 71 W, Sec. 31, lot 11, (formerly being the NE1/4SE1/4); Sec. 32, lots 1, 2, and 3, (formerly being the NW1/4SW1/4).

    The area described aggregates 41.42 acres in Larimer County.

    2. PLO No. 7448 (65 FR 35391) is modified by removing from paragraph 1 of the Order the limitation “subject to provisions of Section 24 of the Federal Power Act as specified by the FERC determination DV17-3-000,” affecting the following described lands:

    6th Principal Meridian, Colorado T. 6 N, R. 71 W, Sec. 31, lots 5, 6, 9, and 10, (formerly being the SW1/4NE1/4, SE1/4NW1/4).

    The area described contains 81.88 (formerly 80) acres in Larimer County.

    3. At 9 a.m. on August 1, 2018 the lands described in Paragraph 1 and 2 are opened to such forms of disposition as may be made of NFS land, subject to valid existing rights, the provisions of existing withdrawals, other segregations of record, and the requirements of applicable law.

    Joseph R. Balash, Assistant Secretary—Land and Minerals Management.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16451 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-JB-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Reclamation [RR04073000, XXXR4081X3, RX.05940913.7000000] Public Meeting of the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Work Group AGENCY:

    Bureau of Reclamation, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972, the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) is publishing this notice to announce that a Federal Advisory Committee meeting of the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Work Group (AMWG) will take place.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Wednesday, August 22, 2018, from 9:30 a.m. to approximately 5:00 p.m., and Thursday, August 23, 2018, from 8:30 a.m. to approximately 3:00 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the Little America Hotel, 2515 E Butler Avenue, Flagstaff, Arizona 86004.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kathleen Callister, Bureau of Reclamation, telephone (801) 524-3781; email at [email protected]; facsimile (801) 524-5499.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This meeting is being held under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552B, as amended), and 41 CFR 102-3.140 and 102-3.150.

    Purpose of the Meeting: The Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program (GCDAMP) was implemented as a result of the Record of Decision on the Operation of Glen Canyon Dam Final Environmental Impact Statement to comply with consultation requirements of the Grand Canyon Protection Act (Pub. L. 102-575) of 1992. The AMWG makes recommendations to the Secretary of the Interior concerning Glen Canyon Dam operations and other management actions to protect resources downstream of Glen Canyon Dam, consistent with the Grand Canyon Protection Act. The AMWG meets two to three times a year.

    Agenda: The AMWG will meet to receive updates on: (1) Current basin hydrology and water year 2019 operations; (2) non-native fish issues; (3) joint tribal liaison report; and (4) science results from Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center staff. The AMWG will also discuss the FY 2019 Budget and Work Plan and other administrative and resource issues pertaining to the GCDAMP. To view a copy of the agenda and documents related to the above meeting, please visit Reclamation's website at https://www.usbr.gov/uc/rm/amp/amwg/mtgs/18aug22.

    Meeting Accessibility/Special Accommodations: The meeting is open to the public and seating is on a first-come basis. Members of the public wishing to attend the meeting or wanting to receive call-in information or a link to the live stream webcast should contact Kathleen Callister, Bureau of Reclamation, Upper Colorado Regional Office, by email at [email protected], or by telephone at (801) 524-3781, to register no later than five (5) business days prior to the meeting. Individuals requiring special accommodations to access the public meeting should contact Ms. Callister at least five (5) business days prior to the meeting so that appropriate arrangements can be made.

    Public Disclosure of Comments: Time will be allowed at the meeting for any individual or organization wishing to make formal oral comments. To allow for full consideration of information by the AMWG members, written notice must be provided to Kathleen Callister, Bureau of Reclamation, Upper Colorado Regional Office, 125 South State Street, Room 8100, Salt Lake City, Utah 84138; email at [email protected]; or facsimile (801) 524-5499, at least five (5) business days prior to the meeting. Any written comments received will be provided to the AMWG members.

    Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    Dated: June 11, 2018. Kathleen Callister, Manager, Environmental Resources Division, Upper Colorado Regional Office.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16481 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4332-90-P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337-TA-1109] Certain Clidinium Bromide and Products Containing Same; Commission Decision Not To Review an Initial Determination Granting Complainants' Unopposed Motion To Terminate the Investigation Based on the Withdrawal of the Amended Complaint; Termination of the Investigation AGENCY:

    U.S. International Trade Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined not to review an initial determination (“ID”) (Order No. 12) of the presiding Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) granting Complainants' unopposed motion to terminate the investigation in its entirety based on the withdrawal of the amended complaint. The investigation is terminated.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Houda Morad, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 708-4716. Copies of non-confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation are or will be available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server at https://www.usitc.gov. The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on (202) 205-1810.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Commission instituted this investigation on April 23, 2018, based on a complaint filed by Valeant Pharmaceuticals North America LLC of Bridgewater, New Jersey and Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc. of Laval, Canada (collectively, “Valeant”). See 83 FR 17676-7 (Apr. 23, 2018). The complaint, as amended, alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), based upon the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain clidinium bromide and products containing same by reason of unfair acts or methods of competition, the threat or effect of which is to destroy or substantially injure an industry in the United States. See id. The notice of investigation named as respondents in this investigation: Bi-Coastal Pharma International LLC and Bi-Coastal Pharmaceutical Corporation (collectively, “Bi-Coastal”) of Shrewsbury, New Jersey; ECI Pharmaceuticals LLC of Fort Lauderdale, Florida; Virtus Pharmaceuticals LLC of Tampa, Florida; and Virtus Pharmaceuticals OPCO II LLC of Nashville, Tennessee. See id. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations is also a party to this investigation. See id. On June 12, 2018, the ALJ partially terminated the investigation as to Bi-Coastal based on a settlement agreement. See Order No. 9 (June 12, 2018), unreviewed, Comm'n Notice (June 28, 2018).

    On July 9, 2018, Valeant filed an unopposed motion (Motion) to terminate the investigation in its entirety based on the withdrawal of the amended complaint. On July 10, 2018, the ALJ issued the subject ID (Order No. 12) granting the Motion. In accordance with Commission Rule 210.21(a)(1), 19 CFR 210.21(a)(1), the ID notes that “[t]here are no agreements, written or oral, express or implied between Complainants and Respondents concerning the subject matter of this Investigation.” See ID at 1 (citing Motion at 2). In addition, the ID finds that “there are no extraordinary circumstances that warrant denying the motion.” See id.

    No petition for review of the ID was filed. The Commission has determined not to review the ID.

    The authority for the Commission's determination is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in part 210 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR part 210).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: July 27, 2018. Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16484 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337-TA-1126] Certain Water Filters and Components Thereof Institution of Investigation AGENCY:

    U.S. International Trade Commission

    ACTION:

    Notice

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that a complaint was filed with the U.S. International Trade Commission on June 8, 2018, under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, on behalf of Electrolux Home Products, Inc. of Charlotte, North Carolina and KX Technologies, LLC of West Haven, Connecticut. An amended complaint was filed on June 28, 2018. A letter supplementing the amended complaint was filed on July 10, 2018. The amended complaint, as supplemented, 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 water filters and components thereof by reason of infringement of U.S. Patent No. 8,673,146 (“the '146 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 8,137,551 (“the '551 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 9,233,322 (“the '322 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 9,901,852 (“the '852 patent”). The amended complaint further alleges that an industry in the United States exists as required by the applicable Federal Statute.

    The complainants request that the Commission institute an investigation and, after the investigation, issue a general exclusion order or, in the alternative, a limited exclusion order, and cease and desist orders.

    ADDRESSES:

    The amended 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 https://www.usitc.gov. The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Pathenia M. Proctor, The Office of Unfair Import Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, telephone (202) 205-2560.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Authority:

    The authority for institution of this investigation is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, and in section 210.10 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10 (2018).

    Scope of investigation: Having considered the amended complaint, the U.S. International Trade Commission, on July 26, 2018, ordered that—

    (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 products identified in paragraph (2) by reason of infringement of one or more of claims 1-3, 6, 7, and 15 of the '146 patent; claim 49 of the '551 patent; claims 1-3, 7-9, and 12-15 of the '322 patent; and claims 1, 4-6, 9-11, 14-18, and 21-31 of the '852 patent; and whether an industry in the United States exists as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337;

    (2) Pursuant to section 210.10(b)(1) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10(b)(1), the plain language description of the accused products or category of accused products, which defines the scope of the investigation, is “water filter cartridges for refrigerators, including water filter cartridge assemblies and interconnection subassemblies”;

    (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 complainants are:

    Electrolux Home Products, Inc., 10200 David Taylor Drive, Charlotte, NC 28262 KX Technologies, LLC, 55 Railroad Avenue, West Haven, CT 06516

    (b) The respondents are the following entities alleged to be in violation of section 337, and are the parties upon which the amended complaint is to be served:

    Shenzen Calux Purification Technology Co., Limited, No. 7-3, The Second Industrial Zone, Fudigang Pingdong Community, Pingdi Street, Longgang District, Shenzen, Guangdong, China 518100 Ningbo Pureza Limited, No. l Floor, Shanshan Industrial Park, Jishigang, Yinzhou, Ningbo, China 315100 JiangSu Angkua Environmental Technical Co., Ltd., Chai Wan Industrial Park, RuGao, China 226500 Ecopure Filter Co., Ltd., 266 Yanquing Arterial Highway, Jimo, Qindao, China 266000 Shenzhen Dakon Purification Tech Co., Ltd., 101, No. 7-3, Fudigang Second Industrial Area, Pingdong Community, Pingdi Sreet, Longgng Dist., Shenzhen, Guangdong, China 518100 HongKong Ecoaqua Co., Limited, Hong Kong Rm 2105 JQD2732 Trend Centre, 29-31 Cheng Lee St., Wan Chai, Hong Kong, CHINA, Area Code 852 Ecolife Technologies, Inc., 17910 Ajax Circle, City of Industry, CA 91748 Crystala Filters LLC, 555 Preakness Avenue, Suite 301, Patterson, NJ 07502

    (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 amended 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 amended complaint and the notice of investigation. Extensions of time for submitting responses to the amended 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 amended complaint and in this notice may be deemed to constitute a waiver of the right to appear and contest the allegations of the amended 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 amended 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.

    Issued: July 27, 2018. Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16434 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [USITC SE-18-035] Government in the Sunshine Act Meeting Notice Agency Holding the Meeting:

    United States International Trade Commission.

    TIME AND DATE:

    August 3, 2018 at 11:00 a.m.

    PLACE:

    Room 101, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, Telephone: (202) 205-2000.

    STATUS:

    Open to the public.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    1. Agendas for future meetings: None.

    2. Minutes.

    3. Ratification List.

    4. Vote on Inv. Nos. 701-TA-608 and 731-TA-1420 (Preliminary) (Steel Racks from China). The Commission is currently scheduled to complete and file its determinations on August 6, 2018; views of the Commission are currently scheduled to be completed and filed on August 13, 2018.

    5. Vote on Inv. Nos. 701-TA-583 and 731-TA-1381 (Final) (Cast Iron Soil Pipe Fittings from China). The Commission is currently scheduled to complete and file its determinations and views of the Commission by August 20, 2018.

    6. Outstanding action jackets: None.

    In accordance with Commission policy, subject matter listed above, not disposed of at the scheduled meeting, may be carried over to the agenda of the following meeting.

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: July 27, 2018. William Bishop, Supervisory Hearings and Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16552 Filed 7-30-18; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337-TA-1105] Certain Programmable Logic Controller (PLCs), Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same; Commission Determination Not To Review an Initial Determination Granting a Motion of Non-Party North Coast To Intervene AGENCY:

    U.S. International Trade Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined not to review an initial determination (“ID”) (Order No. 10) granting a motion of non-party North Coast Electric Company (“North Coast”) to intervene in the above-captioned investigation.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Megan M. Valentine, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202-708-2301. Copies of non-confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation are or will be available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202-205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server (https://www.usitc.gov). The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Commission instituted this investigation on March 29, 2018, based on a complaint filed by Radwell International, Inc., of Willingboro, New Jersey (“Radwell”). 83 FR 13515-16 (Mar. 29, 2018). The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain programmable logic controllers (PLCs), components thereof, and products containing same by reason of: (l) A conspiracy to fix resale prices in violation of Section l of the Sherman Act; (2) a conspiracy to boycott resellers in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act; and (3) monopolization in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act, the threat or effect of which is to destroy or substantially injure a domestic industry in the United States, or to restrain or monopolize trade and commerce in the United States. Id. The notice of investigation names Rockwell Automation, Inc. of Milwaukee, Wisconsin as respondent. Id. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations was also named as a party to the investigation. Id.

    On May 25, 2018, Radwell filed a motion requesting the ALJ to certify to the Commission a request for judicial enforcement of a subpoena duces tecum directed to non-party North Coast. On June 8, 2018, pursuant to Commission rules 210.15 and 210.19 (19 CFR 210.15, 210.19), North Coast filed an unopposed motion to intervene for the limited purpose of submitting an opposition to the pending motion to certify, along with the opposition. No party filed a response concerning the motion to intervene.

    On July 9, 2018, the ALJ issued the subject ID, granting North Coast's motion to intervene. The ALJ found that North Coast's interests are directly at issue in the investigation and that no party would suffer prejudice as a result of North Coast's intervention for the limited purpose of opposing the motion to certify. No petitions for review were filed.

    The Commission has determined not to review the subject ID.

    The authority for the Commission's determination is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in Part 210 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR part 210).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: July 27, 2018. Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16483 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337-TA-1098] Certain Subsea Telecommunication Systems and Components Thereof; Commission Determination Not To Review an Initial Determination Granting a Motion for Leave To Amend the Complaint and Notice of Investigation To Reflect a Corporate Name Change AGENCY:

    U.S. International Trade Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined not to review an initial determination (“ID”) (Order No. 21) of the presiding administrative law judge (“ALJ”), granting complainant's unopposed motion for leave to amend the complaint and notice of investigation to reflect the corporate name change of complainant Neptune Subsea Acquisitions Ltd. to Xtera Topco Ltd.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Amanda Pitcher Fisherow, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2737. Copies of non-confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation are or will be available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server at https://www.usitc.gov. The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on (202) 205-1810.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Commission instituted this investigation on January 26, 2018, based on a complaint, as supplemented, filed on behalf of Neptune Subsea Acquisitions Ltd. of the United Kingdom; Neptune Subsea IP Ltd. of the United Kingdom; and Xtera, Inc. of Allen, Texas (“complainants”). 83 FR 3370 (Jan. 26, 2018). The complaint, as supplemented, alleges violations of Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 (“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 subsea telecommunication systems and components thereof by reason of infringement of one or more claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,380,068; U.S. Patent No. 7,860,403; U.S. Patent No. 8,971,171; U.S. Patent No. 8,351,798; and U.S. Patent No. 8,406,637. The complaint further alleges that an industry in the United States exists as required by section 337. The Notice of Investigation named Nokia Corporation of Espoo, Finland; Nokia Solutions and Networks B.V. of Hoofddorp, The Netherlands; Nokia Solutions and Networks Oy of Espoo, Finland; Alcatel-Lucent Submarine Networks SAS of Boulogne-Billancourt, France; Nokia Solutions and Networks US LLC of Phoenix, Arizona; NEC Corporation of Tokyo, Japan; NEC Networks & System Integration Corporation of Tokyo, Japan; and NEC Corporation of America of Irving, Texas as respondents. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations was named as a party in this investigation.

    On May 30, 2018, the complainants filed an unopposed motion for leave to amend the complaint and notice of investigation to reflect a corporate name change of one of the complainants from Neptune Subsea Acquisitions Ltd. to Xtera Topco Ltd.

    On July 10, 2018, the ALJ issued the subject ID, granting complainants' unopposed motion. The ALJ found that good cause exists to amend the complaint and notice of investigation and that there was no evidence that the proposed amendment would harm the public interest or prejudice to the parties in the investigation. No petitions for review were filed.

    The Commission has determined not to review the ID.

    The authority for the Commission's determination is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in Part 210 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR part 210).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: July 27, 2018. Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16485 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation Nos. 701-TA-365-366 and 731-TA-734-735 (Fourth Review)] Certain Pasta From Italy and Turkey; Institution of Five-Year Reviews AGENCY:

    United States International Trade Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission hereby gives notice that it has instituted reviews pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”), as amended, to determine whether revocation of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on certain pasta from Italy and Turkey would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury. Pursuant to the Act, interested parties are requested to respond to this notice by submitting the information specified below to the Commission.

    DATES:

    Instituted August 1, 2018. To be assured of consideration, the deadline for responses is August 31, 2018. Comments on the adequacy of responses may be filed with the Commission by October 16, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mary Messer (202-205-3193), 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 (https://www.usitc.gov). The public record for this proceeding may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background.—On July 24, 1996, the Department of Commerce issued countervailing and antidumping duty orders on imports of certain pasta from Italy and Turkey (61 FR 38544). Following first five-year reviews by Commerce and the Commission, effective November 16, 2001, Commerce issued a continuation of the countervailing and antidumping duty orders on imports of certain pasta from Italy and Turkey (66 FR 57703). Following second five-year reviews by Commerce and the Commission, effective October 12, 2007, Commerce issued a continuation of the countervailing and antidumping duty orders on certain pasta from Italy and Turkey (72 FR 58052). Following third five-year reviews by Commerce and the Commission, effective September 17, 2013, Commerce issued a continuation of the countervailing and antidumping duty orders on certain pasta from Italy and Turkey (78 FR 57129). The Commission is now conducting fourth reviews pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)), to determine whether revocation of the orders would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to the domestic industry within a reasonably foreseeable time. Provisions concerning the conduct of this proceeding may be found in the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure at 19 CFR parts 201, subparts A and B and 19 CFR part 207, subparts A and F. The Commission will assess the adequacy of interested party responses to this notice of institution to determine whether to conduct full or expedited reviews. The Commission's determinations in any expedited reviews will be based on the facts available, which may include information provided in response to this notice.

    Definitions.—The following definitions apply to these reviews:

    (1) Subject Merchandise is the class or kind of merchandise that is within the scope of the five-year reviews, as defined by the Department of Commerce.

    (2) The Subject Countries in these reviews are Italy and Turkey.

    (3) The Domestic Like Product is the domestically produced product or products which are like, or in the absence of like, most similar in characteristics and uses with, the Subject Merchandise. In its original and subsequent five-year review determinations, the Commission defined the Domestic Like Product as all dry pasta. One Commissioner defined the Domestic Like Product differently in the original and expedited first five-year review determinations.

    (4) The Domestic Industry is the U.S. producers as a whole of the Domestic Like Product, or those producers whose collective output of the Domestic Like Product constitutes a major proportion of the total domestic production of the product. In its original and subsequent five-year review determinations, the Commission defined the Domestic Industry as all domestic producers of dry pasta. One Commissioner defined the Domestic Industry differently in the original and expedited first five-year review determinations.

    (5) An Importer is any person or firm engaged, either directly or through a parent company or subsidiary, in importing the Subject Merchandise into the United States from a foreign manufacturer or through its selling agent.

    Participation in the proceeding and public service list.—Persons, including industrial users of the Subject Merchandise and, if the merchandise is sold at the retail level, representative consumer organizations, wishing to participate in the proceeding as parties must file an entry of appearance with the Secretary to the Commission, as provided in section 201.11(b)(4) of the Commission's rules, no later than 21 days after publication of this notice in the Federal Register. The Secretary will maintain a public service list containing the names and addresses of all persons, or their representatives, who are parties to the proceeding.

    Former Commission employees who are seeking to appear in Commission five-year reviews are advised that they may appear in a review even if they participated personally and substantially in the corresponding underlying original investigation or an earlier review of the same underlying investigation. The Commission's designated agency ethics official has advised that a five-year review is not the same particular matter as the underlying original investigation, and a five-year review is not the same particular matter as an earlier review of the same underlying investigation for purposes of 18 U.S.C. 207, the post employment statute for Federal employees, and Commission rule 201.15(b) (19 CFR 201.15(b)), 79 FR 3246 (Jan. 17, 2014), 73 FR 24609 (May 5, 2008). Consequently, former employees are not required to seek Commission approval to appear in a review under Commission rule 19 CFR 201.15, even if the corresponding underlying original investigation or an earlier review of the same underlying investigation was pending when they were Commission employees. For further ethics advice on this matter, contact Charles Smith, Office of the General Counsel, at 202-205-3408.

    Limited disclosure of business proprietary information (BPI) under an administrative protective order (APO) and APO service list.—Pursuant to section 207.7(a) of the Commission's rules, the Secretary will make BPI submitted in this proceeding available to authorized applicants under the APO issued in the proceeding, provided that the application is made no later than 21 days after publication of this notice in the Federal Register. Authorized applicants must represent interested parties, as defined in 19 U.S.C. 1677(9), who are parties to the proceeding. A separate service list will be maintained by the Secretary for those parties authorized to receive BPI under the APO.

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

    Written submissions.—Pursuant to section 207.61 of the Commission's rules, each interested party response to this notice must provide the information specified below. The deadline for filing such responses is August 31, 2018. Pursuant to section 207.62(b) of the Commission's rules, eligible parties (as specified in Commission rule 207.62(b)(1)) may also file comments concerning the adequacy of responses to the notice of institution and whether the Commission should conduct expedited or full reviews. The deadline for filing such comments is October 16, 2018. All written submissions must conform with the provisions of section 201.8 of the Commission's rules; any submissions that contain BPI must also conform with the requirements of sections 201.6, 207.3, and 207.7 of the Commission's rules. The Commission's Handbook on E-Filing, available on the Commission's website at https://edis.usitc.gov, elaborates upon the Commission's rules with respect to electronic filing. Also, in accordance with sections 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the Commission's rules, each document filed by a party to the proceeding must be served on all other parties to the proceeding (as identified by either the public or APO service list as appropriate), and a certificate of service must accompany the document (if you are not a party to the proceeding you do not need to serve your response).

    No response to this request for information is required if a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) number is not displayed; the OMB number is 3117 0016/USITC No. 18-5-411, expiration date June 30, 2020. Public reporting burden for the request is estimated to average 15 hours per response. Please send comments regarding the accuracy of this burden estimate to the Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436.

    Inability to provide requested information.—Pursuant to section 207.61(c) of the Commission's rules, any interested party that cannot furnish the information requested by this notice in the requested form and manner shall notify the Commission at the earliest possible time, provide a full explanation of why it cannot provide the requested information, and indicate alternative forms in which it can provide equivalent information. If an interested party does not provide this notification (or the Commission finds the explanation provided in the notification inadequate) and fails to provide a complete response to this notice, the Commission may take an adverse inference against the party pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1677e(b)) in making its determinations in the reviews.

    INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED IN RESPONSE TO THIS NOTICE OF INSTITUTION:

    If you are a domestic producer, union/worker group, or trade/business association; import/export Subject Merchandise from more than one Subject Country; or produce Subject Merchandise in more than one Subject Country, you may file a single response. If you do so, please ensure that your response to each question includes the information requested for each pertinent Subject Country. As used below, the term “firm” includes any related firms.

    (1) The name and address of your firm or entity (including World Wide Web address) and name, telephone number, fax number, and Email address of the certifying official.

    (2) A statement indicating whether your firm/entity is an interested party under 19 U.S.C. 1677(9) and if so, how, including whether your firm/entity is a U.S. producer of the Domestic Like Product, a U.S. union or worker group, a U.S. importer of the Subject Merchandise, a foreign producer or exporter of the Subject Merchandise, a U.S. or foreign trade or business association (a majority of whose members are interested parties under the statute), or another interested party (including an explanation). If you are a union/worker group or trade/business association, identify the firms in which your workers are employed or which are members of your association.

    (3) A statement indicating whether your firm/entity is willing to participate in this proceeding by providing information requested by the Commission.

    (4) A statement of the likely effects of the revocation of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on the Domestic Industry in general and/or your firm/entity specifically. In your response, please discuss the various factors specified in section 752(a) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675a(a)) including the likely volume of subject imports, likely price effects of subject imports, and likely impact of imports of Subject Merchandise on the Domestic Industry.

    (5) A list of all known and currently operating U.S. producers of the Domestic Like Product. Identify any known related parties and the nature of the relationship as defined in section 771(4)(B) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1677(4)(B)).

    (6) A list of all known and currently operating U.S. importers of the Subject Merchandise and producers of the Subject Merchandise in each Subject Country that currently export or have exported Subject Merchandise to the United States or other countries after 2012.

    (7) A list of 3-5 leading purchasers in the U.S. market for the Domestic Like Product and the Subject Merchandise (including street address, World Wide Web address, and the name, telephone number, fax number, and Email address of a responsible official at each firm).

    (8) A list of known sources of information on national or regional prices for the Domestic Like Product or the Subject Merchandise in the U.S. or other markets.

    (9) If you are a U.S. producer of the Domestic Like Product, provide the following information on your firm's operations on that product during calendar year 2017, except as noted (report quantity data in pounds and value data in U.S. dollars, f.o.b. plant). If you are a union/worker group or trade/business association, provide the information, on an aggregate basis, for the firms in which your workers are employed/which are members of your association.

    (a) Production (quantity) and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total U.S. production of the Domestic Like Product accounted for by your firm's(s') production;

    (b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm to produce the Domestic Like Product (that is, the level of production that your establishment(s) could reasonably have expected to attain during the year, assuming normal operating conditions (using equipment and machinery in place and ready to operate), normal operating levels (hours per week/weeks per year), time for downtime, maintenance, repair, and cleanup, and a typical or representative product mix);

    (c) the quantity and value of U.S. commercial shipments of the Domestic Like Product produced in your U.S. plant(s);

    (d) the quantity and value of U.S. internal consumption/company transfers of the Domestic Like Product produced in your U.S. plant(s); and

    (e) the value of (i) net sales, (ii) cost of goods sold (COGS), (iii) gross profit, (iv) selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses, and (v) operating income of the Domestic Like Product produced in your U.S. plant(s) (include both U.S. and export commercial sales, internal consumption, and company transfers) for your most recently completed fiscal year (identify the date on which your fiscal year ends).

    (10) If you are a U.S. importer or a trade/business association of U.S. importers of the Subject Merchandise from any Subject Country, provide the following information on your firm's(s') operations on that product during calendar year 2017 (report quantity data in pounds and value data in U.S. dollars). If you are a trade/business association, provide the information, on an aggregate basis, for the firms which are members of your association.

    (a) The quantity and value (landed, duty-paid but not including antidumping or countervailing duties) of U.S. imports and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total U.S. imports of Subject Merchandise from each Subject Country accounted for by your firm's(s') imports;

    (b) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S. port, including antidumping and/or countervailing duties) of U.S. commercial shipments of Subject Merchandise imported from each Subject Country; and

    (c) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S. port, including antidumping and/or countervailing duties) of U.S. internal consumption/company transfers of Subject Merchandise imported from each Subject Country.

    (11) If you are a producer, an exporter, or a trade/business association of producers or exporters of the Subject Merchandise in any Subject Country, provide the following information on your firm's(s') operations on that product during calendar year 2017 (report quantity data in pounds and value data in U.S. dollars, landed and duty-paid at the U.S. port but not including antidumping or countervailing duties). If you are a trade/business association, provide the information, on an aggregate basis, for the firms which are members of your association.

    (a) Production (quantity) and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total production of Subject Merchandise in each Subject Country accounted for by your firm's(s') production;

    (b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm(s) to produce the Subject Merchandise in each Subject Country (that is, the level of production that your establishment(s) could reasonably have expected to attain during the year, assuming normal operating conditions (using equipment and machinery in place and ready to operate), normal operating levels (hours per week/weeks per year), time for downtime, maintenance, repair, and cleanup, and a typical or representative product mix); and

    (c) the quantity and value of your firm's(s') exports to the United States of Subject Merchandise and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total exports to the United States of Subject Merchandise from each Subject Country accounted for by your firm's(s') exports.

    (12) Identify significant changes, if any, in the supply and demand conditions or business cycle for the Domestic Like Product that have occurred in the United States or in the market for the Subject Merchandise in each Subject Country after 2012, and significant changes, if any, that are likely to occur within a reasonably foreseeable time. Supply conditions to consider include technology; production methods; development efforts; ability to increase production (including the shift of production facilities used for other products and the use, cost, or availability of major inputs into production); and factors related to the ability to shift supply among different national markets (including barriers to importation in foreign markets or changes in market demand abroad). Demand conditions to consider include end uses and applications; the existence and availability of substitute products; and the level of competition among the Domestic Like Product produced in the United States, Subject Merchandise produced in each Subject Country, and such merchandise from other countries.

    (13) (Optional) A statement of whether you agree with the above definitions of the Domestic Like Product and Domestic Industry; if you disagree with either or both of these definitions, please explain why and provide alternative definitions.

    Authority:

    This proceeding is being conducted under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to section 207.61 of the Commission's rules.

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: July 27, 2018. Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16435 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives [OMB Number 1140-0101] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; National Firearms Act Division and Firearms and Explosives Services Division Customer Service Survey AGENCY:

    Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    30-day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), will submit 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. A minor change is being made to the proposed collection OMB 1140-0101 (Firearms and Explosives Services Division (FESD) Customer Service Survey), to include references to the recently established National Firearms Act Division (NFA Division); which was previously a branch in FESD. All survey questions directly relate to customer experience in FESD, NFA Division and their branches. The proposed collection is being published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. The proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register, on May 30, 2018, allowing for a 60-day comment period.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for an additional 30 days until August 31, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have additional comments, particularly with respect to the estimated public burden or associated response time, have suggestions, need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions, or desire any other additional information, please contact Erica Payne, National Firearms Act Division, either by mail at 244 Needy Road, Martinsburg, WV 25405, by email at [email protected] or by telephone at 304-616-4582. Written comments and/or suggestions can also be directed to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention Department of Justice Desk Officer, Washington, DC 20503 or sent to [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    —Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; —Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; —Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected can be enhanced; and —Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. Overview of This Information Collection

    (1) Type of Information Collection: Extension, with change, of a currently approved collection.

    (2) The Title of the Form/Collection: National Firearms Act Division and Firearms and Explosives Services Division Customer Service Survey.

    (3) The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection:

    Form number: None.

    Component: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice.

    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

    Primary: Business or other for-profit.

    Other: Individuals or Households, Federal Government, and State, Local, or Tribal Government.

    Abstract: The purpose of this survey is to gather information about customer service provided to the firearms and explosives industry and government agencies, in order to improve service delivery and customer satisfaction.

    (5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: An estimated 18,200 respondents will utilize this survey, and it will take each respondent approximately 5 minutes to complete their responses.

    (6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The estimated annual public burden associated with this collection is 1,517 hours which is equal to: 18,200 (total # of responses) * .0833333 (5 minutes).

    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.

    Date: July 27, 2018. Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16487 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Bulk Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Application: Chemtos, LLC ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    DATES:

    Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic classes, and applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration on or before October 1, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/DRW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Attorney General has delegated his authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been delegated to the Assistant Administrator of the DEA Diversion Control Division (“Assistant Administrator”) pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart R.

    In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33(a), this is notice that on June 11, 2018, Chemtos, LLC, 14101 West Highway 290, Building 2000B, Austin, Texas 78737 applied to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of the following basic classes of controlled substances:

    Controlled substance Drug code Schedule 3-Fluoro-N-methylcathinone (3-FMC) 1233 I Cathinone 1235 I Methcathinone 1237 I 4-Fluoro-N-methylcathinone (4-FMC) 1238 I Pentedrone (α-methylaminovalerophenone) 1246 I Mephedrone (4-Methyl-N-methylcathinone) 1248 I 4-Methyl-N-ethylcathinone (4-MEC) 1249 I Naphyrone 1258 I N-Ethylamphetamine 1475 I N,N-Dimethylamphetamine 1480 I Fenethylline 1503 I Aminorex 1585 I 4-Methylaminorex (cis isomer) 1590 I Gamma Hydroxybutyric Acid 2010 I Methaqualone 2565 I Mecloqualone 2572 I JWH-250 (1-Pentyl-3-(2-methoxyphenylacetyl) indole) 6250 I SR-18 (Also known as RCS-8) (1-Cyclohexylethyl-3-(2-methoxyphenylacetyl) indole) 7008 I ADB-FUBINACA (N-(1-amino-3,3-dimethyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-(4-fluorobenzyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide) 7010 I 5-Fluoro-UR-144 and XLR11 [1-(5-Fluoro-pentyl)1H-indol-3-yl](2,2,3,3-tetramethylcyclopropyl)methanone 7011 I AB-FUBINACA (N-(1-amino-3-methyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-(4-fluorobenzyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide) 7012 I JWH-019 (1-Hexyl-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole) 7019 I MDMB-FUBINACA (Methyl 2-(1-(4-fluorobenzyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamido)-3,3-dimethylbutanoate) 7020 I AB-PINACA (N-(1-amino-3-methyl-
  • 1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-pentyl-1H-indazole-
  • 3-carboxamide)
  • 7023 I
    THJ-2201 [1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indazol-3-
  • yl](naphthalen-1-yl)methanone
  • 7024 I
    AB-CHMINACA (N-(1-amino-3-methyl-1-
  • oxobutan-2-yl)-1-(cyclohexylmethyl)-
  • 1H-indazole-3-carboxamide
  • 7031 I
    MAB-CHMINACA (N-(1-amino-3,3dimethyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-(cyclohexylmethyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide) 7032 I 5F-AMB (Methyl 2-(1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamido)-3-methylbutanoate) 7033 I 5F-ADB; 5F-MDMB-PINACA (Methyl 2-(1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamido)-3,3-dimethylbutanoate) 7034 I ADB-PINACA (N-(1-amino-3,3-dimethyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-pentyl-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide) 7035 I MDMB-CHMICA, MMB-CHMINACA (Methyl 2-(1-(cyclohexylmethyl)-1H-indole-3-carboxamido)-3,3-dimethylbutanoate) 7042 I APINACA and AKB48 N-(1-Adamantyl)-1-pentyl-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide 7048 I 5F-APINACA, 5F-AKB48 (N-(adamantan-1-yl)-1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide) 7049 I JWH-081 (1-Pentyl-3-(1-(4-methoxynaphthoyl) indole) 7081 I SR-19 (Also known as RCS-4) (1-Pentyl-3-[(4-methoxy)-benzoyl] indole 7104 I JWH-018 (also known as AM678) (1-Pentyl-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole) 7118 I JWH-122 (1-Pentyl-3-(4-methyl-1-naphthoyl) indole) 7122 I UR-144 (1-Pentyl-1H-indol-3-yl)(2,2,3,3-tetramethylcyclopropyl)methanone 7144 I JWH-073 (1-Butyl-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole) 7173 I JWH-200 (1-[2-(4-Morpholinyl)ethyl]-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole) 7200 I AM2201 (1-(5-Fluoropentyl)-3-(1-naphthoyl) indole) 7201 I JWH-203 (1-Pentyl-3-(2-chlorophenylacetyl) indole) 7203 I PB-22 (Quinolin-8-yl 1-pentyl-1H-indole-3-carboxylate) 7222 I 5F-PB-22 (Quinolin-8-yl 1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indole-3-carboxylate) 7225 I Alpha-ethyltryptamine 7249 I Ibogaine 7260 I CP-47,497 (5-(1,1-Dimethylheptyl)-2-[(1R,3S)-3-hydroxycyclohexyl-phenol) 7297 I CP-47,497 C8 Homologue (5-(1,1-Dimethyloctyl)-2-[(1R,3S)3-hydroxycyclohexyl-phenol) 7298 I Lysergic acid diethylamide 7315 I 2,5-Dimethoxy-4-(n)-propylthiophenethylamine (2C-T-7) 7348 I Marihuana Extract 7350 I Marihuana 7360 I Parahexyl 7374 I Mescaline 7381 I 2-(4-Ethylthio-2,5-dimethoxyphenyl) ethanamine (2C-T-2 ) 7385 I 3,4,5-Trimethoxyamphetamine 7390 I 4-Bromo-2,5-dimethoxyamphetamine 7391 I 4-Bromo-2,5-dimethoxyphenethylamine 7392 I 4-Methyl-2,5-dimethoxyamphetamine 7395 I 2,5-Dimethoxyamphetamine 7396 I JWH-398 (1-Pentyl-3-(4-chloro-1-naphthoyl) indole) 7398 I 2,5-Dimethoxy-4-ethylamphetamine 7399 I 3,4-Methylenedioxyamphetamine 7400 I 5-Methoxy-3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine 7401 I N-Hydroxy-3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine 7402 I 3,4-Methylenedioxy-N-ethylamphetamine 7404 I 3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine 7405 I 4-Methoxyamphetamine 7411 I 5-Methoxy-N-N-dimethyltryptamine 7431 I Alpha-methyltryptamine 7432 I Bufotenine 7433 I Diethyltryptamine 7434 I Dimethyltryptamine 7435 I Psilocybin 7437 I Psilocyn 7438 I 5-Methoxy-N,N-diisopropyltryptamine 7439 I N-Ethyl-1-phenylcyclohexylamine 7455 I 1-(1-Phenylcyclohexyl)pyrrolidine 7458 I 1-[1-(2-Thienyl)cyclohexyl]piperidine 7470 I 1-[1-(2-Thienyl)cyclohexyl]pyrrolidine 7473 I N-Ethyl-3-piperidyl benzilate 7482 I N-Methyl-3-piperidyl benzilate 7484 I N-Benzylpiperazine 7493 I 4-Methyl-alphapyrrolidinopropiophenone (4-MePPP) 7498 I 2-(2,5-Dimethoxy-4-methylphenyl) ethanamine (2C-D) 7508 I 2-(2,5-Dimethoxy-4-ethylphenyl) ethanamine (2C-E ) 7509 I 2-(2,5-Dimethoxyphenyl) ethanamine (2C-H) 7517 I 2-(4-iodo-2,5-dimethoxyphenyl) ethanamine (2C-I) 7518 I 2-(4-Chloro-2,5-dimethoxyphenyl) ethanamine (2C-C) 7519 I 2-(2,5-Dimethoxy-4-nitro-phenyl) ethanamine (2C-N) 7521 I 2-(2,5-Dimethoxy-4-(n)-propylphenyl) ethanamine (2C-P) 7524 I 2-(4-Isopropylthio)-2,5-dimethoxyphenyl) ethanamine (2C-T-4 ) 7532 I MDPV (3,4-Methylenedioxypyrovalerone) 7535 I 2-(4-bromo-2,5-dimethoxyphenyl)-N-(2-methoxybenzyl) ethanamine (25B-NBOMe) 7536 I 2-(4-chloro-2,5-dimethoxyphenyl)-N-(2-methoxybenzyl) ethanamine (25C-NBOMe) 7537 I 2-(4-iodo-2,5-dimethoxyphenyl)-N-(2-methoxybenzyl) ethanamine (25I-NBOMe) 7538 I Methylone (3,4-Methylenedioxy-N-methylcathinone) 7540 I Butylone 7541 I Pentylone 7542 I alpha-pyrrolidinopentiophenone (α-PVP) 7545 I alpha-pyrrolidinobutiophenone (α-PBP) 7546 I AM-694 (1-(5-Fluoropentyl)-3-(2-iodobenzoyl) indole) 7694 I Acetyldihydrocodeine 9051 I Benzylmorphine 9052 I Codeine-N-oxide 9053 I Cyprenorphine 9054 I Desomorphine 9055 I Etorphine (except HCl) 9056 I Codeine methylbromide 9070 I Dihydromorphine 9145 I Difenoxin 9168 I Heroin 9200 I Hydromorphinol 9301 I Methyldesorphine 9302 I Methyldihydromorphine 9304 I Morphine methylbromide 9305 I Morphine methylsulfonate 9306 I Morphine-N-oxide 9307 I Myrophine 9308 I Nicocodeine 9309 I Nicomorphine 9312 I Normorphine 9313 I Pholcodine 9314 I Thebacon 9315 I Acetorphine 9319 I Drotebanol 9335 I U-47700 (3,4-dichloro-N-[2-(dimethylamino)cyclohexyl]-N-methylbenzamide) 9547 I AH-7921 (3,4-dichloro-N-[(1-dimethylamino)cyclohexylmethyl]benzamide)) 9551 I Acetylmethadol 9601 I Allylprodine 9602 I Alphacetylmethadol except levo-alphacetylmethadol 9603 I Alphameprodine 9604 I Alphamethadol 9605 I Benzethidine 9606 I Betacetylmethadol 9607 I Betameprodine 9608 I Betamethadol 9609 I Betaprodine 9611 I Clonitazene 9612 I Dextromoramide 9613 I Diampromide 9615 I Diethylthiambutene 9616 I Dimenoxadol 9617 I Dimepheptanol 9618 I Dimethylthiambutene 9619 I Dioxaphetyl butyrate 9621 I Dipipanone 9622 I Ethylmethylthiambutene 9623 I Etonitazene 9624 I Etoxeridine 9625 I Furethidine 9626 I Hydroxypethidine 9627 I Ketobemidone 9628 I Levomoramide 9629 I Levophenacylmorphan 9631 I Morpheridine 9632 I Noracymethadol 9633 I Norlevorphanol 9634 I Normethadone 9635 I Norpipanone 9636 I Phenadoxone 9637 I Phenampromide 9638 I Phenoperidine 9641 I Piritramide 9642 I Proheptazine 9643 I Properidine 9644 I Racemoramide 9645 I Trimeperidine 9646 I Phenomorphan 9647 I Propiram 9649 I 1-Methyl-4-phenyl-4-propionoxypiperidine 9661 I 1-(2-Phenylethyl)-4-phenyl-4-acetoxypiperidine 9663 I Tilidine 9750 I Acryl fentanyl (N-(1-phenethylpiperidin-4-yl)-N-phenylacrylamide) 9811 I Para-Fluorofentanyl 9812 I 3-Methylfentanyl 9813 I Alpha-methylfentanyl 9814 I Acetyl-alpha-methylfentanyl 9815 I Acetyl Fentanyl (N-(1-phenethylpiperidin-4-yl)-N-phenylacetamide) 9821 I Butyryl Fentanyl 9822 I 4-Fluoroisobutyryl fentanyl (N-(4-fluorophenyl)-N-(1-phenethylpiperidin-4-yl)isobutyramide) 9824 I Beta-hydroxyfentanyl 9830 I Beta-hydroxy-3-methylfentanyl 9831 I Alpha-methylthiofentanyl 9832 I 3-Methylthiofentanyl 9833 I Furanyl fentanyl (N-(1-phenethylpiperidin-4-yl)-N-phenylfuran-2-carboxamide) 9834 I Thiofentanyl 9835 I Beta-hydroxythiofentanyl 9836 I Amphetamine 1100 II Methamphetamine 1105 II Lisdexamfetamine 1205 II Phenmetrazine 1631 II Methylphenidate 1724 II Amobarbital 2125 II Pentobarbital 2270 II Secobarbital 2315 II Glutethimide 2550 II Nabilone 7379 II 1-Phenylcyclohexylamine 7460 II Phencyclidine 7471 II 4-Anilino-N-phenethyl-4-piperidine (ANPP) 8333 II Phenylacetone 8501 II 1-Piperidinocyclohexanecarbonitrile 8603 II Alphaprodine 9010 II Anileridine 9020 II Cocaine 9041 II Codeine 9050 II Etorphine HCl 9059 II Dihydrocodeine 9120 II Oxycodone 9143 II Hydromorphone 9150 II Diphenoxylate 9170 II Ecgonine 9180 II Ethylmorphine 9190 II Hydrocodone 9193 II Levomethorphan 9210 II Levorphanol 9220 II Isomethadone 9226 II Meperidine 9230 II Meperidine intermediate-A 9232 II Meperidine intermediate-B 9233 II Meperidine intermediate-C 9234 II Methadone 9250 II Methadone intermediate 9254 II Metopon 9260 II Dextropropoxyphene, bulk (non-dosage forms) 9273 II Morphine 9300 II Thebaine 9333 II Dihydroetorphine 9334 II Levo-alphacetylmethadol 9648 II Oxymorphone 9652 II Noroxymorphone 9668 II Phenazocine 9715 II Thiafentanil 9729 II Piminodine 9730 II Racemethorphan 9732 II Racemorphan 9733 II Alfentanil 9737 II Remifentanil 9739 II Sufentanil 9740 II Carfentanil 9743 II Tapentadol 9780 II Bezitramide 9800 II Fentanyl 9801 II Moramide-intermediate 9802 II

    The company plans to manufacture small quantities of the listed controlled substances in bulk for distribution to its customers.

    Dated: July 23, 2018. John J. Martin, Assistant Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16468 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Importer of Controlled Substances Application: Cody Laboratories Inc. ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    DATES:

    Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic classes, and applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a) on or before August 31, 2018. Such persons may also file a written request for a hearing on the application pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.43 on or before August 31, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/DRW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All requests for hearing must be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: Administrator, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All request for hearing should also be sent to: (1) Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: Hearing Clerk/LJ, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152; and (2) Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: DEA Federal Register Representative/DRW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. Comments and request for hearing on applications to import narcotic raw material are not appropriate. 72 FR 3417 (January 25, 2007).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Attorney General has delegated his authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been redelegated to the Assistant Administrator of the DEA Diversion Control Division (“Assistant Administrator”) pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart R.

    In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a), this is notice that on June 20, 2018, Cody Laboratories, Inc., Steve Hartman, 601 Yellowstone Avenue, Cody, Wyoming 82414-9221 applied to be registered as an importer of the following basic classes of controlled substances:

    Controlled substance Drug
  • code
  • Schedule
    Phenylacetone 8501 II Poppy Straw Concentrate 9670 II Tapentadol 9780 II

    The company plans to import narcotic raw materials to manufacture bulk controlled substances for distribution to its customers. The company plans to import an intermediate form of tapentadol (9780), to bulk manufacture tapentadol for distribution to its customers.

    Dated: July 23, 2018. John J. Martin, Assistant Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16467 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Importer of Controlled Substances Application: Galephar Pharmaceutical Research Inc. ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    DATES:

    Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic classes, and applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration on or before August 31, 2018. Such persons may also file a written request for a hearing on the application on or before August 31, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/DRW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All requests for hearing must be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: Administrator, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All request for hearing should also be sent to: (1) Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: Hearing Clerk/LJ, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152; and (2) Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: DEA Federal Register Representative/DRW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Attorney General has delegated his authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been delegated to the Assistant Administrator of the DEA Diversion Control Division (“Assistant Administrator”) pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart R.

    In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a), this is notice that on July 3, 2018, Galephar Pharmaceutical Research Inc., #100 Carr 198 Industrial Park, Juncos, Puerto Rico 00777 applied to be registered as an importer of the following basic class of controlled substance:

    Controlled substance Drug
  • code
  • Schedule
    Hydromorphone 9150 II

    The company plans to import the listed controlled substance in finished dosage form for clinical trials, research and analytical purposes.

    Dated: July 23, 2018. John J. Martin, Assistant Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16466 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Importer of Controlled Substances Application: Ultra Scientific Inc. ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    DATES:

    Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic classes, and applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration on or before August 31, 2018. Such persons may also file a written request for a hearing on the application on or before August 31, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/DRW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All requests for hearing must be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: Administrator, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All request for hearing should also be sent to: (1) Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: Hearing Clerk/LJ, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152; and (2) Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: DEA Federal Register Representative/DRW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Attorney General has delegated his authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been redelegated to the Assistant Administrator of the DEA Diversion Control Division (“Assistant Administrator”) pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart R.

    In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a), this is notice that on April 4, 2018, Ultra Scientific Inc., 250 Smith Street, North Kingstown, Rhode Island 02852 applied to be registered as an importer of the following basic classes of controlled substances:

    Controlled substance Drug
  • code
  • Schedule
    Marihuana 7360 I Tetrahydrocannabinols 7370 I

    The company plans to import derivatives of the listed controlled substances for use as chemical standards for testing and calibration only of analytical equipment. The above controlled substances will not be imported for human or animal consumption.

    Dated: July 23, 2018. John J. Martin, Assistant Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16465 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Importer of Controlled Substances Application: Anderson Brecon, Inc. ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    DATES:

    Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic classes, and applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration on or before August 31, 2018. Such persons may also file a written request for a hearing on the application on or before August 31, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/DRW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All requests for hearing must be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: Administrator, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All request for hearing should also be sent to: (1) Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: Hearing Clerk/LJ, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152; and (2) Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: DEA Federal Register Representative/DRW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Attorney General has delegated his authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been redelegated to the Assistant Administrator of the DEA Diversion Control Division (“Assistant Administrator”) pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart R.

    In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a), this is notice that on February 6, 2018, Anderson Brecon, Inc., 4545 Assembly Drive, Rockford, Illinois 61109 applied to be registered as an importer of Tetrahydrocannabinols (7370), a basic class of controlled substance listed in Schedule I.

    The company plans to import for clinical trial only. Approval of applications will occur only when registrant's business activity is consistent with what is authorized under 21 U.S.C 952 (a) (2). Authorization will not extend to the import of FDA approved or non-approved finished dosage forms for commercial sale.

    Dated: July 20, 2018. John J. Martin, Assistant Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16464 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Office of Justice Programs [OMB Number XXXX-New] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; New Collection AGENCY:

    SMART Office, Office of Justice Programs, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    30 Day Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, SMART Office, is submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    The Department of Justice encourages public comment and will accept input until August 31, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have additional comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Samantha Opong, Program Specialist, SMART Office, 810 7th Street NW Washington, DC 20531, [email protected], (202) 514-9320. Written comments and/or suggestions can also be sent to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention Department of Justice Desk Officer, Washington, DC 20503 or sent to [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    —Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the SMART Office, including whether the information will have practical utility; —Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; —Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected can be enhanced; and —Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. Overview of This Information Collection

    1. Type of Information Collection: This is a “New collection,” the collection has not previously been used or sponsored by the SMART Office.

    The Title of the Form/Collection: Campus Information Sharing and Response Project.

    As part of a fellowship project in the Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART), Office of Justice Programs at the U.S. Department of Justice, the Campus Information Sharing and Response project is exploring how institutions of higher education share, respond and coordinate information to prevent sexual assault perpetration. This project will collect through an online questionnaire information about current practices utilized by colleges and universities with regards to the following:

    • Policies and practices regarding registered sex offenders who may be students or employees • Policies and practices regarding individuals found responsible and sanctioned for campus sexual misconduct policy violations • Policies and practices used in reviewing criminal or disciplinary sexual misconduct history of prospective or current students.

    2. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection: There is no agency form number for this collection. The applicable component within the Department of Justice is the SMART Office.

    Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: The respondents to this collection/affected public includes business or other for profit institutions of higher education, and not-for-profit institutions. The SMART Office is exploring how institutions of higher education share, respond and coordinate information to prevent sexual assault perpetration. This project will collect information about current policies and practices utilized by colleges and universities regarding registered sex offenders who may be students or employees; individuals found responsible and sanctioned for campus sexual misconduct policy violations; and the review of criminal or disciplinary sexual misconduct history of prospective or current students.

    3. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: 50 respondents are estimated, and it will take each respondent approximately 15 minutes to complete the questionnaire.

    4. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: Based on the estimate of 50 respondents, each taking approximately 15 minutes to complete the questionnaire, the estimated total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection is 12.5 hours.

    If additional information is required contact: Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE, 3E.405A, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: July 27, 2018. Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16430 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-18-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC-2018-0034] Information Collection: Standards for Protection Against Radiation AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice of submission to the Office of Management and Budget; request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has recently submitted a request for renewal of an existing collection of information to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. The information collection is entitled, “Standards for Protection Against Radiation.”

    DATES:

    Submit comments by August 31, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments directly to the OMB reviewer at: Mathew Oreska, Desk Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (3150-0014), NEOB-10202, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503; telephone: 202-395-3621, email: [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David Cullison, NRC Clearance Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-2084; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0034 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0034.

    NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “ADAMS Public Documents” and then select “Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected] The supporting statement is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18177A400.

    NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    NRC's Clearance Officer: A copy of the collection of information and related instructions may be obtained without charge by contacting the NRC's Clearance Officer, David Cullison, Office of the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-2084; email: [email protected]

    B. Submitting Comments

    The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information in comment submissions that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. All comment submissions are posted at http://www.regulations.gov and entered into ADAMS. Comment submissions are not routinely edited to remove identifying or contact information.

    If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the OMB, 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 comment submissions are not routinely edited to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.

    II. Background

    Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the NRC recently submitted a request for renewal of an existing collection of information to OMB for review entitled, “Standards for Protection Against Radiation.” The NRC hereby informs potential respondents that an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and that a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    The NRC published a Federal Register notice with a 60-day comment period on this information collection on April 10, 2018 (83 FR 15411).

    1. The title of the information collection: 10 CFR part 20, “Standards for Protection Against Radiation.”

    2. OMB approval number: 3150-0014.

    3. Type of submission: Extension.

    4. The form number if applicable: Not Applicable.

    5. How often the collection is required or requested: Annually for most reports and at license termination for reports dealing with decommissioning.

    6. Who will be required or asked to respond: NRC licensees and Agreement State licensees, including those requesting license terminations. Types of licensees include civilian commercial, industrial, academic, and medical users of nuclear materials. Licenses are issued for, among other things, the possession, use, processing, handling, and importing and exporting of nuclear materials, and for the operation of nuclear reactors.

    7. The estimated number of annual responses: 43,530 (11,739 for reporting [1,677 NRC licensees and 10,062 Agreement State licensees], 21,018 for recordkeeping [3,003 NRC licensees and 18,015 Agreement State licensees], and 10,773 for third-party disclosures [1,539 NRC licensees and 9,234 Agreement State licensees]).

    8. The estimated number of annual respondents: 21,018 (3,003 NRC licensees and 18,015 Agreement State licensees).

    9. An estimate of the total number of hours needed annually to comply with the information collection requirement or request: 640,776 hours (91,545 hours for NRC licensees and 549,231 hours for Agreement State licensees).

    10. Abstract: 10 CFR part 20 establishes standards for protection against ionizing radiation resulting from activities conducted under licenses issued by the NRC and by Agreement States. These standards require the establishment of radiation protection programs, maintenance of radiation protection programs, maintenance of radiation records recording of radiation received by workers, reporting of incidents which could cause exposure to radiation, submittal of an annual report to NRC and to Agreement States of the results of individual monitoring, and submittal of license termination information. These mandatory requirements are needed to protect occupationally exposed individuals from undue risks of excessive exposure to ionizing radiation and to protect the health and safety of the public.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, on July 26, 2018.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    David Cullison, NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16390 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC-2018-0151] Information Collection: Request for Taxpayer Identification Number AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Renewal of existing information collection; request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) invites public comment on the renewal of Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval for an existing collection of information. The information collection is entitled, “Request for Taxpayer Identification Number.”

    DATES:

    Submit comments by October 1, 2018. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the Commission is able to ensure consideration only for comments received on or before this date.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0151. Address questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301-287-9127; email: [email protected] For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

    Mail comments to: David Cullison, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Mail Stop: T-2 F43, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

    For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting comments, see “Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments” in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David Cullison, Office of the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-2084; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0151 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0151. A copy of the collection of information and related instructions may be obtained without charge by accessing Docket ID NRC-2018-0151 on this website.

    NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “ADAMS Public Documents” and then select “Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected] The supporting statement and “Request for Taxpayer Identification Number” is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ADAMS ML18114A279.

    NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    NRC's Clearance Officer: A copy of the collection of information and related instructions may be obtained without charge by contacting NRC's Clearance Officer, David Cullison, Office of the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-2084; email: [email protected]

    B. Submitting Comments

    Please include Docket ID NRC-2018-0151 in the subject line of your comment submission, in order to ensure that the NRC is able to make your comment submission available to the public in this docket.

    The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information in comment submissions that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions into ADAMS, and the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove identifying or contact information.

    If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.

    II. Background

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the NRC is requesting public comment on its intention to request the OMB's approval for the information collection summarized below.

    1. The title of the information collection: Request for Taxpayer Identification Number.

    2. OMB approval number: 3150-0188.

    3. Type of submission: Extension.

    4. The form number, if applicable: NRC Form 531.

    5. How often the collection is required or requested: Licensees are only required to submit once, however, a continuous monthly request is sent until the licensee submits the Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN).

    6. Who will be required or asked to respond: NRC Form 531 is used to collect TINs and information sufficient to identify the licensee or applicant for licenses, certificates, approvals and registrations.

    7. The estimated number of annual responses: 300 responses.

    8. The estimated number of annual respondents: 300 respondents.

    9. The estimated number of hours needed annually to comply with the information collection requirement or request: 75 hours.

    10. Abstract: The Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996 requires that agencies collect TINs from individuals who do business with the Government, including contractors and recipients of credit, licenses, permits, and benefits. The TIN will be used to process all electronic payments (refunds) made to licensees by electronic funds transfer by the Department of the Treasury. The Department of the Treasury will use the TIN to determine whether the refund can be used to administratively offset any delinquent debts reported to the Treasury by other government agencies. In addition, the TIN will be used to collect and report to the Department of the Treasury any delinquent indebtedness arising out of the licensee's or applicant's relationship with the NRC.

    III. Specific Requests for Comments

    The NRC is seeking comments that address the following questions:

    1. Is the proposed collection of information necessary for the NRC to properly perform its functions? Does the information have practical utility?

    2. Is the estimate of the burden of the information collection accurate?

    3. Is there a way to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected?

    4. How can the burden of the information collection on respondents be minimized, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology?

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26th day of July 2018.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    David Cullison, NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16401 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278; NRC-2018-0130] Exelon Generation Company, LLC; Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3 AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    License renewal application; receipt.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has received an application for the subsequent license renewal of Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-44 and DPR-56, which authorize Exelon Generation Company, LLC (the applicant) to operate Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3 (Peach Bottom). The renewed licenses would authorize the applicant to operate Peach Bottom for an additional 20 years beyond the period specified in each of the current renewed licenses. The current renewed operating licenses for Peach Bottom expire as follows: Unit 2 on August 8, 2033, and Unit 3 on July 2, 2034.

    DATES:

    The license renewal application referenced in this document was submitted on July 10, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0130 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this document using any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0130. Address questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301-287-9127; email: [email protected] For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

    NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “ADAMS Public Documents” and then select “Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected] The ADAMS accession number for each document referenced (if it is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that it is mentioned in this document.

    NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Bennett M. Brady, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-2941, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The NRC has received an application (ADAMS Package Accession No. ML18193A689) from Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Exelon or the applicant), dated July 10, 2018, filed pursuant to Section 103 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and part 54 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, to renew the operating licenses for Peach Bottom. Renewal of the licenses would authorize the applicant to operate the facility for an additional 20-year period beyond the period specified in the respective current renewed operating licenses. The current renewed operating licenses for Peach Bottom expire as follows: Unit 2 on August 8, 2033, and Unit 3 on July 2, 2034. The Peach Bottom units are boiling water reactors located in Delta, PA, about 17.9 miles south of Lancaster, PA. The acceptability of the tendered application for docketing, and other matters, including an opportunity to request a hearing, will be the subject of subsequent Federal Register notices.

    A copy of the subsequent license renewal application for Peach Bottom is also available for inspection near the site at the Harford County Public Library: Whiteford Branch, 2407 Whiteford Rd, Whiteford, MD 21160.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26th day of July 2018.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    Emmanuel C. Sayoc, Acting Chief, License Renewal Projects Branch, Division of Materials and License Renewal, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16402 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC-2018-0159] Interim Staff Guidance for Decommissioning Funding Plans for Materials Licensees AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Draft interim staff guidance; request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is soliciting public comment on its draft Interim Staff Guidance (ISG) on Decommissioning Funding Plans (DFP) for materials licensees. The purpose of this ISG is to provide the NRC staff and the industry with guidance based on recent developments and lessons learned in financial assurance since the last update to NUREG-1757, Vol. 3, Rev. 1, “Consolidated Decommissioning Guidance Financial Assurance, Recordkeeping, and Timeliness” (NUREG-1757, Vol. 3).

    DATES:

    Submit comments by September 17, 2018. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the Commission is able to ensure consideration only for comments received before this date.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0159. Address questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301-287-9127; email: [email protected] For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

    Mail comments to: May Ma, Office of Administration, Mail Stop: TWFN-7-A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

    For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting comments, see “Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments” in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kenneth Kline, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-7075, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0159 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0159.

    NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “ADAMS Public Documents” and then select “Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected] The ISG for Decommissioning Funding Plans for Materials Licensees is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18163A087.

    NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    B. Submitting Comments

    Please include Docket ID NRC-2018-0159 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 http://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions into ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove identifying or contact information.

    If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.

    II. Discussion

    Since 1988, NRC licensees have been required to provide decommissioning financial assurance. The NRC published its “Decommissioning Planning Rule” in the Federal Register on June 17, 2011 (76 FR 35512). The rule became effective on December 17, 2012. The rule's purpose is to minimize the likelihood of new “legacy sites,” those sites owned or controlled by licensees with insufficient resources to complete decommissioning. Successful completion of decommissioning is a prerequisite to the NRC terminating the license.

    The NRC's radioactive materials licensing regulations, part 30 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), “Rules of General Applicability to Domestic Licensing of Byproduct Material”; 10 CFR part 40, “Domestic Licensing of Source Material”; and 10 CFR part 70, “Domestic Licensing of Special Nuclear Material,” require NRC licensees to provide adequate financial assurance for all decommissioning activities.1 The NRC staff utilizes NUREG-1757, Vol. 3 (ADAMS Accession No. ML12048A683), as guidance to evaluate DFPs submitted by 10 CFR parts 30, 40 and 70 licensees. The NRC's Regulatory Guide (RG) 4.22, “Decommissioning Planning During Operations” (ADAMS Accession No. ML12158A361), provides guidance to licensees for use during licensed operations to minimize radiological contamination, including radiological subsurface contamination, and to properly retain survey results. For those licensees having or likely to have significant residual radioactivity, RG 4.22 provides guidance on arranging for sufficient funding to complete decommissioning, thereby allowing the NRC to terminate the license.

    1 The specific NRC regulations are 10 CFR 30.35, 10 CFR 40.36, and 10 CFR 70.25, each entitled “Financial Assurance and Recordkeeping for Decommissioning.”

    The purpose of this ISG is to provide NRC staff and industry with guidance based on developments and lessons learned in financial assurance since the last update to NUREG-1757, Vol. 3. The ISG covers decommissioning cost estimates describing current facility conditions, evaluating events since the last DFP approval, and updates for certain financial instruments.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26th day of July, 2018.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    John R. Tappert, Director, Division of Decommissioning, Uranium Recovery and Waste Programs, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16392 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 70-7003; NRC-2018-0160] American Centrifuge Operating, LCC; Lead Cascade Facility AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact; issuance.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing an environmental assessment (EA) and a finding of no significant impact (FONSI) regarding a request from American Centrifuge Operating, LLC (ACO) for approval of its Decommissioning Plan. ACO is authorized to possess and use special nuclear material (SNM), source material, and byproduct material at its Lead Cascade Facility (LCF) in Piketon, Ohio under NRC License SNM-7003, issued in 2004. ACO's Decommissioning Plan contains its proposed Release Criteria and the Final Status Survey design.

    DATES:

    The EA referenced in this document is available on August 1, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0160 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this document using any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0160. Address questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301-287-9127; email: [email protected] For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

    NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “ADAMS Public Documents” and then select “Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected] The ADAMS accession number for each document referenced (if it is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that it is mentioned in this document.

    NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jean Trefethen, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-0867, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction

    By letter dated January 5, 2018 (ADAMS Accession Number ML18025B285), American Centrifuge Operating, LLC (ACO or the licensee) requested NRC approval of ACO's Decommissioning Plan (DP). The DP contains ACO's proposed Release Criteria (RC) and Final Status Survey (FSS) design. The Lead Cascade Facility (LCF) is located at the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant (PORTS) site in Pike County, Ohio. The PORTS site is owned by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), and the DOE leases portions of the PORTS site, including the LCF buildings, to the licensee. The NRC staff has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) (ADAMS Accession Number ML18204A294) as part of its review of this proposed action in accordance with the requirements in part 51 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), “Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions” and associated staff guidance. The NRC has concluded that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.

    II. Summary of the Environmental Assessment Description of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action is to review and approve ACO's DP which provides the proposed RC and FSS design. The RC are regulatory limits identified in 10 CFR part 20.1402. The FSS is performed by the licensee to verify that residual contamination levels are less than these limits.

    Need for the Proposed Action

    By letter dated March 2, 2016, the licensee notified the NRC of its decision to permanently cease LCF operations (ADAMS Accession Number ML16074A405). In preparation for decommissioning of the LCF, termination of license SNM-7003, and potential future release of the site and return to DOE as outlined in the lease agreement, ACO has performed clean-up and survey activities.

    Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The NRC staff evaluated the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed action, and has performed its environmental review in accordance with the requirements in 10 CFR part 51 and associated staff guidance. As detailed in the EA, the staff reviewed relevant information submitted by the licensee and consulted with the Ohio State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), the Osage Nation, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), and the State of Ohio Department of Health (ODH).

    Survey activities for the FSS have occurred inside the LCF buildings, and no land disturbance activities were involved or are planned. Therefore, the NRC staff considers that there would be no impacts to the following resources areas: Land use, geology and soils, water resources, ecology, meteorology, climate, air quality, noise, transportation, waste management, visual and scenic resources, and socioeconomic resources.

    The NRC staff evaluated the radiological impacts to workers and the public. The staff found that the radiological doses to workers would be within the dose limits specified in 10 CFR 20.1201, “Occupational dose limits to adults,” and that radiological doses to the public would be indistinguishable when compared to background radiation.

    The NRC staff also evaluated the cumulative impacts by identifying past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions at DOE's Piketon, Ohio site, and the incremental impacts of ACO's proposed action. The staff determined that the proposed action would not significantly contribute to cumulative impacts. The staff also determined that the proposed action would not affect federally-listed endangered or threatened species or their critical habitats, if present.

    Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered denial of the proposed action and requesting ACO to submit a revised DP (i.e., the “no-action” alternative). Under the no-action alternative, the LCF FSS and RC would not be approved and license termination would not be possible. The NRC considers the environmental impacts of this alternative to be similar to those of the proposed action. The no-action alternative does not comply with the licensee's commitments made during licensing or the decommissioning requirements of 10 CFR 70.38 and does not provide any environmental benefit. The NRC staff concludes that not approving the provided RC and FSS, which meet the regulatory requirements, is not a reasonable alternative to approving the proposed action.

    Agencies and Persons Consulted

    By letter dated June 12, 2018 (ADAMS Accession Number ML18130A468), the staff consulted with the ODH regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. By letter dated July 6, 2018, the ODH replied indicating that they had no comments on the draft EA (ADAMS Accession Number ML18130A468). The NRC staff also consulted with the Ohio SHPO by letter dated April 9, 2018 (ADAMS Accession Number. ML18078B230). The Ohio SHPO responded by letter dated May 16, 2018, stating that they could not concur with a finding of No Adverse Effect for the proposed action and recommended that NRC initiate and carry out consultation and contact the ACHP (ADAMS Accession Number ML18155A296). On June 11, 2018, a conference call was held between the Ohio SHPO, the ACHP, and the NRC to discuss the concerns expressed in the SHPO's May 16, 2018, letter. During the call the ACHP expressed its agreement with the NRC that the requested action falls under 36 CFR 800.3(a)(1), No potential to cause effects, which states, “If the undertaking is a type of activity that does not have the potential to cause effects on historic properties, assuming such properties were present, the agency official has no further obligations under Section 106 or this part”. The NRC sent a letter, dated July 16, 2018, to the Ohio SHPO summarizing the conference call and concluding Section 106 consultation (ADAMS Accession Number ML18171A218). By letter dated April 11, 2018, the NRC initiated Section 106 consultation under the National Historic Preservation Act with the Osage Nation. In their reply, the Osage Nation stated it concurred with the NRC determination that the proposed DP most likely would not adversely affect any sacred properties and/or properties of cultural significance to the Nation, and also stated, “[t]he Osage Nation has no further concern with this project” (ADAMS Accession Number ML18158A263).

    III. Finding of No Significant Impact

    In accordance with the requirements in 10 CFR part 51, the NRC staff has concluded that the proposed action will not significantly affect the quality of the human environment. Therefore, the staff finds, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.31, that preparation of an environmental impact statement is not required for the proposed action, and that a finding of no significant impact is appropriate.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26th day of July 2018.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    Craig G. Erlanger, Director, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety, Safeguards, and Environmental Review, Office of Nuclear Material Safety, and Safeguards.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16404 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 50-409; NRC-2018-0157] LaCrosse Solutions, LLC; Dairyland Power Cooperative La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Exemption; issuance.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing an exemption in response to a February 22, 2018, request from LaCrosseSolutions, LLC (LS) from the regulatory requirement to maintain a specified level of onsite property damage insurance to permit the La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor (LACBWR) to reduce its onsite insurance coverage from $180 million to $50 million.

    DATES:

    The exemption was issued on July 24, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0157 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this document using any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0157. Address questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301-287-9127; email: [email protected] For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

    NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “ADAMS Public Documents” and then select “Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected] The ADAMS accession number for each document referenced (if it is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that it is mentioned in this document.

    NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Marlayna G. Vaaler, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-3178, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    The La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor was an Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) Demonstration Project Reactor that first went critical in 1967, commenced commercial operation in November 1969, and was capable of producing 50 megawatts of electric power. The LACBWR site is located on the east bank of the Mississippi River in Vernon County, Wisconsin, and is co-located with the Genoa Generating Station, which is a coal-fired electrical power plant that is still in operation. The Allis-Chalmers Company was the original licensee; the AEC later sold the plant to the Dairyland Power Cooperative (DPC) and granted it Provisional Operating License No. DPR-45 on August 28, 1973 (ADAMS Accession No. ML17080A423).

    The LACBWR permanently ceased operations on April 30, 1987 (ADAMS Accession No. ML17080A422), and reactor defueling was completed on June 11, 1987 (ADAMS Accession No. ML17080A420). In a letter dated August 4, 1987 (ADAMS Accession No. ML17080A393), the NRC terminated DPC's authority to operate LACBWR under Provisional Operating License No. DPR-45, and granted the licensee a possess-but-not-operate status. By letter dated August 18, 1988 (ADAMS Accession No. ML17080A421), the NRC amended DPC's Provisional Operating License No. DPR-45 to Possession Only License No. DPR-45 to reflect the permanently defueled configuration at LACBWR.

    The NRC issued an order to authorize decommissioning of LACBWR and approve the licensee's proposed Decommissioning Plan (DP) on August 7, 1991 (ADAMS Accession No. ML17080A454). Because the NRC approved DPC's DP before August 28, 1996, pursuant to section 50.82 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), the DP is considered the Post-Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report (PSDAR) for LACBWR. The PSDAR public meeting was held on May 13, 1998, and subsequent updates to the LACBWR decommissioning report have combined the DP and PSDAR into the “LACBWR Decommissioning Plan and Post-Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report” (D-Plan/PSDAR). This document is also considered the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) for LACBWR and is updated every 24 months in accordance with 10 CFR 50.71(e). The DPC constructed an onsite Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) under its 10 CFR part 72 general license, and completed the movement of all 333 spent nuclear fuel elements from the Fuel Element Storage Well to dry cask storage at the ISFSI by September 19, 2012 (ADAMS Accession No. ML12290A027). The remaining associated buildings and structures are currently undergoing dismantlement and decommissioning activities.

    By order dated May 20, 2016 (ADAMS Accession No. ML16123A073), the NRC approved the direct transfer of Possession Only License No. DPR-45 for LACBWR from DPC to LS, a wholly-owned subsidiary of EnergySolutions, LLC, and approved a conforming license amendment, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.80, “Transfer of licenses,” and 10 CFR 50.90, “Application for amendment of license, construction permit, or early site permit,” to reflect the change. The order was published in the Federal Register (FR) on June 2, 2016 (81 FR 35383). The transfer assigns DPC's licensed possession, maintenance, and decommissioning responsibilities for LACBWR to LS in order to implement expedited decommissioning at the LACBWR site. Decommissioning of the LACBWR facility and site is scheduled to be completed in 2018.

    II. Request/Action

    Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12, “Specific exemptions,” LS has requested an exemption from 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) by letter dated February 22, 2018 (ADAMS Accession No. ML18057A021). The exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) would permit LS to reduce its onsite property damage insurance from $180 million to $50 million.

    The regulation in 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) requires each licensee to have and maintain onsite property damage insurance to stabilize and decontaminate the reactor and reactor site in the event of an accident. The onsite insurance coverage must be either $1.06 billion or whatever amount of insurance is generally available from private sources (whichever is less). The LACBWR site currently maintains $180 million in onsite insurance coverage in accordance with a previous exemption approved by the NRC on June 26, 1986 (51 FR 24456).1

    1 At the time the previous exemption was granted in 1986, 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) required the licensee to maintain on-site property insurance in the amount of $500 million. Based on a finding that special circumstances were present, the Commission approved the licensee's exemption request to permit LACBWR to reduce its onsite insurance coverage from $500 million to $180 million. See 51 FR 24456.

    The licensee stated that there is a reduced potential for, and consequences from, an accident at a permanently shutdown and defueled reactor when compared to the risks at an operating power reactor. In addition, since the license no longer authorizes reactor operation or emplacement or retention of fuel in the reactor vessel at LACBWR, there are no events that would require the stabilization of reactor conditions after an accident. Similarly, the risk of an accident that that would result in significant onsite contamination at LACBWR is also much lower than the risk of such an event at an operating reactor. Therefore, LS requested an exemption from 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) that would permit a reduction in its onsite property damage insurance from $180 million to $50 million, commensurate with the reduced risk of an accident at the permanently shutdown and defueled LACBWR reactor.

    III. Discussion

    Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12, the Commission may, upon application by any interested person or upon its own initiative, grant exemptions from the requirements of 10 CFR part 50 when (1) the exemptions are authorized by law, will not present an undue risk to public health or safety, and are consistent with the common defense and security; and (2) any of the special circumstances listed in 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2) are present.

    The financial protection limits of 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) were established after the Three Mile Island accident out of concern that licensees may be unable to financially cover onsite cleanup costs in the event of a major nuclear accident. The specified coverage requirement was developed based on an analysis of an accident at a nuclear reactor operating at power, resulting in a large fission product release and requiring significant resource expenditures to stabilize the reactor conditions and ultimately decontaminate and clean up the site.

    The NRC developed these cost estimates from the spectrum of postulated accidents for an operating nuclear reactor and the consequences of any associated release of radioactive material from the reactor. Although the risk of an accident at an operating reactor is very low, the consequences can be large. In an operating plant, the high temperature and pressure of the reactor coolant system, as well as the inventory of relatively short-lived radionuclides, contribute to both the risk and consequences of an accident. With the permanent cessation of reactor operations at LACBWR, the permanent removal of the fuel from the reactor core, and the movement of all the irradiated fuel assemblies into storage at the onsite ISFSI, such accidents are no longer possible. As a result, the reactor, reactor coolant system, and supporting systems no longer operate, and the majority of these components have already been dismantled and removed from the site as part of the decommissioning process. Therefore, these systems and components no longer serve any function related to the storage of the irradiated fuel. As such, postulated accidents involving failure or malfunction of the reactor, reactor coolant system, or supporting systems are no longer applicable at LACBWR.

    During reactor decommissioning, the principal radiological risks are associated with the storage of spent fuel onsite, as well as the inventory of radioactive liquids, activated reactor components, and contaminated materials. In its February 22, 2018, exemption request, LS noted that because all of the irradiated fuel assemblies are currently stored in the onsite ISFSI, a fuel handling accident and a zirconium fire caused by drain down of the spent fuel pool are no longer considered credible events. In the current state of decommissioning at LACBWR, with the reactor building being the only contaminated structure that still remains onsite, only minor liquid and airborne effluent releases resulting from dismantlement activities are considered credible events. The licensee determined that the minimal radioactive material remaining at the site that resulted from LACBWR's operation is insufficient for any potential event to result in exceeding dose limits or otherwise involving a significant adverse effect on public health and safety.

    Specifically, there are no credible events at LACBWR that could result in a radiological release exceeding the limits established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) early-phase Protective Action Guidelines (PAGs) of one roentgen equivalent man at the exclusion area boundary, which demonstrates that any possible radiological releases would be minimal and would not require precautionary protective actions (e.g., sheltering in place or evacuation). The staff evaluated the radiological consequences associated with various decommissioning activities, and credible accident events at LACBWR, in consideration of the permanently shutdown and defueled status of the facility. The possible accident scenarios at LACBWR have greatly reduced radiological consequences. Based on its review, the staff concluded that no reasonably conceivable radiological release event exists that could cause an offsite release greater than the EPA PAGs.

    In addition, given that all of the irradiated fuel assemblies at LACBWR have already been moved into storage at the onsite ISFSI, the fuel is no longer thermal-hydraulically capable of sustaining a zirconium fire, and can be air-cooled in all credible accident scenarios and fuel configurations. Since NRC approval of the previous exemption in 1986, which permitted LACBWR to reduce its onsite insurance coverage to $180 million, the NRC staff has authorized a lesser amount of onsite property damage insurance coverage based on an analysis of the zirconium fire risk. In SECY-96-256, “Changes to Financial Protection Requirements for Permanently Shutdown Nuclear Power Reactors, 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) and 10 CFR 140.11,” dated December 17, 1996 (ADAMS Accession No. ML15062A483), the NRC staff recommended changes to the power reactor insurance regulations that would allow licensees to lower onsite insurance levels to $50 million upon demonstration that the fuel stored in the spent fuel pool can be air-cooled.

    In its Staff Requirements Memorandum to SECY-96-256, dated January 28, 1997 (ADAMS Accession No. ML15062A454), the Commission supported the staff's recommendation that, among other things, would allow permanently shutdown power reactor licensees to reduce commercial onsite property damage insurance coverage to $50 million when the licensee was able to demonstrate the technical criterion that the spent fuel could be air-cooled if the spent fuel pool was drained of water. The staff has used this technical criterion to grant similar exemptions to other decommissioning reactors (e.g., Maine Yankee Atomic Power Station, published in the Federal Register on January 19, 1999 (64 FR 2920); and Zion Nuclear Power Station, published in the Federal Register on December 28, 1999 (64 FR 72700)). These prior exemptions were based on the licensees demonstrating that the spent fuel could be air-cooled, consistent with the technical criterion discussed above. Based on this criterion, the NRC staff determined $50 million to be an adequate level of onsite property damage insurance coverage for the LACBWR site, given that the spent fuel is no longer susceptible to a zirconium fire.

    In addition, the staff has postulated that there is still a potential for other radiological incidents at a decommissioning reactor that could result in significant onsite contamination besides a zirconium fire. In SECY-96-256, the NRC staff cited the rupture of a large contaminated liquid storage tank, causing soil contamination and potential groundwater contamination, as the most costly postulated event to decontaminate and remediate (other than a zirconium fire). The postulated large liquid radiological waste storage tank rupture event was determined to have a bounding onsite cleanup cost of approximately $50 million. However, decommissioning activities at LACBWR have progressed to such an extent that there are no longer any large radiological waste storage tanks onsite, as described in the most recent update to the D-Plan/PSDAR (ADAMS Accession No. ML18155A395). The only potential source of radioactive liquid remaining at LACBWR is water generated during decommissioning and decontamination activities (e.g., draining, decontamination, and cutting processes), including the retention tank used to store this water, which has a total capacity of 6000 gallons and is therefore considerably less that the 450,000 gallon large contaminated liquid storage tank postulated in SECY-96-256. According to the analysis described in the LACBWR D-Plan/PSDAR, in the event that 80 percent of the retention tank volume were to be released from the tank via a non-mechanistic rupture, the normal effluent concentration limits of 10 CFR part 20, “Standards for Protection Against Radiation,” appendix B, table 2, would not be exceeded. The staff has examined this analysis and concluded that there are no credible phenomena that could reasonably be postulated to cause a release from the LACBWR retention tank that would challenge the assumptions made in SECY-96-256 regarding the rupture of a large contaminated liquid storage tank. Therefore, the staff determined that the licensee's proposal to reduce onsite insurance to a level of $50 million would be consistent with the bounding cleanup and decontamination cost, as discussed in SECY-96-256, to account for the postulated rupture of the retention tank at the LACBWR site.

    A. Authorized by Law

    The regulation in 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) requires each licensee to have and maintain onsite property damage insurance of either $1.06 billion or whatever amount of insurance is generally available from private sources, whichever is less. In accordance with 10 CFR 50.12, the Commission may grant exemptions from the regulations in 10 CFR part 50, as the Commission determines are authorized by law.

    In 1986, the Commission granted LACBWR an exemption from 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1), permitting the reduction of onsite insurance coverage from $500 million to $180 million. As explained above, the NRC staff has determined that the licensee's proposed reduction in onsite property damage insurance coverage to a level of $50 million is consistent with SECY-96-256 because there is no credible risk of a zirconium fire with all irradiated fuel stored in the onsite ISFSI, where it is air-cooled in all accident scenarios.

    The NRC staff has determined that granting of the licensee's proposed exemption will not result in a violation of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, or other laws, as amended. Therefore, based on its review of LS's exemption request, as discussed above, and consistent with SECY-96-256, the NRC staff concludes that the exemption is authorized by law.

    B. No Undue Risk to Public Health and Safety

    The onsite property damage insurance requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) were established to provide financial assurance that following a significant nuclear accident, onsite reactor conditions could be stabilized and the site decontaminated. The requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) and the existing level of onsite insurance coverage for LACBWR are predicated on the assumption that the reactor is operating. However, LACBWR is a permanently shutdown and defueled facility. The permanently defueled status of the facility has resulted in a significant reduction in the number and severity of potential accidents, and correspondingly, a significant reduction in the potential for and severity of onsite property damage. The proposed reduction in the amount of onsite insurance coverage does not impact the probability or consequences of potential accidents. The proposed level of insurance coverage is commensurate with the reduced consequences of credible nuclear accidents at LACBWR. Therefore, the NRC staff concludes that granting the requested exemption will not present an undue risk to the health and safety of the public.

    C. Consistent With the Common Defense and Security

    The proposed exemption would not eliminate any requirements associated with physical protection of the site and would not adversely affect LS's ability to physically secure the site or protect special nuclear material. Physical security measures at LACBWR are not affected by the requested exemption. Therefore, the proposed exemption is consistent with the common defense and security.

    D. Special Circumstances

    Under 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii), special circumstances are present if the application of the regulation in the particular circumstances would not serve the underlying purpose of the rule or is not necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule. The underlying purpose of 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) is to provide reasonable assurance that adequate funds will be available to stabilize reactor conditions and cover onsite cleanup costs associated with site decontamination, following an accident that results in the release of a significant amount of radiological material.

    Because LACBWR is permanently shutdown and defueled, with all irradiated fuel assemblies stored in the onsite ISFSI, and a very small radioactive source term remaining at the site given the progress of decommissioning and dismantlement activities, it is no longer possible for the radiological consequences of design-basis accidents or other credible events at LACBWR to exceed the limits of the EPA PAGs at the exclusion area boundary. Therefore, the staff concludes that the application of the current requirements in 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1), as exempted, for LS to maintain $180 million in onsite insurance coverage is not necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule for the permanently shutdown and defueled LACBWR facility.

    Under 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(iii), special circumstances are present whenever compliance would result in undue hardship or other costs that are significantly in excess of those contemplated when the regulation was adopted, or that are significantly in excess of those incurred by others similarly situated.

    The NRC staff concludes that if the licensee was required to continue to maintain an onsite insurance level of $180 million, the associated insurance premiums would be in excess of those necessary and commensurate with the radiological contamination risks posed by the site. In addition, such insurance levels would be significantly in excess of other decommissioning reactor facilities that have been granted similar exemptions by the NRC.

    As such, the NRC staff finds that compliance with the existing requirement would result in an undue hardship or other costs that are significantly in excess of those contemplated when the regulation was adopted and are significantly in excess of those incurred by others similarly situated. Therefore, the special circumstances required by 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii) and 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(iii) exist for the LACBWR facility.

    E. Environmental Considerations

    The NRC approval of an exemption to insurance or indemnity requirements belongs to a category of actions that the Commission, by rule or regulation, has declared to be a categorical exclusion, after first finding that the category of actions does not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. Specifically, the exemption is categorically excluded from further analysis under 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25).

    Under 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25), granting of an exemption from the requirements of any regulation of chapter I to 10 CFR is a categorical exclusion provided that (i) there is no significant hazards consideration; (ii) there is no significant change in the types or significant increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite; (iii) there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative public or occupational radiation exposure; (iv) there is no significant construction impact; (v) there is no significant increase in the potential for or consequences from radiological accidents; and (vi) the requirements from which an exemption is sought involve: Surety, insurance, or indemnity requirements.

    The Director, Division of Decommissioning, Uranium Recovery, and Waste Programs, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, has determined that approval of the exemption request involves no significant hazards consideration because reducing the licensee's onsite property damage insurance for LACBWR does not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The exempted financial protection regulation is unrelated to the operation of LACBWR. Accordingly, there is no significant change in the types or significant increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite; and no significant increase in individual or cumulative public or occupational radiation exposure.

    The exempted regulation is not associated with construction, so there is no significant construction impact. The exempted regulation does not concern the source term (i.e., potential amount of radiation in an accident), nor mitigation. Therefore, there is no significant increase in the potential for, or consequences of, a radiological accident. In addition, there would be no significant impacts to biota, water resources, historic properties, cultural resources, or socioeconomic conditions in the region. The requirement for onsite property damage insurance involves surety, insurance, and indemnity matters. Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) and 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the approval of this exemption request.

    IV. Conclusions

    Accordingly, the Commission has determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12(a), the exemption is authorized by law, will not present an undue risk to the public health and safety, and is consistent with the common defense and security. Also, special circumstances are present. Therefore, the Commission hereby grants LS an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1), to permit the licensee to reduce its onsite property damage insurance coverage to a level of $50 million.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26th day of July 2018.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    John R. Tappert, Director, Division of Decommissioning, Uranium Recovery, and Waste Programs, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16393 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC-2018-0156] Information Collection: NRC Form 748, National Source Tracking Transaction Report AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Renewal of existing information collection; request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) invites public comment on the renewal of Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval for an existing collection of information. The information collection is entitled, “NRC Form 748, National Source Tracking Transaction Report.”

    DATES:

    Submit comments by October 1, 2018. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the Commission is able to ensure consideration only for comments received on or before this date.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0156. Address questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301-287-9127; email: [email protected] For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

    Mail comments to: David Cullison, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Mail Stop: T-2 F43, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

    For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting comments, see “Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments” in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David Cullison, Office of the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-2084; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0156 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0156. A copy of the collection of information and related instructions may be obtained without charge by accessing Docket ID NRC-2018-0156 on this website.

    NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “ADAMS Public Documents” and then select “Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected] A copy of the collection of information and related instructions may be obtained without charge by accessing ADAMS Accession No. ML18114A723. The supporting statement is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18114A745.

    NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    NRC's Clearance Officer: A copy of the collection of information and related instructions may be obtained without charge by contacting NRC's Clearance Officer, David Cullison, Office of the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-2084; email: [email protected]

    B. Submitting Comments

    Please include Docket ID NRC-2018-0156 in the subject line of your comment submission, in order to ensure that the NRC is able to make your comment submission available to the public in this docket.

    The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information in comment submissions that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions into ADAMS, and the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove identifying or contact information.

    If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.

    II. Background

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the NRC is requesting public comment on its intention to request the OMB's approval for the information collection summarized below.

    1. The title of the information collection: NRC Form 748, National Source Tracking Transaction Report.

    2. OMB approval number: 3150-0202.

    3. Type of submission: Extension.

    4. The form number, if applicable: NRC Form 748.

    5. How often the collection is required or requested: On occasion (at completion of a transaction, and at inventory reconciliation).

    6. Who will be required or asked to respond: Licensees that manufacture, receive, transfer, disassemble, or dispose of nationally tracked sources.

    7. The estimated number of annual responses: 18,927 (13,200 online + 480 batch upload + 5,247 NRC Form 748).

    8. The estimated number of annual respondents: 1,400 (260 NRC Licensees + 1,140 Agreement State Licensees).

    9. The estimated number of hours needed annually to comply with the information collection requirement or request: 1,963.1.

    10. Abstract: In 2006, the NRC amended its regulations to implement a National Source Tracking System (NSTS) for certain sealed sources. The amendments require licensees to report certain transactions involving nationally tracked sources to the NSTS. These transactions include manufacture, transfer, receipt, disassembly, or disposal of the nationally tracked source. This information collection is mandatory and is used to populate the NSTS. National source tracking is part of a comprehensive radioactive source control program for radioactive materials of greatest concern. The NRC and Agreement States uses the information provided by licensees in the NSTS to track the life cycle of the nationally tracked source from manufacture through shipment receipt, decay, and burial. NSTS enhances the ability of NRC and Agreement States to conduct inspections and investigations, communicate information to other government agencies, and verify legitimate ownership and use of nationally tracked sources.

    III. Specific Requests for Comments

    The NRC is seeking comments that address the following questions:

    1. Is the proposed collection of information necessary for the NRC to properly perform its functions? Does the information have practical utility?

    2. Is the estimate of the burden of the information collection accurate?

    3. Is there a way to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected?

    4. How can the burden of the information collection on respondents be minimized, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology?

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26th day of July, 2018.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    David Cullison, NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16391 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC-2018-0047] Information Collection: Domestic Licensing of Source Material AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Renewal of existing information collection; request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) invites public comment on the renewal of Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval for an existing collection of information. The information collection is entitled, “Domestic Licensing of Source Material.”

    DATES:

    Submit comments by October 1, 2018. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the Commission is able to ensure consideration only for comments received on or before this date.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0047. Address questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301-287-9127; email: [email protected] For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

    Mail comments to: David Cullison, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Mail Stop: T-5 F53, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

    For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting comments, see “Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments” in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David Cullison, Office of the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-2084; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0047 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0047.

    NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “ADAMS Public Documents” and then select “Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected] The supporting statement and burden spreadsheet are available in ADAMS under Accession Nos. ML18136A682 and ML18136A688.

    NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    NRC's Clearance Officer: A copy of the collection of information and related instructions may be obtained without charge by contacting the NRC's Clearance Officer, David Cullison, Office of the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-2084; email: [email protected]

    B. Submitting Comments

    The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information in comment submissions that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. All comment submissions are posted at http://www.regulations.gov and entered into ADAMS. Comment submissions are not routinely edited to remove identifying or contact information.

    If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the OMB, 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 comment submissions are not routinely edited to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.

    II. Background

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the NRC is requesting public comment on its intention to request the OMB's approval for the information collection summarized below.

    1. The title of the information collection: 10 CFR part 40, “Domestic Licensing of Source Material.”

    2. OMB approval number: 3150-0020.

    3. Type of submission: Revision.

    4. The form number, if applicable: Not applicable.

    5. How often the collection is required or requested: Reports required under 10 CFR part 40 collected and evaluated on a continuing basis as events occur. There is a one-time submittal of information to receive a license. Renewal applications need to be submitted every 15 to 40 years. Information in previous applications may be referenced without being resubmitted. In addition, recordkeeping must be performed on an on-going basis.

    6. Who will be required or asked to respond: Applicants for and holders of NRC licenses authorizing the receipt, possession, use, or transfer of radioactive source material.

    7. The estimated number of annual responses: 1,390 (750 reporting responses + 6 third party disclosure responses + 634 recordkeepers).

    8. The estimated number of annual respondents: 634.

    9. The estimated number of hours needed annually to comply with the information collection requirement or request: 16,928 (11,366 reporting + 5,544 recordkeeping + 18 third party disclosure).

    10. Abstract: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulations in 10 CFR part 40 establish procedures and criteria for the issuance of licenses to receive title to, receive, possess, use, transfer, or deliver source and byproduct material. The application, reporting, recordkeeping, and third party notification requirements are necessary to permit the NRC to make a determination as to whether the possession, use, and transfer of source and byproduct material is in conformance with the Commission's regulations for protection of public health and safety.

    III. Specific Requests for Comments

    The NRC is seeking comments that address the following questions:

    1. Is the proposed collection of information necessary for the NRC to properly perform its functions? Does the information have practical utility?

    2. Is the estimate of the burden of the information collection accurate?

    3. Is there a way to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected?

    4. How can the burden of the information collection on respondents be minimized, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology?

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of July 2018.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    David Cullison, NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16428 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-83713; File No. SR-MSRB-2018-06] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend MSRB Rule A-13 to Temporarily Reduce the Rate of Assessment for the MSRB's Underwriting, Transaction and Technology Fees on Brokers, Dealers and Municipal Securities Dealers July 26, 2018.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act” or “Exchange Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on July 23, 2018 the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (the “MSRB” or “Board”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the MSRB. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The MSRB filed with the Commission a proposed rule change to amend MSRB Rule A-13 to temporarily reduce the rate of assessment for the MSRB's underwriting, transaction and technology fees on brokers, dealers and municipal securities dealers (“dealers”) with respect to assessible activity that occurs during the months of October, November and December 2018 (the “proposed rule change”). The MSRB has designated the proposed rule change for immediate effectiveness.

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the MSRB's website at www.msrb.org/Rules-and-Interpretations/SEC-Filings/2018-Filings.aspx, at the MSRB's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the MSRB included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The MSRB has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

    A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose

    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to temporarily reduce the rate of assessment for the MSRB's underwriting, transaction and technology fees for dealers under Rule A-13, with respect to assessible activity that occurs during the months of October, November and December 2018. The proposed rule change is designed to reduce, in a carefully considered and strategic manner, excess MSRB reserves in a way that achieves a fair and equitable balance of fees across regulated entities.

    The MSRB discharges its statutory mandate under the Exchange Act through the establishment of rules for dealers and municipal advisors (together with dealers, “regulated entities”); the collection and dissemination of market information; and market leadership, outreach and education. As a self-regulatory organization, the MSRB must maintain sufficient reserves to discharge its responsibilities and operate without interruption, even in an economic downturn. Reserves are necessary to mitigate fluctuations in the MSRB's revenue stream, which is primarily market-driven, and provide a backstop for funding services essential to the efficiency of the market. However, as current reserves exceed the target thresholds that have been established by its Board of Directors, the MSRB is now seeking to temporarily reduce its three largest sources of revenue, which collectively, make up approximately 80% of the MSRB's FY 2018 budgeted revenue. The proposed rule change is projected to reduce the MSRB's excess reserves by approximately $2.6 million and will help align reserve levels with target levels.

    Pursuant to Rule A-13, each dealer must pay to the Board underwriting, transaction and technology fees based upon the rates specified in that rule. The proposed rule change would add a new section (h) setting forth revised temporary assessment rates for these three types of assessments, generally reducing by one-third the fees for activity that occurs during the months of October, November and December 2018. New Rule A-13(h)(i) would provide that the underwriting assessment for certain primary offerings for this time period would be .00185% of the par value ($0.0185 per $1,000), a reduction from .00275% of the par value ($.0275 per $1,000). New Rule A-13(h)(ii) would provide that the transaction assessment would be .00067% of the par value ($0.0067 per $1,000), a reduction from .001% ($.01 per $1,000). And, new Rule A-13(h)(iii) would provide that the technology assessment would be $0.67 per transaction (a reduction from $1.00 per transaction). Rates of assessment would revert to current levels effective January 1, 2019.

    Importantly, the temporary reduced rates are for activity that occurs during this three-month period. Dealers are typically billed for these fees after the relevant month end. Specifically, the underwriting fee is billed immediately after the respective month end, while the transaction and technology fees are billed thirty days in arrears.

    Financial Reserves and the Board's Holistic Review of MSRB Fees

    In 2010, after several years of heavy investment in the technological infrastructure needed to launch the MSRB's Electronic Municipal Market Access (EMMA®) website, the MSRB's financial reserve levels had dropped below the target of 12 months of operating expenses excluding depreciation expense, plus three-times annual capital needs. As a result, replenishing the MSRB's reserves became a priority. The following year, the MSRB increased the transaction fee under Rule A-13 and began assessing a new technology fee for dealers under the same rule.3 By 2014, revenue from the technology fee had generated sufficient resources to stabilize the technology reserve and allowed the MSRB to rebate $3.6 million in technology fees to eligible dealers. The Board's technology fee rebate decision and analysis of reserve levels prompted it in 2015 to conduct a holistic review of fees from dealer assessments, municipal advisors and other sources to determine whether further changes to the funding structure were warranted.

    3See Release No. 34-63621 (Dec. 29, 2010), 76 FR 604 (Jan. 5, 2011) (File No. SR-MSRB-2010-10).

    The Board evaluated the assessment of MSRB fees on regulated entities with the goal of better aligning revenue sources with operating expenses and all capital needs. The Board strives to diversify funding sources among regulated entities and other entities that fund MSRB services in a manner that ensures long-term sustainability, while continuing to strike an equitable balance in fees among regulated entities and a fair allocation of the cost of operating and administering the MSRB, including regulatory activities, systems development and operational activities. The Board, as it has historically, strives to continually refine its fee structure to ensure it is balanced and fair and provides for reasonable cost allocation.

    The first outcome of the holistic review was to substantially reduce (by 8.3%) the fee assessed on municipal securities underwriters. At the same time, the MSRB raised initial registration fees (which had not been adjusted since 1975) and annual fees (which had not been adjusted since 2009)—fees that are paid by all regulated entities—to better align with the cost of administering registrants and ensure that all registrants more fairly contributed to defraying the costs and expenses of operating and administering the MSRB. With the extension of the MSRB's jurisdiction to regulate municipal advisors, this class of regulated entity began contributing to the cost of MSRB regulation in 2014.4 To further the objective of appropriately and equitably assessing fees across all regulated activities, in 2018, the MSRB introduced a new fee on underwriters of 529 plans, as underwriters to 529 plans had not previously paid a fee in this capacity.5

    4See Release No. 34-72019 (Apr. 25, 2014), 79 FR 24798 (May 1, 2014) (File No. SR-MSRB-2014-03).

    5See Release No. 34-81264 (Jul 31, 2017), 82 FR 36472 (Aug. 4, 2017) (File No. SR-MSRB-2017-05).

    The current fees assessed on regulated entities are:

    1. Municipal advisor professional fee (Rule A-11). $500 for each person associated with the municipal advisor who is qualified as a municipal advisor representative in accordance with Rule G-3 and for whom the municipal advisor has on file with the SEC a Form MA-I as of January 31 of each year;

    2. Initial registration fee (Rule A-12). $1,000 one-time registration fee to be paid by each dealer to register with the MSRB before engaging in municipal securities activities and by each municipal advisor to register with the MSRB before engaging in municipal advisory activities;

    3. Annual registration fee (Rule A-12). $1,000 annual fee to be paid by each dealer and municipal advisor registered with the MSRB;

    4. Late fee (Rule A-11 and Rule A-12). $25 monthly late fee and a late fee on the overdue balance (computed according to the prime rate) until paid on balances not paid within 30 days of the invoice date by the dealer or municipal advisor;

    5. Underwriting fee (Rule A-13). $.0275 per $1,000 of the par value paid by a dealer, on all municipal securities purchased from an issuer by or through such dealer, whether acting as principal or agent as part of a primary offering; and in the case of an underwriter (as defined in Rule G-45) of a primary offering of certain municipal fund securities, $.005 per $1,000 of the total aggregate assets for the reporting period;

    6. Transaction fee (Rule A-13). .001% ($.01 per $1,000) of the total par value to be paid by a dealer, except in limited circumstances, for inter-dealer sales and customer sales reported to the MSRB pursuant to Rule G-14(b), on transaction reporting requirements;

    7. Technology fee (Rule A-13). $1.00 paid by a dealer per transaction for each inter-dealer sale and for each sale to customers reported to the MSRB pursuant to Rule G-14(b); and

    8. Examination fee (Rule A-16). $150 test development fee assessed per candidate for each MSRB examination.6

    6 In addition, the MSRB charges data subscription service fees for subscribers, including dealers and municipal advisors, seeking direct electronic delivery of municipal trade data and disclosure documents associated with municipal bond issues. However, this information is available without direct electronic delivery on the EMMA website without charge.

    Notably, while all regulated entities contribute to the MSRB's revenue base, the three fees that are the subject of the proposed rule change (underwriting, transaction and technology fees) constitute approximately 80% of the MSRB's FY 2018 budgeted revenue. As the most significant contributors to MSRB funding, as well as being market based and historically contributing more than budgeted, these three fees are the primary drivers for the excess reserves.7 While the fees generated from municipal advisors contribute to the MSRB's budget, the fees charged for this newly regulated category of professionals remain relatively modest and do not yet meet target revenues.8 Accordingly, the Board determined that these three fees exclusively should be temporarily reduced for the designated period.

    7 Reserves also grew due to fine revenue, a new revenue source first provided in 2010 under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. See 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(c)(9).

    8See Release No. 34-81841 (Oct. 10, 2017), 82 FR 48135, 48138 (Oct. 16, 2017) (File No. SR-MSRB-2017-07) (noting that the target revenue to be generated from the municipal advisor fee under Rule A-11 was approximately $2 million, or approximately 5% of the total MSRB revenues). At present, the municipal advisor professional fee generates approximately $1.5 million, or 4% of the MSRB's Fiscal Year 2018 budgeted revenues.

    Since the initiation of the Board's holistic review of fees, MSRB reserves continued to grow due to strong revenue results compared to budget, as well as expense savings, and bolstered reserve levels to the point where another rebate was warranted in 2016. That year, the MSRB rebated $5.5 million of excess reserves to dealers who were assessed underwriting, transaction and technology fees during the first nine months of the fiscal year. In total, $9.1 million was returned to dealers in fee rebates since 2014. However, the fee rebates were not without their operational challenges. Industry feedback suggested that underwriting fee rebates can be problematic due to inherent complications of processing and potentially redistributing pro rata shares to syndicate members. Moreover, the MSRB believes that the approach taken in the proposed rule change (i.e., a temporary reduction in dealer fees) would be fairer than another alternative approach, such as a fee holiday. For a fee holiday, the MSRB would forego charging fees for one month—but, because of the difficulties in selecting a single month that is representative of dealer activity for all dealers subject to the relevant fees, the MSRB believes that a temporary fee reduction that occurs over the course of several months is more likely to lead to a fair and equitable fee reduction across dealers. Accordingly, the Board has determined that a temporary three-month fee reduction, rather than a fee rebate or fee holiday, is a preferable mode of reducing its reserves.

    The Board strives to be fiscally responsible. Since approximately 80% of the Board's revenue sources are market based, which is inherently unpredictable and largely has exceeded budget, and the Board has a historical track record of managing expenses to below budget, reserves continue to grow. The Board seeks to strike the right balance in fee assessments to maintain sufficient reserves to ensure fiscal sustainability, while providing relief to regulated entities that have contributed to the excess reserves position. The temporary three-month fee reduction continues these ongoing efforts.

    2. Statutory Basis

    The MSRB believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 15B(b)(2)(J) of the Act 9 which states that the MSRB's rules shall:

    9 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(2)(J).

    provide that each municipal securities broker, municipal securities dealer, and municipal advisor shall pay to the Board such reasonable fees and charges as may be necessary or appropriate to defray the costs and expenses of operating and administering the Board. Such rules shall specify the amount of such fees and charges, which may include charges for failure to submit to the Board, or to any information system operated by the Board, within the prescribed timeframes, any items of information or documents required to be submitted under any rule issued by the Board.

    The MSRB believes that its rules provide for reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among regulated entities. The MSRB believes that the proposed rule change is necessary and appropriate to fund the operation and administration of the Board and satisfies the requirements of Section 15B(b)(2)(J),10 achieving a more equitable balance of fees among regulated entities and a fairer allocation of the expenses of the regulatory activities, system development, and operational activities undertaken by the MSRB because it temporarily decreases fees for the regulated entities that financially contribute the greatest to the cost of MSRB activities.

    10Id.

    As described above, current reserve levels exceed targets, but looking forward to FY 2020, the MSRB's pro formas project reserves to fall modestly below targeted levels with the temporary fee reduction. As a result, the MSRB believes that it is preferable to temporarily reduce fees rather than take an alternative approach, such as a permanent fee reduction. Also, the MSRB believes a temporary fee reduction is preferable to a fee rebate because it would be operationally easier for dealers as dealers would be able to incorporate temporarily reduced fee rates into their business processes in advance rather than receive a rebate associated with past activity that may need to be redistributed through or across organizations. Finally, the MSRB believes that the proposed rule change would achieve a more equitable balance among regulated entities and a fairer allocation of the MSRB's expenses because the three fees that are the subject of the proposed rule change, representing approximately 80% of the MSRB's FY 2018 revenue budget, have contributed most to funding operations of the MSRB and concurrently contributed the most to the current reserve levels.

    While the MSRB has progressively budgeted for municipal advisor fees to defray a greater portion of the cost of the MSRB's municipal advisor-related activity,11 municipal advisor fees have comprised a very small portion of the MSRB's revenues and have not contributed to the MSRB's excess reserves position. For these same reasons, the beneficiaries of the proposed rule change are generally the same group of regulated entities that received the fee rebates in 2014 and 2016, as described above.

    11See supra n. 8.

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    Section 15B(b)(2)(C) of the Act 12 requires that MSRB rules not be designed to impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

    12 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(2)(C).

    The Board's policy on the use of economic analysis limits its applications regarding those rules for which the Board seeks immediate effectiveness.13 However, an internal analysis is still conducted to gauge the economic impact, with an emphasis on the burden on competition involving regulated entities.

    13 The scope of the Board's policy on the use of economic analysis in rulemaking provides that:

    [t]his Policy addresses rulemaking activities of the MSRB that culminate, or are expected to culminate, in a filing of a proposed rule change with the SEC under Section 19(b) of the Exchange Act, other than a proposed rule change that the MSRB reasonably believes would qualify for immediate effectiveness under Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Exchange Act if filed as such or as otherwise provided under the exception process of this Policy.

    Policy on the Use of Economic Analysis in MSRB Rulemaking, available at http://msrb.org/Rules-and-Interpretations/Economic-Analysis-Policy.aspx. For those rule changes which the MSRB seeks immediate effectiveness, the MSRB usually focuses exclusively its examination on the burden of competition on regulated entities.

    In this regard, the Board believes the proposed rule change is necessary and appropriate to promote fairness in funding the operation and administration of the Board and would achieve a more equitable balance among regulated entities and a more balanced allocation of the expenses of the regulatory activities, system development, and operational activities undertaken by the MSRB. Because the three fees that are the subject of the proposed rule change (underwriting, transaction and technology fees) are the primary drivers for the MSRB's excess reserves, the Board believes that it is appropriate to temporarily reduce these fees for the designated period.

    The MSRB does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as it would temporarily decrease by the same percentage the underwriting, transaction and technology fees for all dealers subject to these fees.

    The MSRB believes that the proposed rule change would not impose an unnecessary or inappropriate regulatory burden on small regulated entities, as smaller dealers would benefit from the temporary fee reduction in the same proportion as larger dealers in relation to the assessible activity during the relevant three-month period.

    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

    The foregoing proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 14 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)15 thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

    14 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).

    15 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).

    IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Comments

    • Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

    Send an email to [email protected] Please include File Number SR-MSRB-2018-06 on the subject line.

    Paper Comments

    • Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-MSRB-2018-06. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the MSRB. All comments received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-MSRB-2018-06 and should be submitted on or before August 22, 2018.

    For the Commission, pursuant to delegated authority.16

    16 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Robert W. Errett, Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16419 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-83712; File No. SR-DTC-2018-004] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Depository Trust Company; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Make Clarifying Changes and Updates to the DTC Underwriting Service Guide July 26, 2018.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on July 20, 2018, The Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and III below, which Items have been prepared by the clearing agency. DTC filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(4) thereunder.4 The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).

    4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(4).

    I. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The proposed rule change of DTC 5 consists of modifications to the DTC Underwriting Service Guide (“Underwriting Guide”) 6 to (i) promote consistency with respect to processes and requirements described in other Procedures that are related to those set forth in the Underwriting Guide, (ii) make clarifying and technical changes and (iii) provide enhanced readability and transparency for users of DTC's underwriting service (“Underwriting Service”), as described below.

    5 Capitalized terms not defined herein are defined in the Rules, By-Laws and Organization Certificate of DTC (the “Rules”), available at www.dtcc.com/~/media/Files/Downloads/legal/rules/dtc_rules.pdf, and the DTC Operational Arrangements for Securities to Become and Remain Eligible for DTC Services (“OA”), available at http://www.dtcc.com/~/media/Files/Downloads/legal/issue-eligibility/eligibility/operational-arrangements.pdf.

    6Available at http://www.dtcc.com/~/media/Files/Downloads/legal/service-guides/Underwriting-Service-Guide.pdf. The Underwriting Guide and the OA constitute Procedures of DTC. Pursuant to the Rules, the term “Procedures” means the Procedures, service guides, and regulations of DTC adopted pursuant to Rule 27, as amended from time to time. See Rule 1, Section 1, supra note 5. DTC's Procedures are filed with the Commission. They are binding on DTC and each Participant in the same manner as they are bound by the Rules. See Rule 27, supra note 5. The OA is also binding on each Issuer and Agent of an Eligible Security. See OA at 5, supra note 5. DTC also maintains service guides that constitute Procedures relating to other services it offers, including the “Canadian-Link Service Guide,” “Custody Service Guide” (defined below as “Custody Guide”), “Deposits Service Guide,” “Distributions Service Guide,” “Redemptions Service Guide,” “Reorganizations Service Guide” and “Settlement Service Guide.” Available at http://www.dtcc.com/legal/rules-and-procedures?subsidiary=DTC&pgs=1.

    II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the clearing agency included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The clearing agency has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

    (A) Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose

    The proposed rule change consists of proposed modifications to the Underwriting Guide to (i) promote consistency with respect to processes and requirements described in other Procedures that are related to those set forth in the Underwriting Guide, (ii) make clarifying and technical changes and (iii) provide enhanced readability and transparency for users of DTC's Underwriting Service, as described below.

    Background

    Eligible Securities 7 may be introduced into DTC as new issuances (“New Issues”) through the Underwriting Service, in connection with a Participant, or a correspondent working though a Participant's Account, submitting an eligibility request.8 In addition to the process for New Issues, there are separate eligibility processes for (i) older issues (“Older Issues”), i.e., those already available in the market but not previously made eligible for deposit at DTC 9 and (ii) Eligible Securities in the MMI Program.10 Other issues of Securities may be added through corporate actions with respect to existing Eligible Securities, including events such as name changes, mergers and spinoffs, which are also reviewed for continuing eligibility.11

    7 Generally, Eligible Securities must have been issued in a transaction: (i) Registered with the Commission pursuant to the Securities Act; (ii) exempt from registration pursuant to a Securities Act exemption without transfer or ownership restrictions; or (iii) pursuant to Rule 144A, 17 CFR 230.144A, or Regulation S, 17 CFR 230.901-230.905, under the Securities Act. See OA, supra note 5 at 2-3.

    8See OA, supra note 5 at 1-2.

    9Id.

    10Id. at 3.

    11Id. at 1.

    The Underwriting Service also supports other DTC functions and services relating to the underwriting function, including the IPO Tracking system,12 eligibility processing for the DTC custody service (“Custody Service”),13 and the security holder tracking service (“Security Holder Tracking Service”).14

    12 The IPO Tracking system allows a Participant that is the lead underwriter of an issue to track certain Deliveries of equity Securities during the period known as the underwriting stabilization period (“Stabilization Period”). See Underwriting Guide, supra note 6 at 3. The Stabilization Period is the duration of time immediately after the Closing of an issue during which the lead manager of an underwriting may purchase Securities in the open market in order to stop a decline in the price of the Securities. Id. at 5.

    13See Custody Service Guide (“Custody Guide”), available at http://www.dtcc.com/~/media/Files/Downloads/legal/service-guides/Custody.pdf, at 17-18. In 2016, DTC's Custody Service Procedures were revised pursuant to a rule change (“Custody Rule Filing”) that amended the text of the Custody Guide with respect to making Securities eligible for the Custody Service. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-79252 (November 7, 2016), 81 FR 79543 (November 14, 2016) (SR-DTC-2016-011). As described more fully below, the proposed change would conform the Custody Service section of the Underwriting Guide for consistency to the provisions set forth in the Custody Rule Filing.

    14 The Security Holder Tracking Service facilitates the ability of an issuer or a third party administrator designated by the issuer to track the number of beneficial holders of an issue. See Underwriting Guide, supra note 6 at 22-23.

    The proposed rule change would make modifications to the Underwriting Guide to (i) promote consistency with respect to processes and requirements described in other Procedures that are related to those set forth in the Underwriting Guide, specifically the OA 15 and the Custody Guide,16 (ii) make clarifying and technical changes and (iii) provide enhanced readability and transparency for users of DTC's Underwriting Service, as described in the sections below. These would include (1) the modification of applicable text of the Underwriting Guide relating to (a) the section currently titled “Introduction,” (b) a section on the closing of an initial issue (“Closing”), (c) MMI Securities, (d) New Issue Eligibility, (e) Older Issues, (f) the Custody Service and (g) packaging inquires; (2) technical changes; and (3) the deletion of a section titled “Processing Inquiries,” as described below.

    15Supra note 5.

    16Supra note 13.

    Proposed Changes to the Underwriting Guide Introduction/Overview Section

    The text of the Introduction section of the Underwriting Guide contains four subsections, titled, respectively, “Overview,” “About Underwriting,” “Preparing to Use the Products,” and “Understanding Relevant Dates.” Pursuant to the proposed rule change, to enhance readability and improve the overall flow of this section, the (i) title of the section would be changed from “Introduction” to “Overview,” and (ii) subsection titles mentioned above would be deleted and the four subsections would be consolidated into one section under the new “Overview” title.

    In addition, the text of the consolidated section would be revised for enhanced clarity of the description of the Underwriting Service and overall readability for Participants.

    References to the DTC Participant Terminal System (“PTS”) and other systems that Participants may use in connection with the Underwriting Service would be deleted from this section, because, as proposed and discussed below, other sections of the Underwriting Guide would include information on systems applicable to the aspect of the Underwriting Service covered by the respective sections, obviating the necessity of including such systems-related information in the Overview.

    Also, because DTC's Securities eligibility Procedures are primarily contained in the OA, a cross-reference to, and a brief description of, the OA would be added under the Overview section to promote a more comprehensive understanding by readers with respect to the DTC requirements to make Securities eligible for DTC services. Also, to reduce repetition between the Underwriting Guide and the OA, (i) a description of eligibility criteria for Securities would be deleted from this section of the Underwriting Guide and (ii) a table of requirements and relevant dates included in the Understanding Relevant Dates subsection would be deleted and, as discussed below, would be replaced with a cross-reference in the Closing section to the requirements and dates as set forth in Exhibit B 17 of the OA.

    17See OA, supra note 5 at 60.

    Closing

    In order to provide for enhanced clarity, readability and flow of the text in the Underwriting Guide with respect to Closing processing, the proposed rule change would (i) revise text describing the function of the DTC Closing area and (ii) consolidate the Closing section into one section from two subsections that are titled “About the Product” and “How the Product Works,” respectively, and eliminate the respective titles of the subsections. The proposed rule change would also update information for Participants to contact the DTC Closing desk.

    Also, as mentioned above, to reduce repetition of the content of the Underwriting Guide versus the OA, a table of requirements and relevant dates included in the Understanding Relevant Dates subsection of the Introduction to the Underwriting Guide would be deleted and would be replaced with a cross-reference to these requirements and dates as set forth in Exhibit B 18 of the OA. The cross-reference would be positioned at the end of the Closing section as the referenced information in the OA includes key dates that must be met in relation to the closing date for an issue. In this regard, the proposed rule change would also remove a reference in the Closing section to deadlines for notifications that must be made to DTC with respect to the processing of the distribution of Securities on closing date, because the applicable timeframes are covered within the Exhibit B to the OA, cited above.

    18Id.

    MMI Program

    In order to provide enhanced clarity and readability in the Underwriting Guide with respect to Procedures for processing eligibility requests for the MMI Program, the proposed rule change would (i) revise the text of the description of the MMI Program and its eligibility process, (ii) revise information relating to systems used to access MMI Program eligibility services and include a reference to DTC's web-based underwriting application, (iii) remove a descriptive sentence relating to functionality for issuances and deliveries by an Issuing and Paying Agent (“IPA”) in the MMI Program, because it is not relevant to the eligibility process covered by the Underwriting Guide, but rather to issuances and deliveries of MMI Securities that are conducted through DTC's settlement service in accordance with the Rules 19 and the Settlement Service Guide,20 and (iv) update a reference relating to documentation that must be submitted in connection with an MMI Program eligibility request, to remove an outdated reference to an “Issuer Program Eligibility Form” signed by the IPA, and instead add a list of required program-level details which would be submitted in place of the form in an online format through the MMI Program web-based application.

    19See Rule 9(A), Rule 9(B) and Rule 9(C), supra note 5.

    20See Settlement Service Guide, available at http://www.dtcc.com/~/media/Files/Downloads/legal/service-guides/Settlement.pdf.

    New Issue Eligibility

    The provisions governing DTC's Securities eligibility processes for New Issues are primarily contained in the Rules and the OA; however the Underwriting Guide does contain text intended to provide information that enhances transparency for Participants regarding applicable Procedures.

    In order to provide enhanced clarity in the Underwriting Guide with respect to Procedures for processing eligibility requests for New Issues and promote enhanced consistency of the content of the Underwriting Guide with the provisions of the OA, the proposed rule change would (i) eliminate details in the text describing the New Issue eligibility Procedures and requirements that are repetitive or inconsistent with text contained in the OA, including with respect to (a) the documentation requirements for eligibility requests and (b) types of issues that require additional documentation or special processing, (ii) replace outdated references to the DTC website with a link to the OA for Procedures relating to eligibility and related requirements, and (iii) update references with respect to systems used for access to New Issue-related services to (a) delete references to PTS and PTS functions and (b) add a reference to UW Source, because, in accordance with the OA, UW Source is the system that Participants are required to use to access eligibility services.21

    21See OA, supra note 5 at 2.

    Older Issue Eligibility

    As mentioned above, the provisions governing DTC's Securities eligibility processes for Older Issues are primarily contained in the Rules and the OA; however the Underwriting Guide also contains information in this regard.

    In order to provide consistency of the content of the Underwriting Guide with the provisions of the OA, the proposed rule change would rename the section relating to Older Issues from “Older Issue Eligibility” to “Secondary Market (Older Issue) Eligibility” for clarity and to reflect that Older Issues are issues that are on the secondary market when they are made eligible at DTC (as opposed to New Issues that are the subject of initial offerings), and insert a link to the OA for Procedures relating to eligibility and related requirements.

    Custody Service

    In order to provide enhanced clarity and transparency in the Underwriting Guide with respect to Procedures for processing eligibility requests for the Custody Service, the proposed rule change would (i) change the Custody Service section from being a subsection of the Older Issue Eligibility section to its own section of the Underwriting Guide, because the Custody Service, while administered by the same area within DTC that administers eligibility processing for Older Issues and New Issues, is a separate function with different eligibility requirements,22 (ii) update the text for enhanced readability and consistency of content, including with respect to systems requirements, with applicable Procedures set forth in the Custody Guide,23 (iii) add a link to the Custody Guide for cross-reference purposes, and (iv) add a link to the DTCC website that provides additional information regarding the Custody Service.

    22Compare Custody Guide, supra note 13 at 11-16 (describing the Custody Service function and eligibility requirements), with OA, supra note 5 at 1-9 (describing DTC's eligibility requirements for Securities to be made eligible for DTC's book-entry services, including New Issues and Older Issues).

    23See Custody Guide, supra note 13 at 15-16. In 2016, DTC's Custody Service Procedures were revised pursuant to the Custody Rule Filing, which amended the applicable text of the Custody Guide. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-79252 (November 7, 2016), 81 FR 79543 (November 14, 2016) (SR-DTC-2016-011). The proposed change would conform the Custody Service section of the Underwriting Guide for consistency to the provisions set forth in the Custody Rule Filing.

    Packaging Inquiries

    The proposed rule change would modify the text of the section titled “Packaging Inquiries” (i) for readability, (ii) to eliminate content that is repetitive of related content in the OA section named “Possession and Inspection,” 24 (iii) to add a link to the OA for additional information and (iv) to provide an updated link to the DTC form of letter of securities possession, which must be executed by a lead underwriter in order for DTC to process a distribution of an issue by book-entry on closing date if a Security certificate has not been provided to DTC within required timeframes.25

    24See OA, supra note 5 at 15.

    25See Underwriting Guide, supra note 6 at 18-19.

    Processing Inquiries

    The proposed rule change would remove the section titled “Processing Inquiries” from the Underwriting Guide. This section contains information relating to internal processes for data entry and billing information that is not necessary to be included in a Procedure. In addition, this section refers to special forms for the processing of eligibility of retail certificates of deposit, unit investment trusts and municipal and corporate products, which forms are obsolete because eligibility requests for all Security types, other than Securities in the MMI Program, must be submitted through UW Source.26

    26See OA, supra note 5 at 1-2.

    Other Proposed Changes

    The proposed rule change would make technical changes to (i) add to the front of the Underwriting Guide a title page with DTC's name and the title “Underwriting Service Guide,” (ii) update (a) the address of DTC's internet site and (b) the copyright date of the Underwriting Guide, (iii) delete outdated contact information within the “Important Legal Information” included at the beginning of the Underwriting Guide and (iv) add a link to a user guide relating to the IPO Tracking system that is referenced in the “IPO Tracking System” section of the Underwriting Guide.

    2. Statutory Basis

    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act 27 requires that the rules of the clearing agency be designed, inter alia, to promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions. DTC believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with this provision of the Act because by amending the text of the Underwriting Guide to (i) promote consistency with respect to processes and requirements described in other Procedures that are related to those set forth in the Underwriting Guide, specifically the OA and Custody Guide, (ii) make clarifying changes, (iii) provide enhanced readability and transparency for users of DTC's Underwriting Service, and (iv) make other technical changes, the proposed rule change would provide Participants with an enhanced understanding with respect to the DTC Procedures relating to making Securities eligible for DTC services, as described above. Therefore, by providing Participants with enhanced understanding of DTC eligibility requirements and processing in this regard, and therefore facilitating their ability to request that Securities be made eligible for DTC services, DTC believes that the proposed rule change would promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions consistent with the Act.

    27 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).

    (B) Clearing Agency's Statement on Burden on Competition

    DTC does not believe that the proposed rule change would have any impact on competition. The proposed rule change would merely clarify and provide enhanced transparency with respect to the DTC Underwriting Service by amending the text of the Underwriting Guide (i) for enhanced readability, transparency and flow of content, (ii) to update (a) details on existing processes and (b) contact information, (iii) for enhanced consistency with respect to processes and requirements described in other Procedures that are related to those set forth in the Underwriting Guide, specifically the OA and Custody Guide and (iv) to make other technical changes, as described above, which amendments would not significantly affect the rights and obligations of users of DTC's services, and would not disproportionally impact any users.

    (C) Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    DTC has not received or solicited any written comments relating to this proposal. DTC will notify the Commission of any written comments received by DTC.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change, and Timing for Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 28 and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.29 At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

    28 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).

    29 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).

    IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Comments

    • Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

    • Send an email to [email protected] Please include File Number SR-DTC-2018-004 on the subject line.

    Paper Comments

    • Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-DTC-2018-004. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of DTC and on DTCC's website (http://dtcc.com/legal/sec-rule-filings.aspx). All comments received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-DTC-2018-004 and should be submitted on or before August 22, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.30

    30 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Robert W. Errett, Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16418 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-83722; File No. SR-FINRA-2018-023] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.; Notice of Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on a Proposed Rule Change Relating to ATS Reporting of Transactions to TRACE in U.S. Treasury Securities July 26, 2018.

    On June 5, 2018, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (“FINRA”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 a proposed rule change to amend FINRA Rule 6730 to require certain alternative trading systems (“ATSs”) that report transactions in U.S. Treasury Securities to the Transaction Reporting and Compliance Engine (“TRACE”) to identify non-FINRA-member subscribers on those transaction reports. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register on June 13, 2018.3 The Commission received three comments regarding the proposed rule change.4

    1 15 U.S.C.78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    3See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83393 (June 7, 2018), 83 FR 27643 (“Notice”).

    4See letter to Secretary, Commission, from Stephen John Berger, Managing Director, Government and Regulatory Policy, Citadel, dated July 5, 2018; letter to Robert W. Errett, Deputy Secretary, Commission, from Theodore Bragg, Chief Executive Officer, Execution Access, LLC, dated July 3, 2018; letter to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, from Tyler Gellasch, Executive Director, The Healthy Markets Association, dated July 5, 2018.

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act 5 provides that, within 45 days of the publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or as to which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change, disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The 45th day for this filing is July 28, 2018.

    5 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    The Commission notes that Section 19(b)(5) of the Act requires the Commission to “consult with and consider the views of the Secretary of the Treasury prior to approving a proposed rule filed by a registered securities association that primarily concerns conduct related to transactions in government securities.” 6 The Commission finds that it is appropriate to designate a longer period within which to take action on the proposed rule change in order to consider fully the comments received on the proposal and to complete the consultation process required under Section 19(b)(5). Accordingly, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,7 the Commission designates September 11, 2018, as the date by which the Commission shall either approve or disapprove, or institute proceedings to determine whether to disapprove, the proposed rule change (File No. SR-FINRA-2018-023).

    6 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(5).

    7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.8

    8 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).

    Robert W. Errett, Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16426 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-83716; File No. SR-NYSEARCA-2018-53] Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the NYSE Arca Options Fees and Charges and the NYSE Arca Equities Fees and Charges Related to Co-Location Services in Connection With a Proposed Transaction With the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. Exchange and Its Parent, CHX Holdings, Inc. July 26, 2018.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 2 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,3 notice is hereby given that, on July 16, 2018, NYSE Arca, Inc. (“Exchange” or “NYSE Arca”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 15 U.S.C. 78a.

    3 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend the NYSE Arca Options Fees and Charges (the “Options Fee Schedule”) and the NYSE Arca Equities Fees and Charges (the “Equities Fee Schedule” and, together with the Options Fee Schedule, the “Fee Schedules”) related to co-location services in connection with a proposed transaction (“Transaction”) whereby the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. (“CHX”) Exchange and its parent, CHX Holdings, Inc. (“CHX Holdings”), would become indirect subsidiaries of Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (“ICE”), the Exchange's indirect parent, and affiliates of the Exchange. The Exchange also proposes to make a non-substantive change to the Fee Schedules. The proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the 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.

    A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose

    The Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedules related to co-location 4 services in connection with the proposed Transaction whereby CHX and its parent, CHX Holdings, would become indirect subsidiaries of ICE, the Exchange's indirect parent, and affiliates of the Exchange.5 The Exchange also proposes to make a non-substantive change to the Fee Schedules.

    4 The Exchange initially filed rule changes relating to its co-location services with the Commission in 2010. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63275 (November 8, 2010), 75 FR 70048 (November 16, 2010) (SR-NYSEArca-2010-100). The Exchange operates a data center in Mahwah, New Jersey (the “data center”) from which it provides co-location services to Users.

    5 In order to effect the Transaction, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Exchange's direct parent company, NYSE Group, Inc., would merge with and into CHX Holdings, with CHX Holdings continuing as the surviving corporation. See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 83635 (July 13, 2018) (SR-CHX-2018-004), and 83303 (May 22, 2018), 83 FR 24517 (May 29, 2018) (SR-CHX-2018-004). CHX would also become an affiliate of the Exchange's affiliates the New York Stock Exchange LLC (“NYSE”), NYSE American LLC (“NYSE American”), and NYSE National, Inc. (“NYSE National” and, together, the “Affiliate SROs”).

    The Exchange proposes that the proposed rule change become operative upon the closing of the Transaction.

    General Note 4

    Pursuant to General Note 4 of the Fee Schedules, when a User 6 purchases access to the Liquidity Center Network (“LCN”) or the internet protocol (“IP”) network, the two local area networks available in the data center,7 a User receives (a) the ability to access the trading and execution systems of the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs (“Exchange Systems”), and (b) connectivity to any of the listed data products (“Included Data Products”) that it selects. The majority of the Included Data Products are proprietary feeds of the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs.8

    6 For purposes of the Exchange's co-location services, a “User” means any market participant that requests to receive co-location services directly from the Exchange. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 76010 (September 29, 2015), 80 FR 60197 (October 5, 2015) (SR-NYSEArca-2015-82). As specified in the Fee Schedules, a User that incurs co-location fees for a particular co-location service pursuant thereto would not be subject to co-location fees for the same co-location service charged by the Affiliate SROs. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 70173 (August 13, 2013), 78 FR 50459 (August 19, 2013) (SR-NYSEArca-2013-80).

    7See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79729 (January 4, 2017), 82 FR 3061 (January 10, 2017) (SR-NYSEArca-2016-172).

    8Id. Included Data Products are listed in the Fee Schedules under General Note 4.

    Upon the closing of the Transaction, CHX will be an affiliate of both the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs. Consistent with the treatment of the Exchange's and the Affiliate SROs' trading and execution systems and data products, the Exchange proposes to expand the definition of Exchange Systems to incorporate CHX's trading and execution systems, and to add CHX's data products to the table of Included Data Products. In order to make the change, the Exchange proposes to add CHX to the list of trading and execution system providers in the first sentence of the first paragraph and add CHX to the lists of affiliated entities in the first, third and fourth sentences. The proposed changes to the paragraph are as follows (additions underlined, deletions in brackets):

    EN01AU18.007

    In addition, the Exchange proposes to add CHX to the table of Included Data Products set forth in General Note 4.

    In a non-substantive change, the Exchange proposes to make the table of Included Data Products alphabetical by putting the list of NYSE American feeds before NYSE American Options. Such list currently follows NYSE Bonds.

    Connectivity to Third Party Systems and Third Party Data Feeds

    Users may obtain access to the trading and execution services of third party markets and other content service providers (“Third Party Systems”) of multiple third party markets and other content service providers for a fee.9 Users connect to Third Party Systems over the IP network. In addition, Users may obtain connectivity to data feeds from third party markets and other content service providers (“Third Party Data Feeds”) for a fee.10

    9See Securities Exchange Act Release 80310 (March 24, 2017), 82 FR 15763 (March 30, 2017) (SR-NYSEArca-2016-89).

    10See id.

    Currently, CHX is listed in the tables setting forth the Third Party Systems and Third Party Data Feeds, and Users seeking access to CHX's trading and execution services and data feeds are subject to the applicable fees. Consistent with the proposed changes to General Note 4 described above, because CHX will become an affiliate of the Exchange, the Exchange proposes to delete CHX from such tables.

    General

    As is the case with all Exchange co-location arrangements, (i) neither a User nor any of the User's customers would be permitted to submit orders directly to the Exchange unless such User or customer is a member organization, a Sponsored Participant or an agent thereof (e.g., a service bureau providing order entry services); (ii) use of the co-location services proposed herein would be completely voluntary and available to all Users on a non-discriminatory basis; 11 and (iii) a User would only incur one charge for the particular co-location service described herein, regardless of whether the User connects only to the Exchange or to the Exchange, one or more of its Affiliate SROs.12

    11 As is currently the case, Users that receive co-location services from the Exchange will not receive any means of access to the Exchange's trading and execution systems that is separate from, or superior to, that of other Users. In this regard, all orders sent to the Exchange enter the Exchange's trading and execution systems through the same order gateway, regardless of whether the sender is co-located in the data center or not. In addition, co-located Users do not receive any market data or data service product that is not available to all Users, although Users that receive co-location services normally would expect reduced latencies in sending orders to, and receiving market data from, the Exchange.

    12See 78 FR 50459, supra note 6, at 50459. The Affiliate SROs have also submitted substantially the same proposed rule change to propose the changes described herein. See SR-NYSE-2018-35, SR-NYSEAMER-2018-38, and SR-NYSENAT-2018-17.

    The proposed change is not otherwise intended to address any other issues relating to co-location services and/or related fees, and the Exchange is not aware of any problems that Users would have in complying with the proposed change.

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,13 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,14 in particular, because it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest and because it is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.

    13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    14 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    The Exchange believes that the proposed change would remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, protect investors and the public interest because upon the closing of the Transaction, CHX will be an affiliate of both the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs. Expanding the definition of Exchange Systems to incorporate CHX's trading and execution systems, adding CHX's data products to the table of Included Data Products, and removing CHX from the lists of Third Party Systems and Third Party Data Feeds would make the Fee Schedule treatment of CHX trading and execution systems and data products consistent with the treatment of the trading and execution systems and data products of the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs.

    Further, the Exchange believes that revising General Note 4 would promote just and equitable principles of trade and remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market and a national market system as it would make clear that all Users that voluntarily select to access the LCN or IP network would receive the same access to the CHX trading and execution systems and connectivity to CHX data as to those of the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs and would not be subject to a charge above and beyond the fee paid for the relevant LCN or IP network access. In addition, as with Exchange and Affiliate SRO access and connectivity, a User would not be required to use any of its bandwidth to access the CHX trading and execution system or connect to CHX data unless it wished to do so. A User only receives access to Exchange Systems and connectivity to Included Data Products that it selects, and a User can change such access or connectivity it receives at any time, subject to authorization from the relevant data provider, the Exchange, or relevant Affiliate SRO.

    The Exchange believes that the non-substantive change to put the table of Included Data Products into alphabetical order would remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, protect investors and the public interest because the amendment would clarify Exchange rules and make it easier for market participants to find Included Data Products in the table.

    The Exchange also believes that the proposed fee change is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,15 in particular, because it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members, issuers and other persons using its facilities and does not unfairly discriminate between customers, issuers, brokers or dealers.

    15 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).

    The Exchange believes that the proposed change provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members, issuers and other persons using its facilities and does not unfairly discriminate between customers, issuers, brokers or dealers, because the change would result in CHX, which will be an affiliate of the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs, being treated on the same terms and in the same manner as the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs with respect to their trading and execution systems and data products. The proposed change would result in reduced fees for Users that have access or connectivity to CHX, as it would no longer be a Third Party System or Third Party Data Feed.

    The Exchange believes that the proposed non-substantive change to put the table of Included Data Products into alphabetical order would be reasonable because the change would have no impact on pricing or services offered. Rather, the change would alleviate possible market participant confusion by making it easier to find Included Data Products in the table.

    For these reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with the Act.

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,16 the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because, in addition to the use of co-location services being completely voluntary, they are available to all Users on an equal basis (i.e., the same range of products and services are available to all Users).

    16 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).

    The Exchange believes that the proposed change would not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because the change would result in CHX, which will be an affiliate of the Exchange and Affiliate SROs, being treated on the same terms and in the same manner as the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs with respect to their trading and execution systems and data products. As a result of the proposed changes, all Users that voluntarily select to access the LCN or IP network would receive the same access to the CHX trading and execution systems and connectivity to CHX data as to those of the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs and would not be subject to a charge above and beyond the fee paid for the relevant LCN or IP network access. A User would not be required to use any of its bandwidth to access the CHX trading and execution system or connect to CHX data unless it wishes to do so. The proposed change would result in reduced fees for Users that have access or connectivity to CHX, as it would no longer be a Third Party System or Third Party Data Feed.

    The Exchange believes that the proposed non-substantive change to put the table of Included Data Products into alphabetical order would not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because the change would have no impact on pricing or the services offered. Rather, the change would alleviate possible market participant confusion by making it easier to find Included Data Products in the table.

    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 17 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.18 Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.19

    17 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).

    18 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

    19 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6) requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) 20 normally does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b4(f)(6)(iii),21 the Commission may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange requests that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal may become operative immediately upon filing. The Exchange represents that the requested wavier would ensure that immediately upon the closing of the Transaction CHX would be treated on the same terms and in the same manner as the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs with respect to their trading and execution systems and data products. The waiver would allow the Exchange to expand the definition of Exchange Systems to incorporate CHX's trading and execution systems, add CHX's data products to the table of Included Data Products, and remove CHX from the lists of Third Party Systems and Third Party Data Feeds immediately upon the closing of the Transaction. In addition, it would implement the reduced fee for Users that currently have access or connectivity to CHX immediately upon Closing. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. Accordingly, the Commission waives the 30-day operative delay and designates the proposed rule change operative upon filing.22

    20 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

    21 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).

    22 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of 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) 23 of the Act to determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved.

    23 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).

    IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Comments

    • Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

    • Send an email to [email protected] Please include File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2018-53 on the subject line.

    Paper Comments

    • Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2018-53. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2018-53 and should be submitted on or before August 22, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.24

    24 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Robert W. Errett, Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16421 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-83717; File No. SR-NYSE-2018-35] Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its Price List Related to Co-Location Services in Connection With a Proposed Transaction With the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. Exchange and Its Parent, CHX Holdings, Inc. July 26, 2018.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 2 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,3 notice is hereby given that on July 16, 2018, New York Stock Exchange LLC (“NYSE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 15 U.S.C. 78a.

    3 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend its Price List related to co-location services in connection with a proposed transaction (“Transaction”) whereby the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. (“CHX”) Exchange and its parent, CHX Holdings, Inc. (“CHX Holdings”), would become indirect subsidiaries of Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (“ICE”), the Exchange's indirect parent, and affiliates of the Exchange. The Exchange also proposes to make a non-substantive change to the Price List. The proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the 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.

    A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose

    The Exchange proposes to amend its Price List related to co-location 4 services in connection with the proposed Transaction whereby CHX and its parent, CHX Holdings, would become indirect subsidiaries of ICE, the Exchange's indirect parent, and affiliates of the Exchange.5 The Exchange also proposes to make a non-substantive change to the Price List.

    4 The Exchange initially filed rule changes relating to its co-location services with the Commission in 2010. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62960 (September 21, 2010), 75 FR 59310 (September 27, 2010) (SR-NYSE-2010-56). The Exchange operates a data center in Mahwah, New Jersey (the “data center”) from which it provides co-location services to Users.

    5 In order to effect the Transaction, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Exchange's direct parent company, NYSE Group, Inc., would merge with and into CHX Holdings, with CHX Holdings continuing as the surviving corporation. See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 83635 (July 13, 2018) (SR-CHX-2018-004), and 83303 (May 22, 2018), 83 FR 24517 (May 29, 2018) (SR-CHX-2018-004). CHX would also become an affiliate of the Exchange's affiliates NYSE American LLC (“NYSE American”), NYSE Arca, Inc. (“NYSE Arca”), and NYSE National, Inc. (“NYSE National” and, together, the “Affiliate SROs”).

    The Exchange proposes that the proposed rule change become operative upon the closing of the Transaction.

    General Note 4

    Pursuant to General Note 4 of the Price List, when a User 6 purchases access to the Liquidity Center Network (“LCN”) or the internet protocol (“IP”) network, the two local area networks available in the data center,7 a User receives (a) the ability to access the trading and execution systems of the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs (“Exchange Systems”), and (b) connectivity to any of the listed data products (“Included Data Products”) that it selects. The majority of the Included Data Products are proprietary feeds of the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs.8

    6 For purposes of the Exchange's co-location services, a “User” means any market participant that requests to receive co-location services directly from the Exchange. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 76008 (September 29, 2015), 80 FR 60190 (October 5, 2015) (SR-NYSE-2015-40). As specified in the Price List, a User that incurs co-location fees for a particular co-location service pursuant thereto would not be subject to co-location fees for the same co-location service charged by the Affiliate SROs. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 70206 (August 15, 2013), 78 FR 51765 (August 21, 2013) (SR-NYSE-2013-59).

    7See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79730 (January 4, 2017), 82 FR 3045 (January 10, 2017) (SR-NYSE-2016-92).

    8Id. Included Data Products are listed in the Price List under General Note 4.

    Upon the closing of the Transaction, CHX will be an affiliate of both the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs. Consistent with the treatment of the Exchange's and the Affiliate SROs' trading and execution systems and data products, the Exchange proposes to expand the definition of Exchange Systems to incorporate CHX's trading and execution systems, and to add CHX's data products to the table of Included Data Products. In order to make the change, the Exchange proposes to add CHX to the list of trading and execution system providers in the first sentence of the first paragraph and add CHX to the lists of affiliated entities in the first, third and fourth sentences. The proposed changes to the paragraph are as follows (additions underlined, deletions in brackets):

    BILLING CODE 8011-01-P EN01AU18.008 BILLING CODE 8011-01-C

    In addition, the Exchange proposes to add CHX to the table of Included Data Products set forth in General Note 4.

    In a non-substantive change, the Exchange proposes to make the table of Included Data Products alphabetical by putting the list of NYSE American feeds before NYSE American Options. Such list currently follows NYSE Bonds.

    Connectivity to Third Party Systems and Third Party Data Feeds

    Users may obtain access to the trading and execution services of third party markets and other content service providers (“Third Party Systems”) of multiple third party markets and other content service providers for a fee.9 Users connect to Third Party Systems over the IP network. In addition, Users may obtain connectivity to data feeds from third party markets and other content service providers (“Third Party Data Feeds”) for a fee.10

    9See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80311 (March 24, 2017), 82 FR 15741 (March 30, 2017) (SR-NYSE-2016-45).

    10See id.

    Currently, CHX is listed in the tables setting forth the Third Party Systems and Third Party Data Feeds, and Users seeking access to CHX's trading and execution services and data feeds are subject to the applicable fees. Consistent with the proposed changes to General Note 4 described above, because CHX will become an affiliate of the Exchange, the Exchange proposes to delete CHX from such tables.

    General

    As is the case with all Exchange co-location arrangements, (i) neither a User nor any of the User's customers would be permitted to submit orders directly to the Exchange unless such User or customer is a member organization, a Sponsored Participant or an agent thereof (e.g., a service bureau providing order entry services); (ii) use of the co-location services proposed herein would be completely voluntary and available to all Users on a non-discriminatory basis; 11 and (iii) a User would only incur one charge for the particular co-location service described herein, regardless of whether the User connects only to the Exchange or to the Exchange, one or more of its Affiliate SROs.12

    11 As is currently the case, Users that receive co-location services from the Exchange will not receive any means of access to the Exchange's trading and execution systems that is separate from, or superior to, that of other Users. In this regard, all orders sent to the Exchange enter the Exchange's trading and execution systems through the same order gateway, regardless of whether the sender is co-located in the data center or not. In addition, co-located Users do not receive any market data or data service product that is not available to all Users, although Users that receive co-location services normally would expect reduced latencies in sending orders to, and receiving market data from, the Exchange.

    12See 78 FR 51765, supra note 6, at 51766. The Affiliate SROs have also submitted substantially the same proposed rule change to propose the changes described herein. See SR-NYSEAMER-2018-38, SR-NYSEArca-2018-53, and SR-NYSENAT-2018-17.

    The proposed change is not otherwise intended to address any other issues relating to co-location services and/or related fees, and the Exchange is not aware of any problems that Users would have in complying with the proposed change.

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,13 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,14 in particular, because it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest and because it is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.

    13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    14 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    The Exchange believes that the proposed change would remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, protect investors and the public interest because upon the closing of the Transaction, CHX will be an affiliate of both the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs. Expanding the definition of Exchange Systems to incorporate CHX's trading and execution systems, adding CHX's data products to the table of Included Data Products, and removing CHX from the lists of Third Party Systems and Third Party Data Feeds would make the Price List treatment of CHX trading and execution systems and data products consistent with the treatment of the trading and execution systems and data products of the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs.

    Further, the Exchange believes that revising General Note 4 would promote just and equitable principles of trade and remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market and a national market system as it would make clear that all Users that voluntarily select to access the LCN or IP network would receive the same access to the CHX trading and execution systems and connectivity to CHX data as to those of the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs and would not be subject to a charge above and beyond the fee paid for the relevant LCN or IP network access. In addition, as with Exchange and Affiliate SRO access and connectivity, a User would not be required to use any of its bandwidth to access the CHX trading and execution system or connect to CHX data unless it wished to do so. A User only receives access to Exchange Systems and connectivity to Included Data Products that it selects, and a User can change such access or connectivity it receives at any time, subject to authorization from the relevant data provider, the Exchange, or relevant Affiliate SRO.

    The Exchange believes that the non-substantive change to put the table of Included Data Products into alphabetical order would remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, protect investors and the public interest because the amendment would clarify Exchange rules and make it easier for market participants to find Included Data Products in the table.

    The Exchange also believes that the proposed fee change is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,15 in particular, because it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members, issuers and other persons using its facilities and does not unfairly discriminate between customers, issuers, brokers or dealers.

    15 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).

    The Exchange believes that the proposed change provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members, issuers and other persons using its facilities and does not unfairly discriminate between customers, issuers, brokers or dealers, because the change would result in CHX, which will be an affiliate of the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs, being treated on the same terms and in the same manner as the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs with respect to their trading and execution systems and data products. The proposed change would result in reduced fees for Users that have access or connectivity to CHX, as it would no longer be a Third Party System or Third Party Data Feed.

    The Exchange believes that the proposed non-substantive change to put the table of Included Data Products into alphabetical order would be reasonable because the change would have no impact on pricing or services offered. Rather, the change would alleviate possible market participant confusion by making it easier to find Included Data Products in the table.

    For these reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with the Act.

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,16 the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because, in addition to the use of co-location services being completely voluntary, they are available to all Users on an equal basis (i.e., the same range of products and services are available to all Users).

    16 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).

    The Exchange believes that the proposed change would not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because the change would result in CHX, which will be an affiliate of the Exchange and Affiliate SROs, being treated on the same terms and in the same manner as the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs with respect to their trading and execution systems and data products. As a result of the proposed changes, all Users that voluntarily select to access the LCN or IP network would receive the same access to the CHX trading and execution systems and connectivity to CHX data as to those of the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs and would not be subject to a charge above and beyond the fee paid for the relevant LCN or IP network access. A User would not be required to use any of its bandwidth to access the CHX trading and execution system or connect to CHX data unless it wishes to do so. The proposed change would result in reduced fees for Users that have access or connectivity to CHX, as it would no longer be a Third Party System or Third Party Data Feed.

    The Exchange believes that the proposed non-substantive change to put the table of Included Data Products into alphabetical order would not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because the change would have no impact on pricing or the services offered. Rather, the change would alleviate possible market participant confusion by making it easier to find Included Data Products in the table.

    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 17 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.18 Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.19

    17 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).

    18 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

    19 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6) requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) 20 normally does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b4(f)(6)(iii),21 the Commission may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange requests that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal may become operative immediately upon filing. The Exchange represents that the requested wavier would ensure that immediately upon the closing of the Transaction CHX would be treated on the same terms and in the same manner as the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs with respect to their trading and execution systems and data products. The waiver would allow the Exchange to expand the definition of Exchange Systems to incorporate CHX's trading and execution systems, add CHX's data products to the table of Included Data Products, and remove CHX from the lists of Third Party Systems and Third Party Data Feeds immediately upon the closing of the Transaction. In addition, it would implement the reduced fee for Users that currently have access or connectivity to CHX immediately upon Closing. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. Accordingly, the Commission waives the 30-day operative delay and designates the proposed rule change operative upon filing.22

    20 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

    21 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).

    22 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of 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) 23 of the Act to determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved.

    23 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).

    IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Comments

    • Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

    • Send an email to [email protected] Please include File Number SR-NYSE-2018-35 on the subject line.

    Paper Comments

    • Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2018-35. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2018-35 and should be submitted on or before August 22, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.24

    24 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Robert W. Errett, Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16422 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-83715; File No. SR-NYSENAT-2018-17] Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE National, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its Schedule of Fees and Rebates Related to Co-Location Services in Connection With a Proposed Transaction With the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. Exchange and Its Parent, CHX Holdings, Inc. July 26, 2018.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 2 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,3 notice is hereby given that on July 16, 2018, NYSE National, Inc. (“Exchange” or “NYSE National”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 15 U.S.C. 78a.

    3 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend its Schedule of Fees and Rebates (the “Price List”) related to co-location services in connection with a proposed transaction (“Transaction”) whereby the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. (“CHX”) Exchange and its parent, CHX Holdings, Inc. (“CHX Holdings”), would become indirect subsidiaries of Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (“ICE”), the Exchange's indirect parent, and affiliates of the Exchange. The Exchange also proposes to make a non-substantive change to the Price List. The proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the 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.

    A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose

    The Exchange proposes to amend its Price List related to co-location 4 services in connection with the proposed Transaction whereby CHX and its parent, CHX Holdings, would become indirect subsidiaries of ICE, the Exchange's indirect parent, and affiliates of the Exchange.5 The Exchange also proposes to make a non-substantive change to the Price List.

    4 The Exchange initially filed rule changes relating to its co-location services with the Commission in 2018. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83351 (May 31, 2018), 83 FR 26314 (June 6, 2018) (SR-NYSENAT-2018-07) (“NYSE National Filing”). The Exchange operates a data center in Mahwah, New Jersey (the “data center”) from which it provides co-location services to Users.

    5 In order to effect the Transaction, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Exchange's direct parent company, NYSE Group, Inc., would merge with and into CHX Holdings, with CHX Holdings continuing as the surviving corporation. See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 83635 (July 13, 2018) (SR-CHX-2018-004), and 83303 (May 22, 2018), 83 FR 24517 (May 29, 2018) (SR-CHX-2018-004). CHX would also become an affiliate of the Exchange's affiliates the New York Stock Exchange LLC (“NYSE”), NYSE American LLC (“NYSE American”), and NYSE Arca, Inc. (“NYSE Arca” and, together, the “Affiliate SROs”).

    The Exchange proposes that the proposed rule change become operative upon the closing of the Transaction.

    General Note 4

    Pursuant to General Note 4 of the Price List, when a User 6 purchases access to the Liquidity Center Network (“LCN”) or the internet protocol (“IP”) network, the two local area networks available in the data center,7 a User receives (a) the ability to access the trading and execution systems of the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs (“Exchange Systems”), and (b) connectivity to any of the listed data products (“Included Data Products”) that it selects. The majority of the Included Data Products are proprietary feeds of the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs.8

    6 For purposes of the Exchange's co-location services, a “User” means any market participant that requests to receive co-location services directly from the Exchange. See NYSE National Filing, supra note 4, note 9. As specified in the Price List, a User that incurs co-location fees for a particular co-location service pursuant thereto would not be subject to co-location fees for the same co-location service charged by the Affiliate SROs. See NYSE National Filing, supra note 4, at 26314.

    7See NYSE National Filing, supra note 4, at 26315-26315.

    8Id. Included Data Products are listed in the Price List under General Note 4.

    Upon the closing of the Transaction, CHX will be an affiliate of both the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs. Consistent with the treatment of the Exchange's and the Affiliate SROs' trading and execution systems and data products, the Exchange proposes to expand the definition of Exchange Systems to incorporate CHX's trading and execution systems, and to add CHX's data products to the table of Included Data Products. In order to make the change, the Exchange proposes to add CHX to the list of trading and execution system providers in the first sentence of the first paragraph and add CHX to the lists of affiliated entities in the first, third and fourth sentences. The proposed changes to the paragraph are as follows (additions underlined, deletions in brackets):

    BILLING CODE 8011-01-P EN01AU18.006 BILLING CODE 8011-01-C

    In addition, the Exchange proposes to add CHX to the table of Included Data Products set forth in General Note 4.

    In a non-substantive change, the Exchange proposes to make the table of Included Data Products alphabetical by putting the list of NYSE American feeds before NYSE American Options. Such list currently follows NYSE Bonds.

    Connectivity to Third Party Systems and Third Party Data Feeds

    Users may obtain access to the trading and execution services of third party markets and other content service providers (“Third Party Systems”) of multiple third party markets and other content service providers for a fee.9 Users connect to Third Party Systems over the IP network. In addition, Users may obtain connectivity to data feeds from third party markets and other content service providers (“Third Party Data Feeds”) for a fee.10

    9See NYSE National Filing, supra note 4, at 26322.

    10Id.

    Currently, CHX is listed in the tables setting forth the Third Party Systems and Third Party Data Feeds, and Users seeking access to CHX's trading and execution services and data feeds are subject to the applicable fees. Consistent with the proposed changes to General Note 4 described above, because CHX will become an affiliate of the Exchange, the Exchange proposes to delete CHX from such tables.

    General

    As is the case with all Exchange co-location arrangements, (i) neither a User nor any of the User's customers would be permitted to submit orders directly to the Exchange unless such User or customer is a member organization, a Sponsored Participant or an agent thereof (e.g., a service bureau providing order entry services); (ii) use of the co-location services proposed herein would be completely voluntary and available to all Users on a non-discriminatory basis; 11 and (iii) a User would only incur one charge for the particular co-location service described herein, regardless of whether the User connects only to the Exchange or to the Exchange, one or more of its Affiliate SROs.12

    11 As is currently the case, Users that receive co-location services from the Exchange will not receive any means of access to the Exchange's trading and execution systems that is separate from, or superior to, that of other Users. In this regard, all orders sent to the Exchange enter the Exchange's trading and execution systems through the same order gateway, regardless of whether the sender is co-located in the data center or not. In addition, co-located Users do not receive any market data or data service product that is not available to all Users, although Users that receive co-location services normally would expect reduced latencies in sending orders to, and receiving market data from, the Exchange.

    12See NYSE National Filing, supra note 4, at 26315. The Affiliate SROs have also submitted substantially the same proposed rule change to propose the changes described herein. See SR-NYSE-2018-35, SR-NYSEAMER-2018-38, and SR-NYSEArca-2018-53.

    The proposed change is not otherwise intended to address any other issues relating to co-location services and/or related fees, and the Exchange is not aware of any problems that Users would have in complying with the proposed change.

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,13 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,14 in particular, because it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest and because it is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.

    13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    14 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    The Exchange believes that the proposed change would remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, protect investors and the public interest because upon the closing of the Transaction, CHX will be an affiliate of both the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs. Expanding the definition of Exchange Systems to incorporate CHX's trading and execution systems, adding CHX's data products to the table of Included Data Products, and removing CHX from the lists of Third Party Systems and Third Party Data Feeds would make the Price List treatment of CHX trading and execution systems and data products consistent with the treatment of the trading and execution systems and data products of the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs.

    Further, the Exchange believes that revising General Note 4 would promote just and equitable principles of trade and remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market and a national market system as it would make clear that all Users that voluntarily select to access the LCN or IP network would receive the same access to the CHX trading and execution systems and connectivity to CHX data as to those of the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs and would not be subject to a charge above and beyond the fee paid for the relevant LCN or IP network access. In addition, as with Exchange and Affiliate SRO access and connectivity, a User would not be required to use any of its bandwidth to access the CHX trading and execution system or connect to CHX data unless it wished to do so. A User only receives access to Exchange Systems and connectivity to Included Data Products that it selects, and a User can change such access or connectivity it receives at any time, subject to authorization from the relevant data provider, the Exchange, or relevant Affiliate SRO.

    The Exchange believes that the non-substantive change to put the table of Included Data Products into alphabetical order would remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, protect investors and the public interest because the amendment would clarify Exchange rules and make it easier for market participants to find Included Data Products in the table.

    The Exchange also believes that the proposed fee change is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,15 in particular, because it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members, issuers and other persons using its facilities and does not unfairly discriminate between customers, issuers, brokers or dealers.

    15 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).

    The Exchange believes that the proposed change provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members, issuers and other persons using its facilities and does not unfairly discriminate between customers, issuers, brokers or dealers, because the change would result in CHX, which will be an affiliate of the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs, being treated on the same terms and in the same manner as the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs with respect to their trading and execution systems and data products. The proposed change would result in reduced fees for Users that have access or connectivity to CHX, as it would no longer be a Third Party System or Third Party Data Feed.

    The Exchange believes that the proposed non-substantive change to put the table of Included Data Products into alphabetical order would be reasonable because the change would have no impact on pricing or services offered. Rather, the change would alleviate possible market participant confusion by making it easier to find Included Data Products in the table.

    For these reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with the Act.

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,16 the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because, in addition to the use of co-location services being completely voluntary, they are available to all Users on an equal basis (i.e., the same range of products and services are available to all Users).

    16 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).

    The Exchange believes that the proposed change would not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because the change would result in CHX, which will be an affiliate of the Exchange and Affiliate SROs, being treated on the same terms and in the same manner as the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs with respect to their trading and execution systems and data products. As a result of the proposed changes, all Users that voluntarily select to access the LCN or IP network would receive the same access to the CHX trading and execution systems and connectivity to CHX data as to those of the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs and would not be subject to a charge above and beyond the fee paid for the relevant LCN or IP network access. A User would not be required to use any of its bandwidth to access the CHX trading and execution system or connect to CHX data unless it wishes to do so. The proposed change would result in reduced fees for Users that have access or connectivity to CHX, as it would no longer be a Third Party System or Third Party Data Feed.

    The Exchange believes that the proposed non-substantive change to put the table of Included Data Products into alphabetical order would not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because the change would have no impact on pricing or the services offered. Rather, the change would alleviate possible market participant confusion by making it easier to find Included Data Products in the table.

    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 17 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.18 Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.19

    17 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).

    18 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

    19 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6) requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) 20 normally does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),21 the Commission may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange requests that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal may become operative immediately upon filing. The Exchange represents that the requested wavier would ensure that immediately upon the closing of the Transaction CHX would be treated on the same terms and in the same manner as the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs with respect to their trading and execution systems and data products. The waiver would allow the Exchange to expand the definition of Exchange Systems to incorporate CHX's trading and execution systems, add CHX's data products to the table of Included Data Products, and remove CHX from the lists of Third Party Systems and Third Party Data Feeds immediately upon the closing of the Transaction. In addition, it would implement the reduced fee for Users that currently have access or connectivity to CHX immediately upon Closing. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. Accordingly, the Commission waives the 30-day operative delay and designates the proposed rule change operative upon filing.22

    20 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

    21 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).

    22 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of 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) 23 of the Act to determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved.

    23 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).

    IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Comments

    • Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

    • Send an email to [email protected] Please include File Number SR-NYSENAT-2018-17 on the subject line.

    Paper Comments

    • Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSENAT-2018-17. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSENAT-2018-17 and should be submitted on or before August 22, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.24

    24 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Robert W. Errett, Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-16420 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-83718; File No. SR-NYSEAMER-2018-38] Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE American LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the NYSE American Equities Price List and the NYSE American Options Fee Schedule Related to Co-Location Services in Connection With a Proposed Transaction With the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. Exchange and Its Parent, CHX Holdings, Inc. July 26, 2018.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 2 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,3 notice is hereby given that on July 16, 2018, NYSE American LLC (“Exchange” or “NYSE American”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 15 U.S.C. 78a.

    3 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend the NYSE American Equities Price List (“Price List”) and the NYSE American Options Fee Schedule (“Fee Schedule”) related to co-location services in connection with a proposed transaction (“Transaction”) whereby the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. (“CHX”) Exchange and its parent, CHX Holdings, Inc. (“CHX Holdings”), would become indirect subsidiaries of Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (“ICE”), the Exchange's indirect parent, and affiliates of the Exchange. The Exchange also proposes to make a non-substantive change to the Price List and Fee Schedule. The proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the 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.

    A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose

    The Exchange proposes to amend its Price List and Fee Schedule related to co-location 4 services in connection with the proposed Transaction whereby CHX and its parent, CHX Holdings, would become indirect subsidiaries of ICE, the Exchange's indirect parent, and affiliates of the Exchange.5 The Exchange also proposes to make a non-substantive change to the Price List and Fee Schedule.

    4 The Exchange initially filed rule changes relating to its co-location services with the Commission in 2010. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62961 (September 21, 2010), 75 FR 59299 (September 27, 2010) (SR-NYSEAmex-2010-80). The Exchange operates a data center in Mahwah, New Jersey (the “data center”) from which it provides co-location services to Users.

    5 In order to effect the Transaction, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Exchange's direct parent company, NYSE Group, Inc., would merge with and into CHX Holdings, with CHX Holdings continuing as the surviving corporation. See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 83635 (July 13, 2018) (SR-CHX-2018-004), and 83303 (May 22, 2018), 83 FR 24517 (May 29, 2018) (SR-CHX-2018-004). CHX would also become an affiliate to the Exchange's affiliates the New York Stock Exchange LLC (“NYSE”), NYSE Arca, Inc. (“NYSE Arca”), and NYSE National, Inc. (“NYSE National” and, together, the “Affiliate SROs”).

    The Exchange proposes that the proposed rule change become operative upon the closing of the Transaction.

    General Note 4

    Pursuant to General Note 4 of the Price List and Fee Schedule, when a User 6 purchases access to the Liquidity Center Network (“LCN”) or the internet protocol (“IP”) network, the two local area networks available in the data center,7 a User receives (a) the ability to access the trading and execution systems of the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs (“Exchange Systems”), and (b) connectivity to any of the listed data products (“Included Data Products”) that it selects. The majority of the Included Data Products are proprietary feeds of the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs.8

    6 For purposes of the Exchange's co-location services, a “User” means any market participant that requests to receive co-location services directly from the Exchange. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 76009 (September 29, 2015), 80 FR 60213 (October 5, 2015) (SR-NYSEMKT-2015-67). As specified in the Price List and Fee Schedule, a User that incurs co-location fees for a particular co-location service pursuant thereto would not be subject to co-location fees for the same co-location service charged by the Affiliate SROs. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 70176 (August 13, 2013), 78 FR 50471 (August 19, 2013) (SR-NYSEMKT-2013-67).

    7See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79728 (January 4, 2017), 82 FR 3035 (January 10, 2017) (SR-NYSEMKT-2016-126).

    8Id. Included Data Products are listed in the Price List and Fee Schedule under General Note 4.

    Upon the closing of the Transaction, CHX will be an affiliate of both the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs. Consistent with the treatment of the Exchange's and the Affiliate SROs' trading and execution systems and data products, the Exchange proposes to expand the definition of Exchange Systems to incorporate CHX's trading and execution systems, and to add CHX's data products to the table of Included Data Products. In order to make the change, the Exchange proposes to add CHX to the list of trading and execution system providers in the first sentence of the first paragraph and add CHX to the lists of affiliated entities in the first, third and fourth sentences. The proposed changes to the paragraph are as follows (additions italicized, deletions in brackets):

    When a User purchases access to the LCN or IP network, it receives the ability to access the trading and execution systems of the NYSE, NYSE American, NYSE Arca, [and] NYSE National, and Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. (CHX and, together, the Exchange Systems), subject, in each case, to authorization by the NYSE, NYSE American, NYSE Arca [or] NYSE National or CHX, as applicable. Such access includes access to the customer gateways that provide for order entry, order receipt (i.e., confirmation that an order has been received), receipt of drop copies and trade reporting (i.e., whether a trade is executed or cancelled), as well as for sending information to shared data services for clearing and settlement. A User can change the access it receives at any time, subject to authorization by NYSE, NYSE American, NYSE Arca, [or] NYSE National, or CHX. NYSE, NYSE American, NYSE Arca, [and] NYSE National and CHX also offer access to Exchange Systems to their members, such that a User does not have to purchase access to the LCN or IP network to obtain access to Exchange Systems.

    In addition, the Exchange proposes to add CHX to the table of Included Data Products set forth in General Note 4.

    In a non-substantive change, the Exchange proposes to make the table of Included Data Products alphabetical by putting the list of NYSE American feeds before NYSE American Options. Such list currently follows NYSE Bonds.

    Connectivity to Third Party Systems and Third Party Data Feeds

    Users may obtain access to the trading and execution services of third party markets and other content service providers (“Third Party Systems”) of multiple third party markets and other content service providers for a fee.9 Users connect to Third Party Systems over the IP network. In addition, Users may obtain connectivity to data feeds from third party markets and other content service providers (“Third Party Data Feeds”) for a fee.10

    9See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80309 (March 24, 2017), 82 FR 15725 (March 30, 2017) (SR-NYSEMKT-2016-63).

    10See id.

    Currently, CHX is listed in the tables setting forth the Third Party Systems and Third Party Data Feeds, and Users seeking access to CHX's trading and execution services and data feeds are subject to the applicable fees. Consistent with the proposed changes to General Note 4 described above, because CHX will become an affiliate of the Exchange, the Exchange proposes to delete CHX from such tables.

    General

    As is the case with all Exchange co-location arrangements, (i) neither a User nor any of the User's customers would be permitted to submit orders directly to the Exchange unless such User or customer is a member organization, a Sponsored Participant or an agent thereof (e.g., a service bureau providing order entry services); (ii) use of the co-location services proposed herein would be completely voluntary and available to all Users on a non-discriminatory basis; 11 and (iii) a User would only incur one charge for the particular co-location service described herein, regardless of whether the User connects only to the Exchange or to the Exchange, one or more of its Affiliate SROs.12

    11 As is currently the case, Users that receive co-location services from the Exchange will not receive any means of access to the Exchange's trading and execution systems that is separate from, or superior to, that of other Users. In this regard, all orders sent to the Exchange enter the Exchange's trading and execution systems through the same order gateway, regardless of whether the sender is co-located in the data center or not. In addition, co-located Users do not receive any market data or data service product that is not available to all Users, although Users that receive co-location services normally would expect reduced latencies in sending orders to, and receiving market data from, the Exchange.

    12See 78 FR 50471, supra note 6, at 50471. The Affiliate SROs have also submitted substantially the same proposed rule change to propose the changes described herein. See SR-NYSE-2018-35, SR-NYSEArca-2018-53, and SR-NYSENAT-2018-17.

    The proposed change is not otherwise intended to address any other issues relating to co-location services and/or related fees, and the Exchange is not aware of any problems that Users would have in complying with the proposed change.

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,13 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,14 in particular, because it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest and because it is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.

    13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    14 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    The Exchange believes that the proposed change would remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, protect investors and the public interest because upon the closing of the Transaction, CHX will be an affiliate of both the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs. Expanding the definition of Exchange Systems to incorporate CHX's trading and execution systems, adding CHX's data products to the table of Included Data Products, and removing CHX from the lists of Third Party Systems and Third Party Data Feeds would make the Price List and Fee Schedule treatment of CHX trading and execution systems and data products consistent with the treatment of the trading and execution systems and data products of the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs.

    Further, the Exchange believes that revising General Note 4 would promote just and equitable principles of trade and remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market and a national market system as it would make clear that all Users that voluntarily select to access the LCN or IP network would receive the same access to the CHX trading and execution systems and connectivity to CHX data as to those of the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs and would not be subject to a charge above and beyond the fee paid for the relevant LCN or IP network access. In addition, as with Exchange and Affiliate SRO access and connectivity, a User would not be required to use any of its bandwidth to access the CHX trading and execution system or connect to CHX data unless it wished to do so. A User only receives access to Exchange Systems and connectivity to Included Data Products that it selects, and a User can change such access or connectivity it receives at any time, subject to authorization from the relevant data provider, the Exchange, or relevant Affiliate SRO.

    The Exchange believes that the non-substantive change to put the table of Included Data Products into alp