Federal Register Vol. 83, No.168,

Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 168 (August 29, 2018)

Page Range43961-44170
FR Document

83_FR_168
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
83 FR 44169 - Women's Equality Day, 2018PDF
83 FR 44120 - Notice of Intent To Rule on Request To Release Airport Property at the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, DFW, TexasPDF
83 FR 44101 - Order Making Fiscal Year 2019 Annual Adjustments to Registration Fee RatesPDF
83 FR 44123 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Solicitation of Proposal Information for Award of Public ContractsPDF
83 FR 44055 - Proposed Information Collection Activity; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 44070 - Interim Storage Partner's Waste Control Specialists Consolidated Interim Storage FacilityPDF
83 FR 44068 - Target Fabrication Portion of the Northwest Medical Isotopes Radioisotope Production FacilityPDF
83 FR 44119 - Determination Under Section 7012 of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2018 Relating to Assistance to SomaliaPDF
83 FR 44044 - General Dynamics Information Technology; Transfer of DataPDF
83 FR 44045 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Extension of an Existing Collection (EPA ICR No. 0586.14); Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 44052 - Information Collection; Claims and AppealsPDF
83 FR 44022 - Correction: Notice of Public Meeting of the Ohio Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil RightsPDF
83 FR 44056 - DHL Laboratories Inc.; Proposal To Withdraw Approval of a New Drug Application for Dextrose 5% Injection in Plastic Container; Opportunity for a HearingPDF
83 FR 44052 - Notice of Agreements FiledPDF
83 FR 44034 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 44038 - Certification Notice-254; Notice of Filing of Self-Certification of Coal Capability Under the Powerplant and Industrial Fuel Use ActPDF
83 FR 44037 - Application to Export Electric Energy; Enel Trading North America, LLCPDF
83 FR 44039 - Application To Export Electric Energy; Mercuria Energy America, Inc.PDF
83 FR 44029 - Agency Information Collection Activities Under OMB ReviewPDF
83 FR 44038 - Agency Information Collection ExtensionPDF
83 FR 44119 - Rescission of Social Security Ruling 82-53: Titles II and XVI: Basic Disability Evaluation GuidesPDF
83 FR 44062 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection of eComments Requested; Notification to Fire Safety Authority of Storage of Explosive MaterialsPDF
83 FR 44063 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection of eComments Requested; Application for Explosives License or Permit-ATF F 5400.13/5400.16PDF
83 FR 44032 - Notice of Availability of Software and Documentation for LicensingPDF
83 FR 44121 - Notice of Submission of Proposed Information Collection to OMB Agency Request for Renewal of a Previously Approved Information Collection Request: Reports by Air Carriers on Incidents Involving Animals During Air TransportPDF
83 FR 44036 - Orders Granting Import/Export Authority Under the Natural Gas Act During July, 2018PDF
83 FR 44035 - Change in Control; Delfin LNG, LLCPDF
83 FR 43999 - Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Cod by Trawl Catcher Vessels in the Central Regulatory Area of the Gulf of AlaskaPDF
83 FR 44075 - Senior Executive Service Performance Review BoardPDF
83 FR 44027 - Multilayered Wood Flooring From the People's Republic of China: Amendment to Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Second Amended Final Determination and Amendment to Notice of Third Amended Final Determination of the Antidumping Duty InvestigationPDF
83 FR 44061 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Tribal Reassumption of Jurisdiction Over Child Custody ProceedingsPDF
83 FR 44035 - Notice of Intent To Prepare Supplement II to the Final Environmental Impact Statement, Mississippi River and Tributaries (MR&T) Project, Mississippi River Mainline Levees and Channel ImprovementPDF
83 FR 44125 - Agency Information Collection Activity Under OMB Review: Appeal to Board of Veterans' AppealsPDF
83 FR 43974 - Alabama Regulatory ProgramPDF
83 FR 44033 - Chief of Engineers Environmental Advisory Board; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee MeetingPDF
83 FR 44022 - Information Collection Activity; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 43972 - Alabama Regulatory ProgramPDF
83 FR 44040 - Macquarie Energy Trading LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 AuthorizationPDF
83 FR 44039 - Combined Notice of FilingsPDF
83 FR 43985 - Safety Zone; San Francisco Giants Fireworks Display, San Francisco Bay, San Francisco, CAPDF
83 FR 44042 - Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, L.L.C.; Notice of ApplicationPDF
83 FR 44042 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
83 FR 44043 - Enable Mississippi River Transmission, LLC; Notice of Technical ConferencePDF
83 FR 44040 - Goose River Hydro, Inc.; Notice of Scoping Meetings and Environmental Site Review and Soliciting Scoping CommentsPDF
83 FR 44043 - Edison Electric Institute; Notice of Amendment FilingPDF
83 FR 43977 - Ohio Regulatory ProgramPDF
83 FR 44012 - Texas Regulatory ProgramPDF
83 FR 43986 - Election Whether To Participate in the Wireless Emergency Alert SystemPDF
83 FR 44029 - Performance Review Board (PRB)PDF
83 FR 44067 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Extension With Change, of a Previously Approved Collection; Sequestered Juror Information FormPDF
83 FR 44066 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comments Requested; Request for Registration Under the Gambling Devices Act of 1962PDF
83 FR 44064 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; New Collection: Death in Custody Reporting Act CollectionPDF
83 FR 44053 - Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and RecommendationsPDF
83 FR 44046 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Final Collection; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 44047 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Final Collection; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 44048 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Final Collection; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 44049 - Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications CommissionPDF
83 FR 44048 - Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission Under Delegated AuthorityPDF
83 FR 43987 - Modification of Rules To Codify New Procedure for Non-Federal Public Safety Entities To License Federal Interoperability ChannelsPDF
83 FR 44059 - Tuna-Tariff Rate Quota for Calendar Year 2018 Tuna Classifiable Under Subheading 1604.14.22, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United StatesPDF
83 FR 44026 - Export Trade Certificate of ReviewPDF
83 FR 43961 - Expanded Examination Cycle for Certain Small Insured Depository Institutions and U.S. Branches and Agencies of Foreign BanksPDF
83 FR 44031 - Privacy Act of 1974; Matching ProgramPDF
83 FR 44015 - Inviting Applications for the Delta Health Care Services Grant ProgramPDF
83 FR 44119 - SJI Board of Directors Meeting, NoticePDF
83 FR 44062 - Royalty Policy Committee; Public Meeting; CorrectionPDF
83 FR 44115 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend its Price ListPDF
83 FR 44114 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Amending the Fee Schedule To Eliminate Fee Code IX on Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.PDF
83 FR 44096 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Related to Fees for Use on Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc.PDF
83 FR 44098 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Delay the Implementation Date of Changes to Cboe Options Rule 24A.4, Interpretation and Policy .02, Concerning FLEX OptionsPDF
83 FR 44083 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on a Proposed Rule Change Regarding BZX Rule 14.11(c) (Index Fund Shares)PDF
83 FR 44091 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Partial Amendment No. 2, Concerning Updates to and Formalization of OCC's Recovery and Orderly Wind-Down PlanPDF
83 FR 44076 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 2, Concerning Enhanced and New Tools for Recovery ScenariosPDF
83 FR 44059 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Federal Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp (Duck Stamp) and Junior Duck Stamp ContestsPDF
83 FR 44120 - Rescinding the Notice of Intent for an Environmental Impact Statement; Multiple Counties, AlabamaPDF
83 FR 44120 - Rescinding the Notice of Intent for an Environmental Impact Statement; Gadsden, Etowah County, AlabamaPDF
83 FR 44121 - Rescinding the Notice of Intent for an Environmental Impact Statement; Multiple Counties, AlabamaPDF
83 FR 44028 - Science Advisory Board; Solicitation for Members of the NOAA Science Advisory BoardPDF
83 FR 44065 - Notice of Lodging of Proposed Settlement Agreement Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability ActPDF
83 FR 44109 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation; Notice of No Objection to Advance Notice, as Modified by Partial Amendment No. 3, Concerning Updates to and Formalization of OCC's Recovery and Orderly Wind-Down PlanPDF
83 FR 44083 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation; Notice of No Objection to Advance Notice, as Modified by Amendment No. 2, Concerning Enhanced and New Tools for Recovery ScenariosPDF
83 FR 44058 - Center for Scientific Review; Notice of MeetingPDF
83 FR 44058 - National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
83 FR 44057 - Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
83 FR 44065 - Notice of Lodging of Proposed Consent Decree Under the Clean Water ActPDF
83 FR 43984 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Saugatuck River, Saugatuck, CTPDF
83 FR 43970 - Amendment of Class D and E Airspace; Austin, TX; and Establishment of Class E Airspace; Georgetown, TX, and Austin, TXPDF
83 FR 43968 - Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace; Pensacola, FL, and Establishment of Class E Airspace; Milton, FLPDF
83 FR 43988 - Hours of Service Recordkeeping; Automated RecordkeepingPDF
83 FR 43983 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Passaic River, Harrison, NJPDF
83 FR 43984 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Sloop Channel, Hempstead, NYPDF
83 FR 44026 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Chemical Weapons Convention Provisions of the Export Administration RegulationsPDF
83 FR 44024 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 44023 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 44025 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 44052 - Notice of Proposals To Engage in or To Acquire Companies Engaged in Permissible Nonbanking ActivitiesPDF
83 FR 44067 - Planetary Science Advisory Committee; MeetingPDF
83 FR 44001 - Amendments to Clearing Exemption for Swaps Entered Into by Certain Bank Holding Companies, Savings and Loan Holding Companies, and Community Development Financial InstitutionsPDF
83 FR 44027 - Trade Fair Certification (TFC) Program: Notice of Change of Application Deadline and Mailing AddressPDF
83 FR 44014 - Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Inapplicability of Certain Laws and Regulations to Commercial Items (DFARS Case 2017-D010); Reopening of Comment PeriodPDF
83 FR 43965 - Rules of Practice and Procedure; Civil Money Penalty Inflation AdjustmentPDF
83 FR 43985 - Overweight ItemsPDF
83 FR 44128 - Expanding Flexible Use of the 3.7 to 4.2 GHz BandPDF
83 FR 44123 - 2018 Pricing of Numismatic Gold, Commemorative Gold, Platinum, and Palladium Products GridPDF

Issue

83 168 Wednesday, August 29, 2018 Contents Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Rural Business-Cooperative Service

See

Rural Utilities Service

AIRFORCE Air Force Department NOTICES Availability of Software and Documentation for Licensing, 44032-44033 2018-18731 Alcohol Tobacco Firearms Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Application for Explosives License or Permit, 44063-44064 2018-18732 Notification to Fire Safety Authority of Storage of Explosive Materials, 44062-44063 2018-18733 Army Army Department NOTICES Meetings: Chief of Engineers Environmental Advisory Board, 44033-44034 2018-18718 Centers Disease Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 44053-44054 2018-18699 Children Children and Families Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 44055 2018-18760 Civil Rights Civil Rights Commission NOTICES Meetings: Ohio Advisory Committee; Correction, 44022-44023 2018-18750 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Drawbridge Operations: Passaic River, Harrison, NJ, 43983 2018-18638 Saugatuck River, Saugatuck, CT, 43984-43985 2018-18650 Sloop Channel, Hempstead, NY, 43984 2018-18637 Safety Zones: San Francisco Giants Fireworks Display, San Francisco Bay, San Francisco, CA, 43985 2018-18712 Commerce Commerce Department 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, 44023-44026 2018-18631 2018-18632 2018-18633 2018-18634 2018-18635
Commodity Futures Commodity Futures Trading Commission PROPOSED RULES Clearing Exemption for Swaps Entered Into by Certain Bank Holding Companies, Savings and Loan Holding Companies, and Community Development Financial Institutions, 44001-44012 2018-18618 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 44029-44031 2018-18742 Comptroller Comptroller of the Currency RULES Expanded Examination Cycle for Certain Small Insured Depository Institutions and U.S. Branches and Agencies of Foreign Banks, 43961-43965 2018-18685 Corporation Corporation for National and Community Service NOTICES Privacy Act; Matching Program, 44031-44032 2018-18684 Defense Acquisition Defense Acquisition Regulations System PROPOSED RULES Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplements: Inapplicability of Certain Laws and Regulations to Commercial Items; Reopening of Comment Period, 44014 2018-18616 Defense Department Defense Department See

Air Force Department

See

Army Department

See

Defense Acquisition Regulations System

See

Engineers Corps

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 44034-44035 2018-18746 2018-18747 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Claims and Appeals, 44052-44053 2018-18751
Energy Department Energy Department See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 44038-44039 2018-18741 Applications to Export Electric Energy: Enel Trading North America, LLC, 44037-44038 2018-18744 Mercuria Energy America, Inc., 44039 2018-18743 Changes in Control: Delfin LNG, LLC; Indirect Equity Ownership Changes, 44035-44036 2018-18728 Orders Granting Import/Export Authority: Southern LNG Co., LLC; Jordan Cove Energy Project, LP; Corpus Christi Liquefaction, LLC; et al., 44036-44037 2018-18729 Self-Certification of Coal Capability under the Powerplant and Industrial Fuel Use Act, 44038 2018-18745
Engineers Engineers Corps NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Mississippi River and Tributaries Project, Mississippi River Mainline Levees and Channel Improvement; Supplement II, 44035 2018-18723 Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 44045-44046 2018-18752 Transfers of Data: General Dynamics Information Technology, 44044-44045 2018-18753 Export Import Export-Import Bank NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 44046-44048 2018-18688 2018-18696 2018-18697 2018-18698 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration RULES Class D and E Airspace; Amendments; Class E Airspace; Establishments: Austin, TX; Georgetown and Austin, TX, 43970-43972 2018-18645 Pensacola, FL; Milton, FL, 43968-43970 2018-18644 NOTICES Airport Property Releases: Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, DFW, TX, 44120 2018-18764 Federal Communications Federal Communications Commission RULES Election Whether to Participate in Wireless Emergency Alert System, 43986-43987 2018-18704 Modification of Rules to Codify New Procedure for Non-Federal Public Safety Entities to License Federal Interoperability Channels, 43987-43988 2018-18691 PROPOSED RULES Expanding Flexible Use of 3.7 to 4.2 GHz Band, 44128-44165 2018-18288 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 44048-44051 2018-18690 2018-18693 2018-18694 2018-18695 Federal Deposit Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation RULES Expanded Examination Cycle for Certain Small Insured Depository Institutions and U.S. Branches and Agencies of Foreign Banks, 43961-43965 2018-18685 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Amendment Filings: Edison Electric Institute, 44043-44044 2018-18707 Applications: Goose River Hydro, Inc., 44040-44042 2018-18708 Maritimes and Northeast Pipeline, LLC, 44042-44043 2018-18711 Combined Filings, 44039-44040, 44042 2018-18710 2018-18713 Initial Market-Based Rate Filings Including Requests for Blanket Section 204 Authorizations: Macquarie Energy Trading, LLC, 44040 2018-18714 Meetings: Enable Mississippi River Transmission, LLC, 44043 2018-18709 Federal Highway Federal Highway Administration NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Gadsden, Etowah County, AL, 44120 2018-18669 Multiple Counties, Alabama; Rescission, 44120-44121 2018-18668 2018-18670 Federal Housing Finance Agency Federal Housing Finance Agency RULES Civil Money Penalty Inflation Adjustments, 43965-43968 2018-18517 Federal Maritime Federal Maritime Commission NOTICES Agreements Filed, 44052 2018-18748 Federal Railroad Federal Railroad Administration RULES Hours of Service Recordkeeping; Automated Recordkeeping, 43988-43999 2018-18639 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System RULES Expanded Examination Cycle for Certain Small Insured Depository Institutions and U.S. Branches and Agencies of Foreign Banks, 43961-43965 2018-18685 NOTICES Proposals to Engage in or to Acquire Companies Engaged in Permissible Nonbanking Activities, 44052 2018-18630 Fish Fish and Wildlife Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Federal Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp and Junior Duck Stamp Contests, 44059-44061 2018-18671 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration NOTICES New Drug Applications: DHL Laboratories, Inc.; Proposal to Withdraw Approval, 44056-44057 2018-18749 General Services General Services Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Claims and Appeals, 44052-44053 2018-18751 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

See

Children and Families Administration

See

Food and Drug Administration

See

National Institutes of Health

Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

See

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

Indian Affairs Indian Affairs Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Tribal Reassumption of Jurisdiction Over Child Custody Proceedings, 44061-44062 2018-18724 Industry Industry and Security Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Chemical Weapons Convention Provisions of Export Administration Regulations, 44026 2018-18636 Interior Interior Department See

Fish and Wildlife Service

See

Indian Affairs Bureau

See

Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office

NOTICES Meetings: Royalty Policy Committee; Correction, 44062 2018-18680
International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of China, 44027-44028 2018-18725 Export Trade Certificates of Review, 44026-44027 2018-18686 Trade Fair Certification Program: Change of Application Deadline and Mailing Address, 44027 2018-18617 Justice Department Justice Department See

Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau

See

United States Marshals Service

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Death in Custody Reporting Act Collection, 44064-44065 2018-18700 Request for Registration under Gambling Devices Act, 44066 2018-18701 Proposed Consent Decrees: CERCLA, 44065-44066 2018-18659 Clean Water Act, 44065 2018-18651
NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Claims and Appeals, 44052-44053 2018-18751 Meetings: Planetary Science Advisory Committee, 44067 2018-18629 National Institute National Institutes of Health NOTICES Meetings: Center for Scientific Review, 44057-44058 2018-18652 2018-18654 National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 44058 2018-18653 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RULES Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone off Alaska: Pacific Cod by Trawl Catcher Vessels in Central Regulatory Area of Gulf of Alaska, 43999-44000 2018-18727 NOTICES Requests for Nominations: Science Advisory Board, 44028-44029 2018-18663 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Environmental Assessments; Availability, etc.: Target Fabrication Portion of Northwest Medical Isotopes Radioisotope Production Facility, 44068-44070 2018-18757 License Applications: Integrated Storage Partner's Waste Control Specialists Consolidated Interim Storage Facility, 44070-44075 2018-18758 Nuclear Waste Technical Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board NOTICES Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board Membership, 44075-44076 2018-18726 Patent Patent and Trademark Office NOTICES Performance Review Board Member Appointments, 44029 2018-18703 Postal Service Postal Service RULES Overweight Items, 43985-43986 2018-18481 Presidential Documents Presidential Documents PROCLAMATIONS Special Observances: Women's Equality Day (Proc. 9774), 44167-44170 2018-18928 Rural Business Rural Business-Cooperative Service NOTICES Requests for Applications: Delta Health Care Services Grant Program, 44015-44022 2018-18682 Rural Utilities Rural Utilities Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 44022 2018-18717 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Fiscal Year 2019 Annual Adjustments to Registration Fee Rates, 44101-44108 2018-18762 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc., 44096-44098 2018-18676 Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc., 44083, 44114-44115 2018-18674 2018-18677 Cboe Exchange, Inc., 44098-44101 2018-18675 New York Stock Exchange, LLC, 44115-44119 2018-18678 Options Clearing Corp., 44076-44096, 44109-44114 2018-18672 2018-18673 2018-18655 2018-18656 Social Social Security Administration NOTICES Rescission of Social Security Ruling 82-53: Titles II and XVI: Basic Disability Evaluation Guides, 44119 2018-18739 State Department State Department NOTICES Determinations under Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act: Somalia, 44119 2018-18754 State Justice State Justice Institute NOTICES Meetings: Board of Directors, 44119-44120 2018-18681 Surface Mining Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office RULES Alabama Regulatory Program, 43972-43976 2018-18716 2018-18719 Ohio Regulatory Program, 43977-43983 2018-18706 PROPOSED RULES Texas Regulatory Program, 44012-44014 2018-18705 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

Federal Highway Administration

See

Federal Railroad Administration

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Reports by Air Carriers on Incidents Involving Animals During Air Transport, 44121-44123 2018-18730
Treasury Treasury Department See

Comptroller of the Currency

See

United States Mint

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Solicitation of Proposal Information for Award of Public Contracts, 44123 2018-18761
Customs U.S. Customs and Border Protection NOTICES Tariff Rate Quotas: Calendar Year 2018; Tuna, 44059 2018-18687 U.S. Marshals United States Marshals Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Sequestered Juror Information Form, 44067 2018-18702 U.S. Mint United States Mint NOTICES 2018 Pricing of Numismatic Gold, Commemorative Gold, Platinum, and Palladium Products Grid, 44123-44125 2018-18233 Veteran Affairs Veterans Affairs Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Appeal to Board of Veterans' Appeals, 44125 2018-18720 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Federal Communications Commission, 44128-44165 2018-18288 Part III Presidential Documents, 44167-44170 2018-18928 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.

83 168 Wednesday, August 29, 2018 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Office of the Comptroller of the Currency 12 CFR Part 4 [Docket ID OCC-2018-0014] RIN 1557-AE37 FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 12 CFR Parts 208 and 211 [Docket No. R-1615] RIN 7100-AF09 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION 12 CFR Parts 337 and 347 RIN 3064-AE76 Expanded Examination Cycle for Certain Small Insured Depository Institutions and U.S. Branches and Agencies of Foreign Banks AGENCY:

Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), Treasury; Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board); and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).

ACTION:

Joint interim final rules and request for comments.

SUMMARY:

The OCC, Board, and FDIC (collectively, the agencies) are jointly issuing and requesting public comment on interim final rules to implement section 210 of the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act (Economic Growth Act), which was enacted on May 24, 2018. Section 210 of the Economic Growth Act amends section 10(d) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (FDI Act) to permit the agencies to examine qualifying insured depository institutions (IDIs) with under $3 billion in total assets not less than once during each 18-month period. Prior to enactment of the Economic Growth Act, qualifying IDIs with under $1 billion in total assets were eligible for an 18-month on-site examination cycle. The interim final rules generally would allow qualifying IDIs with under $3 billion in total assets to benefit from the extended 18-month examination schedule. In addition, the interim final rules make parallel changes to the agencies' regulations governing the on-site examination cycle for U.S. branches and agencies of foreign banks, consistent with the International Banking Act of 1978 (IBA).

DATES:

These interim final rules are effective on August 29, 2018. Comments on the rules must be received by October 29, 2018.

ADDRESSES:

OCC: You may submit comments to the OCC by any of the methods set forth below. Commenters are encouraged to submit comments by the Federal eRulemaking Portal or email, if possible. Please use the title “Expanded Examination Cycle for Certain Small Insured Depository Institutions and U.S. Branches and Agencies of Foreign Banks” to facilitate the organization and distribution of the comments. You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

Federal eRulemaking Portal—“Regulations.gov”: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Enter “Docket ID OCC-2018-0014” in the Search Box and click “Search.” Click on “Comment Now” to submit public comments.

• Click on the “Help” tab on the Regulations.gov home page to get information on using Regulations.gov, including instructions for submitting public comments.

Email: [email protected]

Mail: Legislative and Regulatory Activities Division, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, 400 7th Street SW, Suite 3E-218, Washington, DC 20219.

Hand Delivery/Courier: 400 7th Street SW, Suite 3E-218, Washington, DC 20219.

Fax: (571) 465-4326.

Instructions: You must include “OCC” as the agency name and “Docket ID OCC-2018-0014” in your comment. In general, the OCC will enter all comments received into the docket and publish the comments on the Regulations.gov website without change, including any business or personal information that you provide, such as name and address information, email addresses, or phone numbers. Comments received, including attachments and other supporting materials, are part of the public record and subject to public disclosure. Do not enclose any information in your comment or supporting materials that you consider confidential or inappropriate for public disclosure.

You may review comments and other related materials that pertain to this rulemaking action by any of the following methods:

Viewing Comments Electronically: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Enter “Docket ID OCC-2018-0014” in the Search box and click “Search.” Click on “Open Docket Folder” on the right side of the screen. Comments and supporting materials can be viewed and filtered by clicking on “View all documents and comments in this docket” and then using the filtering tools on the left side of the screen.

• Click on the “Help” tab on the Regulations.gov home page to get information on using Regulations.gov. The docket may be viewed after the close of the comment period in the same manner as during the comment period.

Viewing Comments Personally: You may personally inspect comments at the OCC, 400 7th Street SW, Washington, DC. For security reasons, the OCC requires visitors to make an appointment to inspect comments. You may do so by calling (202) 649-6700 or, for persons who are deaf or hearing impaired, TTY, (202) 649-5597. Upon arrival, visitors will be required to present a valid government-issued photo identification and to submit to security screening in order to inspect comments.

Board: You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. R-1615 and RIN 7100-AF09, by any of the following methods:

Agency Website: http://www.federalreserve.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments at https://www.federalreserve.gov/apps/foia/proposedregs.aspx.

Email: [email protected] Include docket number and RIN in the subject line of the message.

FAX: (202) 452-3819 or (202) 452-3102.

Mail: Ann E. Misback, Secretary, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 20th Street and Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20551.

All public comments are available from the Board's website at http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/foia/ProposedRegs.cfm as submitted, unless modified for technical reasons or to remove sensitive personally identifiable information at the commenter's request. Public comments may also be viewed electronically or in paper form in Room 3515, 1801 K Street NW, Washington, DC 20006 between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on weekdays.

FDIC: You may submit comments, identified by RIN 3064-AE76, by any of the following methods:

Agency Website: http://www.FDIC.gov/regulations/laws/Federal/. Follow the instructions for submitting comments on the Agency website.

Email: [email protected] Include the RIN 3064-AE76 in the subject line of the message.

Mail: Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary, Attention: Comments/Legal ESS, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20429.

Hand Delivery/Courier: Comments may be hand-delivered to the guard station at the rear of the 550 17th Street NW, Building (located on F Street) on business days between 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.

Instructions: Comments submitted must include “FDIC” and “RIN 3064-AE76.” Comments received will be posted without change to http://www.FDIC.gov/regulations/laws/Federal/, including any personal information provided.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

OCC: Enice Thomas, Senior Advisor to Senior Deputy Comptroller, Midsize and Community Bank Supervision, (202) 649-5420; and Deborah Katz, Assistant Director, Melissa J. Lisenbee, Senior Attorney, or Christopher Rafferty, Attorney, Legislative and Regulatory Activities Division, (202) 649-5490; for persons who are deaf or hearing impaired, TTY, (202) 649-5597.

Board: Division of Supervision and Regulation—Richard Naylor, Associate Director, (202) 728-5854; Jonathan Rono, Manager, (202) 721-4568; Assetou Traore, Supervisory Financial Analyst, (202) 974-7066; Virginia Gibbs, Manager, (202) 452-2521; or Alexander Kobulsky, Supervisory Financial Analyst, (202) 452-2031; and Legal Division—Laurie Schaffer, Associate General Counsel, (202) 452-2277; Mary Watkins, Attorney, (202) 452-3722; or Alyssa O'Connor, Attorney, (202) 452-3886.

FDIC: Policy Branch Division of Risk Management and Supervision—Thomas F. Lyons, Chief, Policy and Program Development, (202) 898-6850, [email protected]; Karen J. Currie, Senior Examination Specialist, (202) 898-3981, Policy and Program Development, Division of Risk Management Supervision; Legal Division—Suzanne J. Dawley, Counsel, (202) 898-6509.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Enacted on May 24, 2018, section 210 of the Economic Growth Act 1 amended section 10(d) of the FDI Act 2 to permit the agencies to examine qualifying IDIs (generally those IDIs that are well capitalized and well managed) with under $3 billion in total assets not less than once during each 18-month period, rather than not less than once during each 12-month period. Prior to the enactment of the Economic Growth Act, qualifying IDIs with under $1 billion in total assets were eligible for an 18-month on-site examination cycle.3

1 Public Law 115-174, 132 Stat. 1296 (2018).

2 12 U.S.C. 1820(d).

3See section 83001 of the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (the FAST) Act, enacted on December 4, 2015. Public Law 114-94, 129 Stat. 1312 (permitting the agencies to examine qualifying IDIs with under $1 billion in total assets not less than once during each 18-month period). The agencies published interim final rules implementing the FAST Act amendments in February 2016, and final rules in December 2016. See 81 FR 10069 (Feb. 29, 2016) and 81 FR 90949 (Dec. 16. 2016), respectively, codified at 12 CFR 4.6 and 4.7 (OCC), 12 CFR 208.64 and 211.26 (Board), 12 CFR 337.12 and 347.211 (FDIC).

More specifically, the agencies are issuing interim final rules to implement the Economic Growth Act's amendments to sections 10(d)(4) and 10(d)(10) of the FDI Act 4 that allow qualifying IDIs with under $3 billion in total assets to benefit from the extended 18-month examination schedule. In addition, the interim final rules make parallel changes to the agencies' regulations governing the on-site examination cycle for U.S. branches and agencies of foreign banks, consistent with the IBA.5

4 12 U.S.C. 1820(d)(4) and 1820(d)(10).

5 12 U.S.C. 3105(c)(1)(C).

Section 10(d)(1) of the FDI Act 6 generally requires the appropriate Federal banking agency for an IDI 7 to conduct a full-scope, on-site examination of an IDI at least once during each 12-month period. With the enactment of section 210 of the Economic Growth Act, section 10(d)(4) of the FDI Act authorizes the appropriate Federal banking agency to extend the on-site examination cycle for an IDI to at least once during an 18-month period if the IDI (1) has total assets of less than $3 billion; (2) is well capitalized (as defined in 12 U.S.C.1831o (prompt corrective action)); (3) was found, at its most recent examination, to be well managed 8 and to have a composite condition of “outstanding” or, in the case of an IDI with total assets of not more than $200 million, “outstanding” or “good;” (4) is not subject to a formal enforcement proceeding or order by the FDIC or its appropriate Federal banking agency; and (5) has not undergone a change in control during the previous 12-month period in which a full-scope, on-site examination otherwise would have been required. Section 10(d)(10) of the FDI Act gives each appropriate Federal banking agency discretionary authority to extend eligibility for an 18-month examination cycle, by regulation, to qualifying IDIs with an “outstanding” or “good” composite condition and total assets not greater than $3 billion, if the agency determines that this amount would be consistent with the principles of safety and soundness for IDIs.9

6 12 U.S.C. 1820(d)(1).

7 The Board, FDIC, or OCC. See 12 U.S.C. 1813(q).

8 IDIs are evaluated under the Uniform Financial Institutions Rating System (commonly referred to as “CAMELS”). CAMELS is an acronym that is drawn from the first letters of the individual components of the rating system: Capital adequacy, Asset quality, Management, Earnings, Liquidity, and Sensitivity to market risk. CAMELS ratings of “1” and “2” correspond with ratings of “outstanding” and “good.” In addition to having a CAMELS composite rating of “1” or “2,” an IDI is considered to be “well managed” for the purposes of section 10(d) of the FDI Act only if the IDI also received a rating of “1” or “2” for the management component of the CAMELS rating at its most recent examination. See 72 FR 17798 (Apr. 10, 2007).

9 The Board and the FDIC, as the appropriate Federal banking agencies for State-chartered insured banks and savings associations, are permitted to conduct on-site examinations of such IDIs on alternating 12-month or 18-month periods with an IDI's State supervisor, if the Board or FDIC, as appropriate, determines that the alternating examination conducted by the State carries out the purposes of section 10(d) of the FDI Act. 12 U.S.C. 1820(d)(3).

In addition, section 7(c)(1)(C) of the IBA provides that a Federal or a State branch or agency of a foreign bank shall be subject to on-site examination by its appropriate Federal banking agency or State bank supervisor as frequently as a national or State bank would be subject to such an examination by the agency.

II. Description of the Interim Final Rules

The agencies are adopting interim final rules to implement the Economic Growth Act's amendments to sections 10(d)(4) and 10(d)(10) of the FDI Act. The rules implement section 10(d)(4) of the FDI Act to increase, from $1 billion to $3 billion, the total asset threshold under which an agency may apply an 18-month on-site examination cycle for qualified IDIs that have an “outstanding” composite rating.

The agencies also are exercising their discretionary authority under section 10(d)(10) of the FDI Act to extend eligibility for an 18-month examination cycle, by regulation, to qualifying IDIs with an “outstanding” or “good” composite rating with total assets under $3 billion. The agencies have determined that increasing the maximum asset amount limitation for qualifying IDIs with less than $3 billion in total assets is consistent with the principles of safety and soundness.

In determining whether the reduction in examination frequency is consistent with the principles of safety and soundness for such IDIs, the agencies considered the following factors. The agencies agree that extending the examination cycle could make it more likely that there will be a delay in an agency's ability to detect deterioration in an IDI's performance. However, the agencies believe that extending the examination cycle from 12 months to 18 months for these small IDIs with relatively simple risk profiles should not appreciably increase their risk of financial deterioration or failure. In addition, the agencies will continue their off-site monitoring activities and have the ability to examine IDIs more frequently as necessary or appropriate. The agencies also note that, in order to qualify for an 18-month examination cycle, any IDI with total assets under $3 billion—including one with a composite rating of “good”—must meet the other capital, managerial, and supervisory criteria set forth in section 10(d) of the FDI Act and the agencies' implementing regulations.

Considering the agencies' off-site monitoring activities; their discretion to examine IDIs more frequently as necessary; and the capital, managerial, and supervisory criteria in section 10(d) of the FDI Act, the agencies believe that increasing the maximum asset amount limitation for IDIs from less than $1 billion to less than $3 billion is consistent with the principles of safety and soundness. Additionally, the agencies believe this increase will allow the agencies to better focus their supervisory resources on the IDIs and U.S. branches and agencies of foreign banks (collectively, financial institutions) that may present capital, managerial, or other issues of supervisory concern, and therefore has the ability to enhance safety and soundness collectively for all financial institutions. The agencies will continue to monitor financial institutions in this asset range and the impact of the extended examination cycle.

In accordance with section 7(c)(1)(C) of the IBA, the agencies also are making conforming changes to their regulations governing the on-site examination cycle for the U.S. branches and agencies of foreign banks. For the same reasons as discussed above, the agencies believe that extending similar treatment to qualifying U.S. branches and agencies of foreign banks is consistent with the principles of safety and soundness.

The agencies estimate that the interim final rules will increase the number of banks and savings associations that may qualify for an extended 18-month examination cycle by approximately 420 (227 of which are supervised by the FDIC, 100 by the OCC, and 93 by the Board), bringing the total number to 4,798 banks and savings associations.10 Approximately 33 U.S. branches and agencies of foreign banks would be eligible for the extended examination cycle based on the interim final rules (2 of which are supervised by the FDIC, 9 by the OCC, and 22 by the Board).11

10 Call Report data, Mar. 31, 2018.

11Id.

Effective Date/Request for Comment

The agencies are issuing the interim final rules without prior notice and the opportunity for public comment and the 30-day delayed effective date ordinarily prescribed by the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).12 Pursuant to section 553(b)(B) of the APA, general notice and the opportunity for public comment are not required with respect to a rulemaking when an “agency for good cause finds (and incorporates the finding and a brief statement of reasons therefor in the rules issued) that notice and public procedure thereon are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” 13 The interim final rules implement the provisions in section 210 of the Economic Growth Act, which was enacted on May 24, 2018. In particular, the interim final rules adopt the statutory increase in the total asset threshold, from under $1 billion to under $3 billion, for qualifying IDIs with an “outstanding” composite rating, and also make available, pursuant to statutory authority, the 18-month examination cycle for qualifying IDIs with an “outstanding” or “good” composite rating and total assets under $3 billion. The interim final rules also make conforming amendments to the agencies' regulations governing the on-site examination cycle for U.S. branches and agencies of foreign banks, as required by statute.

12 5 U.S.C. 553.

13 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B).

The agencies believe that the public interest is best served by implementing the statutorily amended thresholds as soon as possible. Immediate implementation will reduce regulatory burden on small, well capitalized, and well managed financial institutions while also allowing the agencies to better focus their supervisory resources on those financial institutions that may present capital, managerial, or other issues of supervisory concern. Because the affected financial institutions and agencies must plan and prepare for examinations in advance, the agencies believe issuing interim final rules will provide the certainty necessary to allow the financial institutions and agencies to begin scheduling for examinations according to the new examination cycle period. In addition, the agencies believe that providing a notice and comment period prior to issuance of the interim final rules is unnecessary because the agencies do not expect public objection to the regulations being promulgated as they merely provide the relief that Congress intended. Moreover, because the interim final rules will permit an agency to conduct an on-site examination of financial institutions more frequently than once every 18 months, the agencies retain the ability to maintain the current—or a more frequent—on-site examination schedule for a financial institution if the relevant agency determines it would be necessary or appropriate. For these reasons, the agencies find there is good cause consistent with the public interest to issue the rules without advance notice and comment.14

14 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B); 553(d)(3).

The APA also requires a 30-day delayed effective date, except for (1) substantive rules which grant or recognize an exemption or relieve a restriction; (2) interpretative rules and statements of policy; or (3) as otherwise provided by the agency for good cause.15 The agencies conclude that, because the rules recognize an exemption, the interim final rules are exempt from the APA's delayed effective date requirement.16 Additionally, the agencies find good cause to publish the interim final rules with an immediate effective date for the same reasons set forth above under the discussion of section 553(b)(B) of the APA.

15 5 U.S.C. 553(d).

16 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1).

While the agencies believe there is good cause to issue the rules without advance notice and comment and with an immediate effective date, the agencies are interested in the views of the public and request comment on all aspects of the interim final rules.

III. Solicitation of Comments on Use of Plain Language

Section 722 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act 17 requires the Federal banking agencies to use plain language in all proposed and final rules published after January 1, 2000. The agencies invite your comments on how to make these interim final rules easier to understand. For example:

17 Public Law 106-102, section 722, 113 Stat. 1338, 1471 (1999).

Have the agencies presented the material in an organized manner that meets your needs? If not, how could this material be better organized?

Are the requirements in the interim final rules clearly stated? If not, how could the interim final rules be more clearly stated?

Do the interim final rules contain language or jargon that is not clear? If so, which language requires clarification?

Would a different format (grouping and order of sections, use of headings, paragraphing) make the interim final rules easier to understand? If so, what changes to the format would make the interim final rules easier to understand?

What else could the agencies do to make the regulation easier to understand?

IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 18 requires an agency to consider whether the rules it proposes will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.19 The RFA applies only to rules for which an agency publishes a general notice of proposed rulemaking pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b). As discussed previously, consistent with section 553(b)(B) of the APA, the agencies have determined for good cause that general notice and opportunity for public comment is unnecessary, and therefore the agencies are not issuing a notice of proposed rulemaking. Accordingly, the agencies have concluded that the RFA's requirements relating to initial and final regulatory flexibility analysis do not apply. Further, the agencies note that no small entities, as defined by the Small Business Administration's rules implementing the RFA, will be affected by the interim final rule's increased asset thresholds.

18 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.

19 Under regulations issued by the Small Business Administration, a small entity includes a depository institution, bank holding company, or savings and loan holding company with total assets of $550 million or less and trust companies with total assets of $38.5 million or less.

V. Paperwork Reduction Act

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 20 states that no agency may conduct or sponsor, nor is the respondent required to respond to, an information collection unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. Because the interim final rules do not create a new, or revise an existing, collection of information, no information collection request submission needs to be made to the OMB.

20 44 U.S.C. 3501-3521.

VI. Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act

Pursuant to section 302(a) of the Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act (RCDRIA),21 in determining the effective date and administrative compliance requirements for a new regulation that imposes additional reporting, disclosure, or other requirements on IDIs, each Federal banking agency must consider any administrative burdens that such regulation would place on IDIs and the benefits of such regulation. In addition, section 302(b) of the RCDRIA requires such new regulation to take effect on the first day of a calendar quarter that begins on or after the date on which the regulations are published in final form, with certain exceptions, including for good cause. Because the interim final rules expand eligibility for an 18-month, rather than 12-month, on-site examination schedule and are burden-reducing in nature, the interim final rules do not impose additional reporting, disclosure, or other requirements on IDIs, and section 302 of the RCDRIA therefore does not apply. Nevertheless, the agencies have considered the administrative burdens that such regulations would place on depository institutions and the benefits of such regulations in determining the effective date and compliance requirements. In addition, for the same reasons set forth previously under the discussion of section 553(b)(B) of the APA, the agencies find good cause would exist under section 302 of RCDRIA to publish these interim final rules with an immediate effective date.

21 12 U.S.C. 4802(a).

VII. OCC Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 Determination

Consistent with section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), before promulgating any final rule for which a general notice of proposed rulemaking was published, the OCC prepares an economic analysis of the final rule. As discussed previously, the OCC has determined that the publication of a general notice of proposed rulemaking is unnecessary. Accordingly, the OCC has not prepared an economic analysis of the joint interim final rules under UMRA.

List of Subjects 12 CFR Part 4

Administrative practice and procedure, Freedom of information, Individuals with disabilities, Minority businesses, Organization and functions (Government agencies), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Women.

12 CFR Part 208

Accounting, Agriculture, Banks, banking, Confidential business information, Crime, Currency, Federal Reserve System, Flood insurance, Mortgages, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Safety and soundness, Securities.

12 CFR Part 211

Exports, Federal Reserve System, Foreign banking, Holding companies, Investments, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

12 CFR Part 337

Banks, banking, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Savings Associations.

12 CFR Part 347

Authority delegations (Government agencies), Bank deposit insurance, Banks, banking, Credit, Foreign banking, Investments, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, U.S. investments abroad.

Office of the Comptroller of the Currency 12 CFR Chapter I

For the reasons set forth in the joint preamble, the OCC amends part 4 of chapter I of title 12 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 4—ORGANIZATION AND FUNCTIONS, AVAILABILITY AND RELEASE OF INFORMATION, CONTRACTING OUTREACH PROGRAM, POST-EMPLOYMENT RESTRICTIONS FOR SENIOR EXAMINERS 1. The authority citation for part 4 continues to read as follows: Authority:

5 U.S.C. 301, 552; 12 U.S.C. 1, 93a, 161, 481, 482, 484(a), 1442, 1462a, 1463, 1464 1817(a), 1818, 1820, 1821, 1831m, 1831p-1, 1831o, 1833e, 1867, 1951 et seq., 2601 et seq., 2801 et seq., 2901 et seq., 3101 et seq., 3401 et seq., 5321, 5412, 5414; 15 U.S.C. 77uu(b), 78q(c)(3); 18 U.S.C. 641, 1905, 1906; 29 U.S.C. 1204; 31 U.S.C. 5318(g)(2), 9701; 42 U.S.C. 3601; 44 U.S.C. 3506, 3510; E.O. 12600 (3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 235).

2. Section 4.6 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(1) to read as follows:
§ 4.6 Frequency of examination of national banks and Federal savings associations.

(b) * * *

(1) The bank or Federal savings association has total assets of less than $3 billion;

3. Section 4.7 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(1)(i) to read as follows:
§ 4.7 Frequency of examination of Federal agencies and branches.

(b) * * *

(1) * * *

(i) Has total assets of less than $3 billion;

Federal Reserve System 12 CFR Chapter II

For the reasons set forth in the joint preamble, the Board amends parts 208 and 211 of chapter II of title 12 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 208—MEMBERSHIP OF STATE BANKING INSTITUTIONS IN THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM (REGULATION H) 4. The authority citation for part 208 continues to read as follows: Authority:

12 U.S.C. 24, 36, 92a, 93a, 248(a), 248(c), 321-338a, 371d, 461, 481-486, 601, 611, 1814, 1816, 1818, 1820(d)(9), 1833(j), 1828(o), 1831, 1831o, 1831p-1, 1831r-1, 1831w, 1831x, 1835a, 1882, 2901-2907, 3105, 3310, 3331-3351, 3353, and 3906-3909; 15 U.S.C. 78b, 781(b), 78l(i), 780-4(c)(5), 78q, 78q-1, 78w, 1681s, 1681w, 6801 and 6805, 31 U.S.C. 5318; 42 U.S.C. 4012a, 4104b, 4106, and 4128.

5. Amend § 208.64 by revising paragraph (b)(1) to read as follows:
§ 208.64 Frequency of examination.

(b) * * *

(1) The bank has total assets of less than $3 billion;

PART 211—INTERNATIONAL BANKING OPERATIONS (REGULATION K) 6. The authority citation for part 211 continues to read as follows: Authority:

12 U.S.C. 221 et seq., 1818, 1835a, 1841 et seq., 3101 et seq., 3901 et seq., and 5101 et seq.; 15 U.S.C. 1681s, 1681w, 6801 and 6805.

7. Amend § 211.26 by revising paragraph (c)(2)(i)(A) to read as follows:
§ 211.26 Examinations of offices and affiliates of foreign banks.

(c) * * *

(2) * * *

(i) * * *

(A) Has total assets of less than $3 billion;

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation 12 CFR Chapter III

For the reasons set forth in the joint preamble, the Board of Directors of the FDIC amends parts 337 and 347 of chapter III of title 12 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 337—UNSAFE AND UNSOUND BANK PRACTICES 8. The authority citation for part 337 continues to read as follows: Authority:

12 U.S.C. 375a(4), 375b, 1463(a)(1), 1816, 1818(a), 1818(b), 1819, 1820(d), 1828(j)(2), 1831, 1831f, 5412.

9. Amend § 337.12 by revising paragraph (b)(1) to read as follows:
§ 337.12 Frequency of examination.

(b) * * *

(1) The institution has total assets of less than $3 billion;

PART 347—INTERNATIONAL BANKING 10. The authority citation for part 347 continues to read as follows: Authority:

12 U.S.C. 1813, 1815, 1817, 1819, 1820, 1828, 3103, 3104, 3105, 3108, 3109; Pub. L. 111-203, section 939A, 124 Stat. 1376, 1887 (July 21, 2010) (codified 15 U.S.C. 78o-7 note).

11. Amend § 347.211 by revising paragraph (b)(1)(i) to read as follows:
§ 347.211 Examination of branches of foreign banks.

(b) * * *

(1) * * *

(i) Has total assets of less than $3 billion;

Dated: August 20, 2018. Joseph M. Otting, Comptroller of the Currency. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, August 22, 2018. Ann E. Misback, Secretary to the Board. Dated at Washington, DC, on August 22, 2018. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-18685 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810-33-P
FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY 12 CFR Parts 1209, 1217, and 1250 RIN 2590-AA93 Rules of Practice and Procedure; Civil Money Penalty Inflation Adjustment AGENCY:

Federal Housing Finance Agency.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) is issuing this final rule amending its Rules of Practice and Procedure and other agency regulations to adjust each civil money penalty within its jurisdiction to account for inflation, pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990, as amended by the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015.

DATES:

Effective date: September 28, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Stephen E. Hart, Deputy General Counsel, at (202) 649-3053, [email protected], or Frank R. Wright, Assistant General Counsel, at (202) 649-3087, [email protected] (not toll-free numbers); Federal Housing Finance Agency, 400 7th Street SW, Washington, DC 20219. The telephone number for the Telecommunications Device for the Hearing Impaired is: (800) 877-8339 (TDD only).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

FHFA is an independent agency of the Federal government, and the financial safety and soundness regulator of the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) (collectively, the Enterprises), as well as the Federal Home Loan Banks (collectively, the Banks) and the Office of Finance under authority granted by the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 (Safety and Soundness Act).1 FHFA oversees the Enterprises and Banks (collectively, the regulated entities) and the Office of Finance to ensure that they operate in a safe and sound manner and maintain liquidity in the housing finance market in accordance with applicable laws, rules and regulations. To that end, FHFA is vested with broad supervisory discretion and specific civil administrative enforcement powers, similar to such authority granted by Congress to the Federal bank regulatory agencies.2 Section 1376 of the Safety and Soundness Act (12 U.S.C. 4636) empowers FHFA to impose civil money penalties under specific conditions. FHFA's Rules of Practice and Procedure regulation (12 CFR part 1209) govern cease and desist proceedings, civil money penalty assessment proceedings, and other administrative adjudications.3 FHFA's Flood Insurance regulation (12 CFR part 1250) governs flood insurance responsibilities as they pertain to the Enterprises.4 FHFA's Implementation of the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986 regulation (12 CFR part 1217) sets forth procedures for imposing civil penalties and assessments under the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act (31 U.S.C. 3801 et seq.) on any person that makes a false claim for property, services or money from FHFA, or makes a false material statement to FHFA in connection with a claim, where the amount involved does not exceed $150,000.5

1See Safety and Soundness Act, 12 U.S.C. 4513 and 4631-4641.

2Id.

3See 12 CFR part 1209.

4See 12 CFR part 1250.

5See generally, 31 U.S.C. 3801 et seq.

II. The Adjustment Improvements Act

The Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990 (“Inflation Adjustment Act”), as amended by the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015 (“Adjustment Improvements Act”), requires FHFA, as well as other Federal agencies with the authority to issue civil money penalties (CMPs), to adjust by regulation the maximum amount of each CMP authorized by law that the agency has jurisdiction to administer.6 The Adjustment Improvements Act required agencies to make an initial “catch-up” adjustment of their CMPs upon the statute's enactment, and further requires agencies to make additional adjustments on an annual basis following the initial adjustment.7

6See 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.

7 FHFA promulgated its catch-up adjustment of its CMPs with an interim final rule published July 1, 2016. 81 FR 43028.

Annual inflation adjustments under the Adjustment Improvements Act are based on the percent change between the October Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (the CPI-U) preceding the date of the adjustment and the October CPI-U for the year before that.

III. Description of the Rule

This final rule adjusts the maximum penalty amount within each of the three tiers specified in 12 U.S.C. 4636 by amending the table contained in 12 CFR 1209.80 to reflect the new adjusted maximum penalty amount that FHFA may impose upon a regulated entity or any entity-affiliated party within each tier. The increases in maximum penalty amounts contained in this final rule may not necessarily affect the amount of any CMP that FHFA may seek for a particular violation, which may not be the maximum that the law allows; FHFA would calculate each CMP on a case-by-case basis in light of a variety of factors.8 This rule also adjusts the maximum penalty amounts for violations under the FHFA Flood Insurance regulation by amending the text of 12 CFR 1250.3 to reflect the new adjusted maximum penalty amount that FHFA may impose for violations under that regulation. This rule also adjusts the maximum amounts for civil money penalties under the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act by amending the text of 12 CFR 1217.3 to reflect the new adjusted maximum penalty amount that FHFA may impose for violations under that regulation.

8See, e.g., 12 CFR 1209.7(c); FHFA Enforcement Policy, AB 2013-03 (May 31, 2013).

The Adjustment Improvements Act directs federal agencies to calculate each annual CMP adjustment as the percent change between the CPI-U for the previous October and the CPI-U for October of the calendar year before.9 The maximum CMP amounts for FHFA penalties under 12 U.S.C. 4636 were last adjusted in 2016.10 Since FHFA is making this round of adjustments in calendar year 2018, and the maximum CMP amounts were last set in calendar year 2016, the inflation adjustment amount for each maximum CMP amount was calculated by comparing the CPI-U for October 2015 with the CPI-U for October 2016, resulting in an inflation factor of 1.01636, and then comparing the CPI-U for October 2016 with the CPI-U for October 2017, resulting in an inflation factor of 1.02041. For each maximum CMP calculation, the product of this inflation adjustment and the previous maximum penalty amount was then rounded to the nearest whole dollar as required by the Adjustment Improvements Act, to determine the new adjusted maximum penalty amount.11 The table below sets out these items accordingly.

9 This final rule will incorporate the annual inflation adjustments for 2017 and 2018 by performing the calculation for 2017, and applying the 2018 adjustment to that amount.

10See 81 FR 43028, 43030 (July 1, 2016).

11 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.

U.S. Code citation Description Previous
  • maximum
  • penalty
  • amount
  • Rounded
  • inflation
  • increase
  • New adjusted
  • maximum
  • penalty
  • amount
  • 12 U.S.C. 4636(b)(1) First Tier $10,982 $408 $11,390 12 U.S.C. 4636(b)(2) Second Tier 54,910 2,037 56,947 12 U.S.C. 4636(b)(4) Third Tier (Entity-affiliated party and Regulated entity) 2,196,380 81,495 2,277,875

    Similarly, the CMP for FHFA penalties under the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act were last adjusted in 2016.12 Since FHFA is making this round of adjustments in calendar year 2018, and the maximum CMP amounts were last set in calendar year 2016, the inflation adjustment amount for each maximum CMP amount was calculated as above by comparing the CPI-U for October 2015 with the CPI-U for October 2016, resulting in an inflation factor of 1.01636, and then comparing the CPI-U for October 2016 with the CPI-U for October 2017, resulting in an inflation factor of 1.02041. The table below sets out these items accordingly.

    12See 81 FR 43031, 43035 (July 1, 2016).

    U.S. Code citation Description Previous
  • maximum
  • penalty
  • amount
  • Rounded
  • inflation
  • increase
  • New adjusted
  • maximum
  • penalty
  • amount
  • 31 U.S.C. 3802(a)(1) Maximum penalty per false claim $10,781 $400 $11,181 31 U.S.C 3802(a)(2) Maximum penalty per false statement 10,781 400 11,181

    Similarly, the CMP for FHFA penalties under the Flood Insurance regulation were last adjusted in 2016.13 Since FHFA is making this round of adjustments in calendar year 2018, and the maximum CMP amounts were last set in calendar year 2016, the inflation adjustment amount for each maximum CMP amount was calculated as above by comparing the CPI-U for October 2015 with the CPI-U for October 2016, resulting in an inflation factor of 1.01636, and then comparing the CPI-U for October 2016 with the CPI-U for October 2017, resulting in an inflation factor of 1.02041. The table below sets out these items accordingly.

    13See 81 FR 43028, 43031 (July 1, 2016).

    U.S. Code citation Description Previous
  • maximum
  • penalty
  • amount
  • Rounded
  • inflation
  • increase
  • New adjusted
  • maximum
  • penalty
  • amount
  • 42 U.S.C. 4012a(f)(5) Maximum penalty per violation $534 $20 $554 42 U.S.C. 4012a(f)(5) Maximum total penalties assessed against an Enterprise in a calendar year 154,028 5,715 159,743
    IV. Differences Between the Federal Home Loan Banks and the Enterprises

    When promulgating any regulation that may have future effect relating to the Banks, the Director is required by section 1313(f) of the Safety and Soundness Act to consider the differences between the Banks and the Enterprises with respect to the Banks' cooperative ownership structure; mission of providing liquidity to members; affordable housing and community development mission; capital structure; and joint and several liability (12 U.S.C. 4513(f)).14 The Director considered the differences between the Banks and the Enterprises, as they relate to the above factors, and determined that this final rule is appropriate, as the maximum civil money penalty amounts are set by statute, as is the manner in which FHFA is required to adjust those amounts, so there is no possibility to vary those provisions in this rule based on consideration of the factors recited in section 1313(f). The inflation adjustments effected by the final rule are mandated by law, Any imposition of civil money penalties would only take place after an enforcement action in which FHFA would have an opportunity to consider all relevant factors. The special features of the Banks identified in section 1313(f) of the Safety and Soundness Act can be accommodated, if appropriate, along with any other relevant factors, when determining any actual penalties.

    14 So in original; no paragraphs (d) and (e) were enacted. See 12 U.S.C.A. 4513 n 1.

    V. Regulatory Impact Administrative Procedure Act

    FHFA finds good cause that notice and an opportunity to comment on this final rule are unnecessary under section 553(b)(B) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). The Adjustment Improvements Act states that the annual civil money penalty adjustments shall be made notwithstanding the rulemaking provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553. Furthermore, this rulemaking conforms with and is consistent with the statutory directive set forth in the Adjustment Improvements Act. As a result, there are no issues of policy discretion about which to seek public comment. Accordingly, FHFA is issuing these amendments as a final rule.

    Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),15 an agency must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis for all proposed and final rules that describes the impact of the rule on small entities, unless the head of an agency certifies that the rule will not have “a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.” However, the RFA applies only to rules for which an agency publishes a general notice of proposed rulemaking pursuant to the APA.16 As discussed above, FHFA has determined for good cause that the APA does not require a general notice of proposed rulemaking for this rule. Thus, the RFA does not apply to this final rule.

    15 5 U.S.C. 603.

    16 5 U.S.C. 603(a), 604(a).

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) requires that regulations involving the collection of information receive clearance from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This rule contains no such collection of information requiring OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act. Consequently, no information has been submitted to OMB for review.

    Congressional Review Act

    FHFA has determined that this regulatory action does not qualify as either a “rule” or a “major rule” under the Congressional Review Act. See 5 U.S.C. 804(2), (3).

    List of Subjects 12 CFR Part 1209

    Administrative practice and procedure, Penalties.

    12 CFR Part 1217

    Civil remedies, Program fraud.

    12 CFR Part 1250

    Flood insurance, Government-sponsored enterprises, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION and under the authority of 12 U.S.C. 4513b and 12 U.S.C. 4526, the Federal Housing Finance Agency hereby amends subchapters A and C of chapter XII of Title 12 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

    SUBCHAPTER A—ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS PART 1209—RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE 1. The authority citation for part 1209 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    5 U.S.C. 554, 556, 557, and 701 et seq.; 12 U.S.C. 1430c(d); 12 U.S.C. 4501, 4502, 4503, 4511, 4513, 4513b, 4517, 4526, 4566(c)(1) and (c)(7), 4581-4588, 4631-4641; and 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.

    2. Revise § 1209.80 to read as follows:
    § 1209.80 Inflation adjustments.

    The maximum amount of each civil money penalty within FHFA's jurisdiction, as set by the Safety and Soundness Act and thereafter adjusted in accordance with the Inflation Adjustment Act, is as follows:

    U.S. Code citation Description New adjusted
  • maximum
  • penalty
  • amount
  • 12 U.S.C. 4636(b)(1) First Tier $11,390 12 U.S.C. 4636(b)(2) Second Tier 56,947 12 U.S.C. 4636(b)(4) Third Tier (Regulated Entity or Entity-Affiliated party) 2,277,875
    3. Revise § 1209.81 to read as follows:
    § 1209.81 Applicability.

    The inflation adjustments set out in § 1209.80 shall apply to civil money penalties assessed in accordance with the provisions of the Safety and Soundness Act, 12 U.S.C. 4636, and subparts B and C of this part, for violations occurring after September 28, 2018.

    PART 1217—PROGRAM FRAUD CIVIL REMEDIES ACT 4. The authority citation for part 1217 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    12 U.S.C. 4501; 12 U.S.C. 4526; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note; 31 U.S.C. 3801-3812.

    5. Amend § 1217.3 by revising paragraphs (a)(1) introductory text and (b)(1) introductory text to read as follows:
    § 1217.3 Basis for civil penalties and assessments.

    (a) * * * (1) A civil penalty of not more than $11,181 may be imposed upon a person who makes a claim to FHFA for property, services, or money where the person knows or has reason to know that the claim:

    (b) * * * (1) A civil penalty of up to $11,181 may be imposed upon a person who makes a written statement to FHFA with respect to a claim, contract, bid or proposal for a contract, or benefit from FHFA that:

    SUBCHAPTER C—ENTERPRISES PART 1250—FLOOD INSURANCE 6. The authority citation for part 1250 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    12 U.S.C. 4521(a)(4) and 4526; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note; 42 U.S.C. 4001 note; 42 U.S.C. 4012a(f)(3), (4), (5), (8), (9), and (10).

    7. Amend § 1250.3 by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
    § 1250.3 Civil money penalties.

    (c) Amount. The maximum civil money penalty amount is $534 for each violation that occurs before September 28, 2018, with total penalties not to exceed $154,028. For violations that occur on or after September 28, 2018, the civil money penalty under this section may not exceed $554 for each violation, with total penalties assessed under this section against an Enterprise during any calendar year not to exceed $159,743.

    Dated: August 15, 2018. Melvin L. Watt, Director, Federal Housing Finance Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18517 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8070-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0062; Airspace Docket No. 18-ASO-3] RIN 2120-AA66 Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace; Pensacola, FL, and Establishment of Class E Airspace; Milton, FL AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This action amends Class D airspace and Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Choctaw Naval Outlying Field (NOLF), Milton, FL, by changing the city associated with the airport name in the above airspace classes and adjusting the geographic coordinates of the airport and the Santa Rosa TACAN navigation aid to match the FAA's aeronautical database. Additionally, Class E surface airspace is established at Choctaw NOLF for the safety of aircraft landing and departing the airport when the air traffic control tower is closed. Also, an editorial change is made to the Class D airspace legal description replacing “Airport/Facility Directory” with the term “Chart Supplement”. This action enhances the safety and management of instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at this airport.

    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:

    John Fornito, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, 1701 Columbia Avenue, 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 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 establishes Class E airspace, and amends Class D and Class E airspace at Choctaw NOLF, Milton, FL, to support IFR operations at the airport.

    History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM in the Federal Register (83 FR 9242, March 5, 2018) for Docket No. FAA-2018-0062 to amend Class D airspace and Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Choctaw NOLF, Milton, FL, and establish Class E surface area airspace at Choctaw NOLF, Milton, FL.

    Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. One comment was received supporting the proposal.

    Class D and E airspace designations are published in paragraph 5000, 6002, and 6005, respectively, 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 and 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 proposes to amend 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:

    Amending Class D airspace at Choctaw NOLF, Milton, FL, by adjusting the geographic coordinates of the airport and the Santa Rosa TACAN navigation aid to be in concert with the FAA's aeronautical database. Also, this action makes an editorial change in the airspace designation replacing the city associated with the airport name from Pensacola, to Milton, to comply with a change to FAA Order 7400.2L, Procedures for Handling Airspace Matters. Additionally, this action replaces the outdated term “Airport/Facility Directory” with the term “Chart Supplement” in the airspace legal description;

    Establishing Class E surface area airspace at Choctaw NOLF, Milton, FL, within a 2.5-mile radius of Choctaw NOLF, with an extension from the 2.5-mile radius to 10.5 miles south of the Santa Rosa TACAN, for the safety of aircraft landing and departing the airport after the air traffic control tower closes; and Amending Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Choctaw NOLF, Milton, FL, by adjusting the geographic coordinates of the airport to be in concert with the FAA's aeronautical database. This action also makes an editorial change by removing the airport name, Choctaw Outlying Field, from the airspace designation, which now becomes Milton, FL.

    This action amends the geographic coordinates of these airports and the Keesler TACAN navigation aid to be in concert with the FAA's aeronautical database.

    Class D and Class E airspace designations are published in Paragraph 5000, 6002, and 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 D and E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

    Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. 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 5-6.5a. 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 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. ASO FL D Milton, FL [Amended] Choctaw NOLF, FL (Lat. 30°30′25″ N, long. 86°57′35″ W) Santa Rosa TACAN (Lat. 30°36′55″ N, long. 86°56′15″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 2,600 feet MSL within a 2.5-mile radius of Choctaw NOLF and within 1.5 miles each side of the Santa Rosa TACAN 188° radial, extending from the 2.5-mile radius to 10.5 miles south of the TACAN; excluding that airspace within Restricted Area R-2915A. This Class D airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

    Paragraph 6002 Class E Surface Area Airspace. ASO FL E2 Milton, FL [New] Choctaw NOLF, FL (Lat. 30°30′25″ N, long. 86°57′35″ W) Santa Rosa TACAN (Lat. 30°36′55″ N, long. 86°56′15″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within a 2.5-mile radius of Choctaw NOLF and within 1.5 miles each side of the Santa Rosa TACAN 188° radial, extending from the 2.5-mile radius to 10.5 miles south of the TACAN; excluding that airspace within Restricted Area R-2915A. This Class E airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

    Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. ASO FL E5 Milton, FL [Amended] Choctaw NOLF, FL (Lat. 30°30′25″ N, long. 86°57′35″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.7-mile radius of Choctaw NOLF.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on August 20, 2018. Ryan W. Almasy, Manager Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic Organization.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18644 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0138; Airspace Docket No. 18-ASW-5] RIN 2120-AA66 Amendment of Class D and E Airspace; Austin, TX; and Establishment of Class E Airspace; Georgetown, TX, and Austin, TX AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This action amends Class D airspace at San Marcos Regional Airport, Austin, TX; establishes Class E airspace designated as a surface area at Georgetown Municipal Airport, Georgetown, TX, and San Marcos Regional Airport; and amends Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at San Marco Regional Airport and Lockhart Municipal Airport, Lockhart, TX. This action is at the request of Austin Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT)/Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON) to establish part-time Class E airspace designated as a surface area at Georgetown Municipal Airport and San Marcos Regional Airport and to review the associated airspace for the safety and management of instrument flight rule (IFR) operations at these airports. The name of San Marcos Regional Airport is updated to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database, and the outdated term “Airport/Facility Directory” is replaced with the term “Chart Supplement”.

    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:

    Jeffrey Claypool, Federal Aviation Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone (817) 222-5711.

    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 D airspace at San Marcos Regional Airport, Austin, TX; establishes Class E airspace designated as a surface area at Georgetown Municipal Airport, Georgetown, TX, and San Marcos Regional Airport; and amends Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at San Marco Regional Airport and Lockhart Municipal Airport, Lockhart, TX, to support IFR operations at these airports.

    History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register (83 FR 25971; June 5, 2018) for Docket No. FAA-2018-0138 to amend Class D airspace at San Marcos Regional Airport, Austin, TX; establish Class E airspace designated as a surface area at Georgetown Municipal Airport, Georgetown, TX, and San Marcos Regional Airport; and amend Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at San Marco Regional Airport and Lockhart Municipal Airport, Lockhart, TX. 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 D and E airspace designations are published in paragraphs 5000, 6002, and 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 D and 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

    This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71:

    Amends the location in the header of the airspace legal description of the Class D airspace from San Marcos, TX, to Austin, TX, to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database; amends the radius to within a 4.3-mile radius (increased from a 4.2-mile radius) of San Marcos Regional Airport (formerly San Marcos Municipal Airport), Austin, TX; adds an extension 1.0 mile each side of the 306° bearing from the San Marcos Regional: RWY 13-LOC extending from the 4.3-mile radius to 4.6 miles northwest of the airport; updates the name of the airport to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database; and makes an editorial change to the airspace legal description replacing “Airport/Facility Directory” with “Chart Supplement”;

    Establishes Class E airspace designated as a surface area within a 4.3-mile radius of San Marcos Regional Airport, Austin, TX, with an extension 1.0 mile each side of the 306° bearing from the San Marcos Regional: RWY 13-LOC extending from the 4.3-mile radius to 4.6 miles northwest of the airport; and with an extension 1.0 mile each side of the 313° bearing from the airport from the 4.3-mile radius to 5.0 miles northwest of the airport; and with an extension 1.0 mile each side of the 268° bearing from the airport from the 4.3-mile radius to 4.4 miles west of the airport; and with an extension 1.0 mile each side of the 358° bearing from the airport from the 4.3-mile radius to 4.4 miles north of the airport;

    Establishes Class E airspace designated as a surface area within a 4.1-mile radius of Georgetown Municipal Airport, Georgetown, TX; and

    Amends the location in the header of the airspace legal description of the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface from San Marcos, TX, to Austin, TX, to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database; amends the radius to within a 6.8-mile radius (increased from a 6.7-mile radius) of San Marcos Regional Airport (formerly San Marcos Municipal Airport), Austin, TX; amends the extension to the northwest of the airport to 12.0 miles (increased from 11.1 miles); amends the extension to the east of the airport to 10.5 miles (increased from 10.4 miles); amends the extension to the southeast of the airport to 9.7 miles (increased from 9.6 miles); amends the extension to the south of the airport to 10.5 miles (increased from 10.4 miles); and amends the radius to within 6.4-miles (increased from a 6.3-mile radius) of Lockhart Municipal Airport, Lockhart, TX, included in the Austin, TX, airspace legal description.

    This action is at the request of Austin ATCT/TRACON to establish part-time Class E airspace designated as a surface areas at Georgetown Municipal Airport and San Marcos Regional Airport and to review the associated airspace for the safety and management of IFR operations at these airports.

    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 5000 Class D Airspace. ASW TX D Austin, TX [Amended] San Marcos Regional Airport, TX (Lat. 29°53′34″ N, long. 97°51′47″ W) San Marcos Regional: RWY 13-LOC (Lat. 29°53′03″ N, long. 97°51′15″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 3,100 feet MSL within a 4.3-mile radius of San Marcos Regional Airport, and within 1.0 mile each side of the San Marcos Regional: RWY13-LOC extending from the 4.3-mile radius to 4.6 miles northwest of the airport, and within 1.0 mile each side of the 313° bearing from the airport extending from the 4.3-mile radius to 5.0 miles northwest of the airport, and within 1.0 mile each side of the 268° bearing from the airport extending from the 4.3-mile radius to 4.4 miles west of the airport, and within 1.0 mile each side of the 358° bearing from the airport extending from the 4.3-mile radius to 4.4 miles north of the airport. This Class D airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective dates and times will thereafter be continually published in the Chart Supplement.

    Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Areas Designated as Surface Areas. ASW TX E2 Austin, TX [New] San Marcos Regional Airport, TX (Lat. 29°53′34″ N, long. 97°51′47″ W) San Marcos Regional: RWY 13-LOC (Lat. 29°53′03″ N, long. 97°51′15″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 3,100 feet MSL within a 4.3-mile radius of San Marcos Regional Airport, and within 1.0 mile each side of the San Marcos Regional: RWY13-LOC extending from the 4.3-mile radius to 4.6 miles northwest of the airport, and within 1.0 mile each side of the 313° bearing from the airport extending from the 4.3-mile radius to 5 miles northwest of the airport, and within 1.0 mile each side of the 268° bearing from the airport extending from the 4.3-mile radius to 4.4 miles west of the airport, and within 1.0 mile each side of the 358° bearing from the airport extending from the 4.3-mile radius to 4.4 miles north of the airport. This Class E airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective dates and times will thereafter be continually published in the Chart Supplement.

    ASW TX E2 Georgetown, TX [New] Georgetown Municipal Airport, TX (Lat. 30°40′44″ N, long. 97°40′46″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 3,300 feet MSL within a 4.1-mile radius of Georgetown Municipal Airport. This Class E airspace is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective dates and times will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

    Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. ASW TX E5 Austin, TX [Amended] San Marcos Regional Airport, TX (Lat. 29°53′34″ N, long. 97°51′47″ W) Lockhart Municipal Airport, TX (Lat. 29°51′01″ N, long. 97°40′21″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.8-mile radius of San Marcos Regional Airport, and within 2 miles each side of the 268° bearing from the airport extending from the 6.8-mile radius to 13.1 miles west of the airport, and within 2 miles each side of the 313° bearing from the airport extending from the 6.8-mile radius to 12.0 miles northwest of the airport, and within 2 miles each side of the 088° bearing from the airport extending from the 6.8-mile radius to 10.5 miles east of the airport, and within 2 miles each side of the 133° bearing from the airport extending from the 6.8-mile radius to 9.7 miles southeast of the airport, and within 2 miles each side of the 178° bearing from the airport extending from the 6.8-mile radius to 10.5 miles south of the airport, and within a 6.4-mile radius of Lockhart Municipal Airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on August 22, 2018. Walter Tweedy, Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18645 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement 30 CFR Part 901 [SATS No. AL-082-FOR; Docket ID: OSM-2017-0011; S1D1S SS08011000 SX064A000 189S180110; S2D2S SS08011000 SX064A000 18XS501520] Alabama Regulatory Program AGENCY:

    Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Final rule; approval of amendment.

    SUMMARY:

    We, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE), are approving an amendment to the Alabama regulatory program (Alabama program) under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA or the Act). Alabama proposed revisions to its program regarding permit fees. Alabama revised its program at its own initiative to raise revenues sufficient to fund the Alabama Surface Mining Commission's (ASMC) share of costs to administer the Alabama coal regulatory program, including the reviewing, administering, inspecting, and enforcing of surface coal mining permits in Alabama.

    DATES:

    The effective date is September 28, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    William Joseph, Acting Director, Birmingham Field Office, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 135 Gemini Circle, Suite 215, Homewood, Alabama 35209. Telephone: (205) 290-7282. Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background on the Alabama Program II. Submission of the Amendment III. OSMRE's Findings IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments V. OSMRE's Decisions VI. Procedural Determinations I. Background on the Alabama Program

    Section 503(a) of the Act permits a State to assume primacy for the regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations on non-Federal and non-Indian lands within its borders by demonstrating that its program includes, among other things, State laws and regulations that govern surface coal mining and reclamation operations in accordance with the requirements of the Act and consistent with the Federal regulations. See 30 U.S.C. 1253(a)(1) and (7). On the basis of these criteria, the Secretary of the Interior conditionally approved the Alabama program effective May 20, 1982. You can find background information on the Alabama program, including the Secretary's findings, the disposition of comments, and the conditions of approval of the Alabama program in the May 20, 1982, Federal Register (47 FR 22030). You can also find later actions concerning the Alabama program and program amendments at 30 CFR 901.10, 901.15, and 901.16.

    II. Submission of the Amendment

    By email dated August 14, 2017 (Administrative Record No. AL-0672), Alabama sent us an amendment to its program under SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.) at its own initiative.

    We announced the receipt of the proposed amendment in the January 22, 2018, Federal Register (83 FR 2953). In the same document, we opened the public comment period and provided an opportunity for a public hearing or meeting on the adequacy of the amendment. We did not hold a public hearing or meeting because no one requested one. The public comment period ended on February 21, 2018. We received four public comments (Administrative Record No. AL-0672-03) that are addressed in the Public Comments section of IV, Summary and Disposition of Comments, below.

    III. OSMRE's Findings

    We are approving the amendment as described below. The following are findings we made concerning Alabama's amendment under SMCRA and the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 732.15 and 732.17. Any revisions that we do not specifically discuss below concerning non-substantive wording or editorial changes can be found in the full text of the program amendment available at www.regulations.gov.

    Alabama Administrative Code 880-X-8B-.07

    Alabama proposed to revise its regulations at Alabama Administrative Code 880-X-8B-.07, increasing coal mining permit fees to adequately fund the ASMC for the purposes of reviewing, administering, inspecting, and enforcing surface coal mining permits in Alabama.

    By this amendment, Alabama is:

    (1) Increasing the initial acreage fee from $35.00 per acre to $75.00, to be paid on each acre in a permit covered by a performance bond prior to the initiation of operations on the permit (or on an increment if increments are used), and to be paid on all bonded acreage covered by a permit renewal;

    (2) Increasing the basic fee for a coal exploration permit application from $2,000.00 to $2,500.00;

    (3) Increasing the basic fee for a permit renewal application from $1,000.00 to $2,500.00;

    (4) Increasing the basic fee for a permit transfer application from $200.00 to $500.00;

    (5) Adding an annual acreage fee for expired permits of $15.00, per acre, to be paid by December 31st of each year on each acre covered by a performance bond as of October 1st of the year; and

    (6) Adding the inspection of permits to the ASMC's uses for the deposited permit fees.

    Alabama fully funds its share of costs to regulate the coal mining industry with fees paid by the coal industry. The proposed fee revisions are intended to provide adequate funding to pay the State's cost of operating its regulatory program. The ASMC does not expect the increase in permit fees to exceed the actual or anticipated cost of reviewing, administering, inspecting, and enforcing surface coal mining permits in Alabama.

    We find that Alabama's fee changes are consistent with the discretionary authority provided by the Federal regulation at 30 CFR 777.17. Therefore, we are approving Alabama's revision.

    IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments Public Comments

    We asked for public comments on the amendment. As noted in section II, we received four comments (Administrative Record No. AL-0672-03). The four commenters provided comments that were outside the scope of the proposed amendment and not germane to the topic of surface coal mining in general. We are not addressing these comments in this final rule for these reasons. The full texts of these comments are available at www.regulations.gov.

    Federal Agency Comments

    On August 21, 2017, pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i) and Section 503(b) of SMCRA, we requested comments on the amendment from various Federal agencies with an actual or potential interest in the Alabama program (Administrative Record No. AL-0672-02). We did not receive any comments.

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Concurrence and Comments

    Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii), we are required to get a written concurrence from EPA for those provisions of the program amendment that relate to air or water quality standards issued under the authority of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.). None of the revisions that Alabama proposed to make in this amendment pertain to air or water quality standards. Therefore, we did not ask EPA to concur on the amendment. However, on August 21, 2017, under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i), we requested comments from the EPA on the amendment (Administrative Record No. AL-0672-02). The EPA did not respond to our request.

    State Historical Preservation Officer (SHPO) and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP)

    Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(4), we are required to request comments from the SHPO and ACHP on amendments that may have an effect on historic properties. On August 21, 2017, we requested comments on the amendment (Administrative Record No. AL-0672-02). We did not receive any comments.

    V. OSMRE's Decision

    Based on the above findings, we are approving the Alabama amendment that was submitted on August 14, 2017 (Administrative Record No. AL-0672).

    To implement this decision, we are amending the Federal regulations at 30 CFR part 901 that codify decisions concerning the Alabama program. In accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act, this rule will take effect 30 days after the date of publication. Section 503(a) of SMCRA requires that the State's program demonstrate the State has the capability of carrying out the provisions of the Act and meeting its purposes. SMCRA requires consistency of State and Federal standards.

    VI. Procedural Determinations Executive Order 12630—Takings

    This rulemaking does not have takings implications. This determination is based on the analysis performed for the counterpart Federal regulation.

    Executive Order 12866—Regulatory Planning and Review

    Pursuant to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Guidance dated October 12, 1993, the approval of state program amendments is exempted from OMB review under Executive Order 12866.

    Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice Reform

    The Department of the Interior has reviewed this rule as required by Section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988. The Department has determined that this Federal Register document meets the criteria of Section 3 of Executive Order 12988, which is intended to ensure that the agency review its legislation and regulations to minimize litigation; and that the agency's legislation and regulations provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct rather than a general standard, and promote simplification and burden reduction. Because Section 3 focuses on the quality of Federal legislation and regulations, the Department limited its review under this Executive Order to the quality of this Federal Register document and to changes to the Federal regulations. The review under this Executive Order did not extend to the language of the State regulatory program or to the program amendment that the State of Alabama drafted.

    Executive Order 13132—Federalism

    This rule is not a “[p]olicy that [has] Federalism implications” as defined by Section 1(a) of Executive Order 13132 because it does 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.” Instead, this rule approves an amendment to the Alabama program submitted and drafted by that State. OSMRE reviewed the submission with fundamental federalism principles in mind as set forth in Section 2 and 3 of the Executive Order and with the principles of cooperative federalism as set forth in SMCRA. See, e.g., 30 U.S.C. 1201(f). As such, pursuant to Section 503(a)(1) and (7)(30 U.S.C. 1253(a)(1) and (7)), OSMRE reviewed the program amendment to ensure that it is “in accordance with” the requirements of SMCRA and “consistent with” the regulations issued by the Secretary pursuant to SMCRA.

    Executive Order 13175—Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    In accordance with Executive Order 13175, we have evaluated the potential effects of this rulemaking on Federally-recognized Tribes and have determined that the rulemaking does not have substantial direct effects on one or more Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal government and Tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Tribes. The basis for this determination is that our decision is on a State regulatory program and does not involve Federal regulations involving Indian lands.

    Executive Order 13211—Regulations That Significantly Affect the Supply, Distribution, or Use of Energy

    Executive Order 13211 of May 18, 2001, requires agencies to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for a rulemaking that is (1) considered significant under Executive Order 12866, and (2) likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Because this rulemaking is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866 and is not expected to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy, a Statement of Energy Effects is not required.

    National Environmental Policy Act

    This rulemaking does not require an environmental impact statement because section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1292(d)) provides that agency decisions on proposed State regulatory program provisions do not constitute major Federal actions within the meaning of section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)).

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rulemaking does not contain information collection requirements that require approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3507 et seq.).

    Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Department of the Interior certifies that this rulemaking will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The State submittal, which is the subject of this rulemaking, is based upon counterpart Federal regulations for which an economic analysis was prepared and certification made that such regulations would not have a significant economic effect upon a substantial number of small entities. In making the determination as to whether this rulemaking would have a significant economic impact, the Department relied upon the data and assumptions for the counterpart Federal regulations.

    Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    This rulemaking is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This rulemaking: (a) Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million; (b) Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions; and (c) Does not have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises. This determination is based upon the fact that the State submittal, which is the subject of this rulemaking, is based upon counterpart Federal regulations for which an analysis was prepared and a determination made that the Federal regulation was not considered a major rule.

    Unfunded Mandates

    This rulemaking will not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector of $100 million or more in any given year. This determination is based upon the fact that the State submittal, which is the subject of this rulemaking, is based upon counterpart Federal regulations for which an analysis was prepared and a determination made that the Federal regulation did not impose an unfunded mandate.

    List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 901

    Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.

    Dated: August 16, 2018. Alfred L. Clayborne, Regional Director, Mid-Continent Region.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 30 CFR part 901 is amended as set forth below:

    PART 901—ALABAMA 1. The authority citation for part 901 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.

    2. Section 901.15 is amended in the table by adding an entry for “Alabama Administrative Code 880-X-8B-.07” in chronological order by “Date of final publication” to read as follows:
    § 901.15 Approval of Alabama regulatory program amendments. Original amendment submission date Date of final publication Citation/description *         *         *         *         *         *         * August 14, 2017 August 29, 2018 Alabama Administrative Code 880-X-8B-.07.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18716 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-05-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement 30 CFR Part 901 [SATS No. AL-081-FOR; Docket ID: OSM-2017-0006; S1D1S SS08011000 SX064A000 189S180110; S2D2S SS08011000 SX064A000 18XS501520] Alabama Regulatory Program AGENCY:

    Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Final rule; approval of amendment.

    SUMMARY:

    We, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE), are approving an amendment to the Alabama regulatory program (Alabama program) under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA or the Act). Alabama proposed revisions to its program to allow the Alabama Surface Mining Commission (ASMC) to revise its current permit fee collection procedures from the term of the mine permit to enable the collection of permit fees over the entire life of the mine. The revision also defines the life of the mine to be from the issuance of the permit through the full release of the performance bond.

    DATES:

    The effective date is September 28, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    William Joseph, Acting Director, Birmingham Field Office, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 135 Gemini Circle, Suite 215, Homewood, Alabama 35209. Telephone: (205) 290-7282. Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background on the Alabama Program II. Submission of the Amendment III. OSMRE's Findings IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments V. OSMRE's Decision VI. Procedural Determinations I. Background on the Alabama Program

    Section 503(a) of the Act permits a State to assume primacy for the regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations on non-Federal and non-Indian lands within its borders by demonstrating that its program includes, among other things, State laws and regulations that govern surface coal mining and reclamation operations in accordance with the requirements of the Act and consistent with the Federal regulations. See 30 U.S.C. 1253(a)(1) and (7). On the basis of these criteria, the Secretary of the Interior conditionally approved the Alabama program effective May 20, 1982. You can find background information on the Alabama program, including the Secretary's findings, the disposition of comments, and the conditions of approval of the Alabama program in the May 20, 1982, Federal Register (47 FR 22030). You can also find later actions concerning the Alabama program and program amendments at 30 CFR 901.10, 901.15, and 901.16.

    II. Submission of the Amendment

    By email dated June 21, 2017 (Administrative Record No. AL-0671), Alabama sent us an amendment to its program under SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.) at its own initiative.

    We announced the receipt of the proposed amendment in the January 29, 2018, Federal Register (83 FR 4011). In the same document, we opened the public comment period and provided an opportunity for a public hearing or meeting on the adequacy of the amendment. We did not hold a public hearing or meeting because no one requested one. The public comment period ended on February 28, 2018. We received 13 public comments (Administrative Record No. AL-0671-03) that are addressed in the Public Comments section of IV, Summary and Disposition of Comments, below.

    III. OSMRE's Findings

    We are approving the amendment as described below. The following are findings we made concerning Alabama's amendment under SMCRA and the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 732.15 and 732.17. Any revisions that we do not specifically discuss below concerning non-substantive wording or editorial changes can be found in the full text of the program amendment available at www.regulations.gov.

    Code of Alabama Section 9-16-83 Permits—Contents of application; reclamation plan; copy of application filed for public inspections; insurance; blasting plan.

    Alabama proposed revisions to its regulations at Code of Alabama section 9-16-83, allowing the ASMC to revise its current permit fee collection procedures from the term of the mine permit to enable the collection of permit fees over the entire life of the mine. The revision also defines the life of the mine to mean the term of the permit and the time required to successfully complete all surface coal mining and reclamation activities and obtain a full release of the performance bond for each bonded area.

    We find that Alabama's proposed amendments do not make its rules or regulations less effective than the Federal regulations governing permit fees found at 30 CFR 777.17. Therefore, we are approving Alabama's revision.

    IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments Public Comments

    We asked for public comments on the amendment. As noted in section II, we received 13 comments (Administrative Record No. AL-0671-03). The 13 commenters provided comments that were outside the scope of the proposed amendment and not germane to the topic of surface coal mining in general. We are not addressing these comments in this final rule for these reasons. The full texts of these comments are available at www.regulations.gov.

    Federal Agency Comments

    On July 27, 2017, pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i) and section 503(b) of SMCRA, we requested comments on the amendment from various Federal agencies with an actual or potential interest in the Alabama program (Administrative Record No. AL-0671-02). We did not receive any comments.

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Concurrence and Comments

    Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii), we are required to get a written concurrence from EPA for those provisions of the program amendment that relate to air or water quality standards issued under the authority of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.). None of the revisions that Alabama proposed to make in this amendment pertain to air or water quality standards. Therefore, we did not ask EPA to concur on the amendment. However, on July 27, 2017, under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i), we requested comments from the EPA on the amendment (Administrative Record No. AL-0671-02). The EPA did not respond to our request.

    State Historical Preservation Officer (SHPO) and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP)

    Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(4), we are required to request comments from the SHPO and ACHP on amendments that may have an effect on historic properties. On July 27, 2017, we requested comments on the amendment (Administrative Record No. AL-0671-02). We did not receive any comments.

    V. OSMRE's Decision

    Based on the above findings, we are approving the Alabama amendment that was submitted on June 21, 2017, (Administrative Record No. AL-0671).

    To implement this decision, we are amending the Federal regulations at 30 CFR part 901 that codify decisions concerning the Alabama program. In accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act, this rule will take effect 30 days after the date of publication. Section 503(a) of SMCRA requires that the State's program demonstrate the State has the capability of carrying out the provisions of the Act and meeting its purposes. SMCRA requires consistency of State and Federal standards.

    VI. Procedural Determinations Executive Order 12630—Takings

    This rulemaking does not have takings implications. This determination is based on the analysis performed for the counterpart Federal regulation.

    Executive Order 12866—Regulatory Planning and Review

    Pursuant to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Guidance dated October 12, 1993, the approval of state program amendments is exempted from OMB review under Executive Order 12866.

    Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice Reform

    The Department of the Interior has reviewed this rule as required by Section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988. The Department has determined that this Federal Register document meets the criteria of Section 3 of Executive Order 12988, which is intended to ensure that the agency review its legislation and proposed regulations to minimize litigation; and that the agency's legislation and regulations provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct rather than a general standard, and promote simplification and burden reduction. Because Section 3 focuses on the quality of Federal legislation and regulations, the Department limited its review under this Executive Order to the quality of this Federal Register document and to changes to the Federal regulations. The review under this Executive Order did not extend to the language of the State regulatory program or to the program amendment that the State of Alabama drafted.

    Executive Order 13132—Federalism

    This rule is not a “[p]olicy that [has] Federalism implications” as defined by Section 1(a) of Executive Order 13132, because it does 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.” Instead, this rule approves an amendment to the Alabama program submitted and drafted by that State. OSMRE reviewed the submission with fundamental federalism principles in mind as set forth in Section 2 and 3 of the Executive Order and with the principles of cooperative federalism as set forth in SMCRA. See, e.g., 30 U.S.C. 1201(f). As such, pursuant to Section 503(a)(1) and (7) (30 U.S.C. 1253(a)(1) and (7)), OSMRE reviewed the program amendment to ensure that it is “in accordance with” the requirements of SMCRA and “consistent with” the regulations issued by the Secretary pursuant to SMCRA.

    Executive Order 13175—Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    In accordance with Executive Order 13175, we have evaluated the potential effects of this rulemaking on Federally-recognized Tribes and have determined that the rulemaking does not have substantial direct effects on one or more Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal government and Tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Tribes. The basis for this determination is that our decision is on a State regulatory program and does not involve Federal regulations involving Indian lands.

    Executive Order 13211—Regulations That Significantly Affect the Supply, Distribution, or Use of Energy

    Executive Order 13211 of May 18, 2001, requires agencies to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for a rulemaking that is (1) considered significant under Executive Order 12866, and (2) likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Because this rulemaking is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866 and is not expected to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy, a Statement of Energy Effects is not required.

    National Environmental Policy Act

    This rulemaking does not require an environmental impact statement because section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1292(d)) provides that agency decisions on proposed State regulatory program provisions do not constitute major Federal actions within the meaning of section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)).

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rulemaking does not contain information collection requirements that require approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3507 et seq.).

    Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Department of the Interior certifies that this rulemaking will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The State submittal, which is the subject of this rulemaking, is based upon counterpart Federal regulations for which an economic analysis was prepared and certification made that such regulations would not have a significant economic effect upon a substantial number of small entities. In making the determination as to whether this rulemaking would have a significant economic impact, the Department relied upon the data and assumptions for the counterpart Federal regulations.

    Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    This rulemaking is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This rulemaking: (a) Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million; (b) Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions; and (c) Does not have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises. This determination is based upon the fact that the State submittal, which is the subject of this rulemaking, is based upon counterpart Federal regulations for which an analysis was prepared and a determination made that the Federal regulation was not considered a major rule.

    Unfunded Mandates

    This rulemaking will not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or Tribal governments or the private sector of $100 million or more in any given year. This determination is based upon the fact that the State submittal, which is the subject of this rulemaking, is based upon counterpart Federal regulations for which an analysis was prepared and a determination made that the Federal regulation did not impose an unfunded mandate.

    List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 901

    Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.

    Dated: August 16, 2018. Alfred L. Clayborne, Regional Director, Mid-Continent Region.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 30 CFR part 901 is amended as set forth below:

    PART 901—ALABAMA 1. The authority citation for part 901 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.

    2. Section 901.15 is amended in the table by adding an entry for “Code of Alabama Section 9-16-83” in chronological order by “Date of final publication” to read as follows:
    § 901.15 Approval of Alabama regulatory program amendments. Original amendment submission date Date of final publication Citation/description *         *         *         *         *         *         * June 21, 2017 August 29, 2018 Code of Alabama Section 9-16-83.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18719 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-05-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement 30 CFR Part 935 [SATS No. OH-255-FOR; Docket No. OSM-2013-0012; S1D1SSS08011000SX066A000178S180110; S2D2SSS08011000SX066A00017XS501520] Ohio Regulatory Program AGENCY:

    Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Final rule; approval of amendment with two exceptions.

    SUMMARY:

    The Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE) is approving, with two exceptions, an amendment to the Ohio regulatory program (the Ohio program) under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA or the Act). Ohio's submission demonstrates its intent to revise its program by amending the Ohio Reclamation Commission's (the Commission) procedural rules. By submission of the amended procedural rules, found within Ohio Administrative Code (OAC) at sections 1513-3-01 through 1513-3-22, Ohio proposed to revise the Ohio program pursuant to the additional flexibility afforded by the revised Federal regulations at 30 CFR 732.17, and SMCRA, as amended. As a result of review of the Ohio program, the proposed amendment, and an opportunity for public comments, OSMRE has determined that the majority of the submittal is no less stringent than SMCRA and no less effective than the corresponding regulations. The two revisions not approved by OSMRE are found within OAC at section 1513-3-07(A), which relates to intervention. OSMRE's rationale for not approving these proposed revisions is explained in depth below.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: September 28, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Ben Owens, Chief, Pittsburgh Field Division, OSMRE, Three Parkway Center, 2nd Floor, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15220. Telephone: (412) 937-2827. Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background on the Ohio Program II. Submission of the Amendment III. OSMRE's Findings IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments V. OSMRE's Decision VI. Procedural Determinations I. Background on the Ohio Program

    Section 503(a) of SMCRA allows a State to assume primacy for the regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations on non-Federal and non-Indian lands within its borders by demonstrating that its State program includes, among other things, state laws and regulations that govern surface coal mining and reclamation operations in accordance with the Act and consistent with the Federal regulations. See 30 U.S.C. 1253(a)(1) and (7). On the basis of these criteria, the Secretary of the Interior conditionally approved the Ohio program effective August 16, 1982. Notice of the conditional approval of Ohio's permanent regulatory program was published in the Federal Register on August 10, 1982 (47 FR 34688). You can also find later actions concerning Ohio's program and program amendments at 30 CFR 935.11, 935.15, and 935.30.

    II. Submission of the Proposed Amendment

    For background purposes, the Commission is an adjudicatory board established pursuant to Ohio Revised Code (ORC) section 1513.05. The Commission is the office to which administrative appeals may be filed by any person claiming to be aggrieved or adversely affected by a decision of the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Chief of the Division of Mineral Resources Management (DMRM), relating to mining and reclamation issues. Following an adjudicatory hearing, the Commission affirms, vacates, or modifies the DMRM Chief's decision. The Commission is comprised of eight members appointed by the Governor of Ohio. Members represent a variety of interests relevant to mining and reclamation issues. The Commission adopts rules to govern its procedures. The Commission's rules are found at OAC section 1513-3-01 through 1513-3-22 and are the subject of the current amendment to the Ohio program. By letter dated November 6, 2013, Ohio submitted an amendment to its program, (Administrative Record No. OH-2192-01). Ohio's submittal was prompted by requirements within the Ohio statute that all state agencies must review their administrative rules every five years. Consistent with this requirement, the Commission revised its rules to ensure an orderly, efficient, and effective appeal process. By submitting the amendment to OSMRE, Ohio exercised its ability to revise the Ohio program pursuant to the additional flexibility afforded by the revised Federal regulations at 30 CFR 732.17, and SMCRA, as amended, to improve operational efficiency of the Ohio program and to ensure Ohio's proposed provisions are consistent, and in accordance, with SMCRA and are no less effective than the corresponding Federal regulations.

    OSMRE announced receipt of the proposed amendment in the May 20, 2014, Federal Register (79 FR 28854). In the same document, OSMRE opened the public comment period and provided an opportunity for a public hearing or meeting.

    OSMRE did not hold a public hearing or meeting, as neither were requested. The public comment period closed on June 19, 2014. OSMRE did not receive any comments.

    III. Summary of the Ohio Amendment and OSMRE's Findings on the Amendment

    Following is a summary of various provisions of the amendment that Ohio submitted, as well as OSMRE's findings on whether those provisions are consistent, and in accordance, with SMCRA and are no less effective than the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 732.15 and 732.17. As described below, OSMRE is approving the amendment with the exception of two provisions in the proposed rule, one at section 1513-3-07(A), relating to the intervention of a party, and the other at 1513-3-07(D)(4), relating to the effect of intervention. Any revisions that we do not specifically discuss below concern non-substantive wording or editorial changes.

    1513-3-01 Definitions

    These changes clarify existing definitions and provide additional definitions. Specifically, the definition of “appellant” is clarified to explicitly state that actions of the DMRM Chief are subject to appeal to the Commission. The definition of “final order” clarifies that the resolution of matters presented on appeal will be in writing and consistent with section 1513-3-19 of the OAC. The definition of “full party” is added. This definition will define “full party” to include the appellant, the appellee, and any intervenor participating in an appeal as defined by the OAC at section 1513-3-07 entitled, “Intervention.” Additionally, the term, “interested persons in an appeal pending before the Commission” is added. This term, as approved, defines interested person as the appellant, the appellee, any intervenors, or and any other persons who have notified the Commission of an interest in a pending appeal and have requested to be notified of hearings in said appeal. The definition of “intervenor” is modified to remove the word “one” and replace it with the term, “any person.” The definition of “person” is modified to encompass limited liability companies. Within the definition of “regular business hours” the terms “chairman” and “vice-chairman” are replaced by “chairperson” and “vice-chairperson,” respectively. The remaining modifications renumber the terms to facilitate the addition of new terms.

    OSMRE Finding: We have determined that the definitions of “appellant,” “final order,” “full party,” “interested persons in an appeal pending before the Commission,” and “regular business hours” do not have Federal counterparts. However, they are not inconsistent with SMCRA or the Federal regulations. Therefore, we approve these definitions. The revised definition of “intervenor” remains consistent with its Federal counterpart at 43 CFR 4.1110 and is therefore approved. There is no direct Federal counterpart to the revised portion of Ohio's definition of “person,” as the Federal counterpart does not specifically include limited liability companies. However, the Federal definition does include corporations and partnerships; limited liability companies are essentially amalgams of those two business structures. Therefore, the change to the State's definition does not render it inconsistent with the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 700.5, and we are approving the change.

    1513-3-02 Internal Regulations

    Paragraph (B) of Section 1513-3-02, which is entitled, “Quorum,” is modified to clarify the conditions for satisfying quorum requirements. Four members of the Commission must be present to qualify as a quorum, and an action by the Commission is not valid unless at least four members concur.

    Additionally, the rule clarifies the procedure in the event concurrence is not reached. As amended, four members must agree that concurrence is not met. Further, when concurrence is not met, the existing record of proceedings is to be submitted to all members of the Commission who did not attend any portion of the proceedings. These members may determine if they wish to participate in the appeal. Following review of the record, they must participate in the rendering of a decision. The provision for a tied vote is eliminated.

    The amendment provides that, in the event that a concurrence cannot be reached, a decision must be rendered stating such and an Order must be issued affirming the action of the DMRM Chief under review.

    Furthermore, the rule clarifies that in the event a Commission member considered as part of the quorum misses any part of the proceeding, he or she must review the record before participating in the rendering of a decision. Audio-electronic hearings before the Commission constitute the official record of the hearing. However, other methods of creating the official record are permitted upon the Commission's discretion, by joint motion of the parties, or by motion of a party and subsequent approval by the Commission. Additionally, the issuance and service of subpoenas must comply with the Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure, and, as applicable, section 119.094 of the ORC, including its requirement that a fee must be paid to witnesses outside the county in which a hearing must be held.

    OSMRE Finding: We have determined that the provisions in this section do not have direct Federal counterparts. However, they are not inconsistent with the Federal regulations at 43 CFR 4.2, which governs, generally, membership of administrative boards and decisions of those boards. Therefore, we approve the proposed changes to OAC 1513-3-02.

    1513-3-03 Appearance and Practice Before the Commission

    The rule clarifies that any party may appear on their own behalf or may be represented by an attorney at law admitted to practice according to Ohio law. This includes the admittance of attorneys pro hac vice.

    OSMRE Finding: We have determined that the provisions in this section are consistent with the Federal regulations at 43 CFR 1.3 and 4.3, which govern, respectively, who may practice in Departmental administrative proceedings, and representation before appeals boards. Therefore, we approve the changes to OAC 1513-3-03.

    1513-3-04 Appeals to the Reclamation Commission

    Although the majority of the changes to this section are clerical and non-substantive, the rule clarifies that email addresses, if available, should be included in the notice of appeal. Additionally, appellants must include a copy of the written notice, order or decision of the DMRM Chief to be reviewed. Appellants are required to comply with the requirements of section 1513.02 of the ORC, pertaining to the power and duties of the DMRM Chief, and must include and forward the amount of any penalty for placement in a penalty fund. The rule adds a section describing information that the appellant may include in the notice of appeal. Appellants may, but are not required to, identify the area to which the notice, Order, or decision relates; state whether or not the Commission is requested to view the site; and state whether or not the appellant waives the right to have the hearing within the time frames established in section 1513.13(B), Appeal of notice of violation, order or decision to reclamation commission of the ORC.

    When filing a notice of appeal pertaining to the review of a decision to approve or disapprove a permit application, an appellant must comply with section 1513.07, Coal mining and reclamation permit of the ORC, and must file the notice of appeal within 30 days of notice of the DMRM Chief's determination.

    It is further clarified that a notice of appeal is deemed filed when complete notice has been provided. Further, a notice of appeal may be amended without leave of the Commission during the time allowed for original filing. However, amendment of a notice of appeal may not be employed to cure jurisdictional defects in the filing following the close of this time period. Following the close of this time period, a notice of appeal may be amended by leave of the Commission.

    OSMRE Finding: We have determined that the provisions in this section are consistent with the Federal regulations governing the varying types of administrative appeals of decisions of OSMRE. These regulations are at 43 CFR 4.1107, 4.1115, 4.1153, 4.1164, 4.1184, 4.1263, 4.1282, 4.1303, 4.1363, 4.1372, and 4.1382. Therefore, we approve the changes to OAC 1513-3-04.

    1513-3-05 Filing and Service of Papers

    This section of the rule clarifies that the filing of a notice of appeal must conform to section 1513.13 of the ORC, Appeal to the Commission. The rule alters the definition of when a notice of appeal is deemed filed. The proposed amendment states that a notice of appeal will be deemed filed when received or if the notice of appeal is sent by certified mail, registered mail, or express mail, it will be deemed filed on the date of the postmark placed upon the sender's receipt by the postal service. However, documents requesting temporary relief are deemed filed when received by the Commission. Additionally, all filings other than a notice of appeal or a request for temporary relief, that are not sent to the Commission by certified mail, registered mail, or express mail will be deemed filed with the Commission on the day on which the filings are received, and those that are sent by such means, will be deemed filed on the postmark date placed upon the sender's receipt by the postal service. Further, following initiation of an appeal, the Commission may, through order, establish a filing and service protocol, which may include the electronic transmission of documents.

    OSMRE Finding: We have determined that the provisions in this section are consistent with the Federal regulations at 43 CFR 4.1107, which governs the filing of documents, and 43 CFR 4.1109, which governs service of documents. Therefore, we approve the changes to OAC 1513-3-05.

    1513-3-06 Computation and Extension of Time

    The majority of the changes to this section are non-substantive and consist of renumbering for clarity. However, section (C)(1) is altered to definitively read that the Commission may not lengthen or reduce the time period allowed for any response to, or filing of, a request for temporary relief.

    OSMRE Finding: We have determined that the provisions in this section do not have direct Federal counterparts. However, they are not inconsistent with the Federal regulations at 43 CFR 4.1261 and 4.1264, which govern, respectively, applications for temporary relief and responses thereto. Therefore, we approve the changes to OAC 1513-3-06.

    1513-3-07 Intervention

    Ohio submitted a revision to this rule to require that any person seeking leave to intervene in an appeal before the Commission must do so within ten days prior to the beginning of an evidentiary hearing on the merits of an appeal, unless waived by the Commission for extraordinary cause. OSMRE is not approving this section of the amendment as it is inconsistent with the corresponding provisions of the Federal regulations found at 43 CFR 4.1110(a). The Federal counterpart allows any person, including a State or OSMRE, to petition to intervene at any stage of a proceeding. The provision proposed by Ohio prejudices a potential intervenor by imposing time limits on petitions to intervene. Although the proposed revision would allow intervention after the ten days preceding an evidentiary hearing, upon waiver by the Commission, the potential intervenor must still demonstrate extraordinary cause. This additional hurdle is not imposed by the Federal counterpart. Therefore, OSMRE is not approving the following sentence in section 1513-3-07(A), of the proposed amendment: “A petition for leave to intervene must be filed at least ten days prior to the beginning of an evidentiary hearing on the merits of an appeal, unless waived by the commission for extraordinary cause.”

    Also, the deletion of 1513-3-07(D)(4) is less effective than the Federal regulations found at 43 CFR 4.1110. This deletion would prevent the Commission from considering the effect of intervention on the agency's ability to implement its statutory mandates. However, the Federal regulation at 43 CFR 4.1110(d)(4) explicitly allows the IBLA to consider this effect in deciding whether intervention is appropriate. The deletion of this provision in the OAC would render the Ohio program less effective by preventing its statutory mandate from receiving due consideration in Commission decisions on intervention. Therefore, OSMRE is not approving the deletion of OAC 1513-3-07(D)(4).

    There is only one other substantive amendment to this section. The change, at section 1513-13-07(F), will allow the filing of amicus briefs and oral argument at hearing by amicus curiae upon leave by, and at the discretion of, the Commission. This provision does not have direct Federal counterparts. However, it is not inconsistent with relevant sections of 43 CFR part 4. Therefore, this provision of OAC 1513-3-07 is approved.

    1513-3-08 Temporary Relief

    The amendments to this section are non-substantive and primarily consist of language to make references gender neutral. Therefore, the amendments are approved.

    1513-3-10 Discovery

    Previous discovery rules are amended to clarify parties to an appeal may obtain discovery in accordance with the provisions of rules 26 through 36 of the Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure. Additionally, the rule explains that all parties, including intervenors, are subject to discovery and that discovery from non-parties must be done through subpoena. In the event a party fails to obey an order to compel or permit discovery issued by the Commission, the Commission may make such orders in regard to the failure as it deems just.

    OSMRE Finding: We have determined that the provisions in this section are consistent with the Federal regulations at 43 CFR 4.1130 through 4.1141. Therefore, we approve the changes to OAC 1513-3-10.

    1513-3-11 Motions

    This revision moves the provision at section (B), which allows a party to make a written motion requesting a hearing to be conducted before the full Commission, rather than before a hearing officer for the Commission, to section 1513-3-18, Reports and recommendations of the hearing officer. The revision to this section also provides that objections to jurisdiction are non-waivable and may be raised at any point in an appeal, consistent with the Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure.

    OSMRE Finding: We have determined that the provisions in this section do not have direct Federal counterparts. However, they are not inconsistent with the Federal regulations at 43 CFR 4.1112. Therefore, we approve OAC 1513-3-11.

    1513-3-12 Pre-Hearing Procedures

    This revision allows the Commission or its hearing officer, at its own initiative, or at the request of any party, to schedule and hold pre-hearing conferences on issues on appeal.

    OSMRE Response: We have determined that the proposed change to this section is consistent with 43 CFR 4.1121(b). Therefore, we are approving the change to OAC 1513-3-12.

    1513-3-14 Site Views and Location of Hearings

    This rule specifies the locations of Commission hearings. It also clarifies the circumstances in which the Commission will conduct site views of mining operations, reclamation operations, or other relevant features. The rule also explicitly states that the Commission will control and direct the manner of conducting a site view. Specifically, where a site view is conducted on property subject to a mining and reclamation permit, parties must be informed prior to the site view of any necessary personal protective equipment, including hard hat, safety glasses, hearing protection, safety-toed shoes or boots and additional equipment that may be required on mine property as determined by the mine operator. Additionally, the Commission reserves the right to limit the number of persons who participate in the site view. Additionally, a hearing related to a cessation of mining or a motion for temporary relief must be held in proximity to the subject area of the hearing for the convenience of the Commission and the parties. All other proceedings will continue to be held in Columbus, Ohio, or at any convenient public location selected by the Commission.

    OSMRE Response: We have determined that the provision regarding the location for hearings related to temporary relief, has no direct Federal counterpart, but is not inconsistent with the Federal regulation found at 43 CFR 4.1106, which governs location of hearing sites, generally. The Federal regulation states that the administrative law judge must consider convenience of the parties in determining the hearing site. The remaining provisions in this section do not have Federal counterparts. However, they are not inconsistent with SMCRA or its implementing regulations. Therefore, we are approving the changes to OAC 1513-3-14.

    1513-3-15 Consolidation of Proceedings

    The Commission is given discretion to administer consolidated appeals in the manner it deems most appropriate.

    OSMRE Response: We have determined that the provision in this section is consistent with the Federal regulation at 43 CFR 4.1113, which grants the administrative law judge the authority to consolidate proceedings. Therefore, we are approving OAC 1513-3-15.

    1513-3-16 Conduct of Evidentiary Hearings

    This rule applies to any person participating in an appeal before the Commission and definitively states that the Commission will determine the conduct of the hearing and the order of the presentation of evidence. Additionally, it further clarifies that the Commission is not bound by the formal rules of evidence as promulgated by the Ohio Supreme Court. The rule also establishes a procedure for in-camera inspection of documents claimed to contain proprietary business information or trade secrets. Additionally, the rule specifically details the number of copies of proposed exhibits a party must make available. The rule also adds a provision to clarify that a continuing objection is sufficient to preserve objection to an area of evidence. In regard to written testimony, affidavits may be admitted only if the evidence is otherwise admissible and all full parties agree that affidavits may be used in lieu of oral testimony. This alteration is limiting as it adds the adjective “full,” thus excluding certain parties. Parties wishing to use affidavits in lieu of oral testimony must serve all full parties with a copy of the affidavit at least 15 days before a hearing. It is clarified that in the event a declarant is unavailable, testimony may be offered in compliance with rule 804 of the Ohio Rules of Evidence. As proposed, objections to deposition testimony must be resolved in accordance with rule 32 of the Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure. Further, in instances when a party is attempting to use written testimony, any full party must present the Commission a schedule of objections to the written testimony prior to the commencement of the hearing. This is a change to the former rule that allowed objection at the hearing following receipt of the testimony into evidence. Regarding the presentation of witnesses, the Commission may require that a witness be called only once during a hearing and that the parties conduct all examinations at the time when the witness is called to testify. An Ohio notary may be given authority to administer oaths and affirmations to witnesses. Further, the Commission is given authority to require the parties to submit written closing arguments, post-hearing briefs, or proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law.

    OSMRE Finding: We have determined that the provisions in this section are not inconsistent with the Federal regulations found at 43 CFR 4.1120-4.1129. Therefore, we are approving the changes to OAC 1513-3-16.

    1513-3-17 Voluntary Dismissal and Settlement

    The adjective “full” is added to section (B), relative to agreement to settle. This addition limits settlements to those where all parties (i.e., appellant, appellee, and intervenor, if any) agree to do so. In the event an appeal is settled during the course of a hearing, the parties must enter into the record a statement acknowledging that they have reached an agreement that all issues have been resolved, and that a withdrawal of the appeal will be filed.

    OSMRE Finding: We have determined that the provisions in this section are consistent with the Federal regulations at 43 CFR 4.1111. Therefore, we are approving the changes to OAC 1513-3-17.

    1513-3-18 Reports and Recommendations of the Hearing Officer

    Section 1513-3-11(B), discussed above, is inserted in this section. This section allows a party to make a written motion requesting that a hearing be conducted before the full Commission, rather than before a hearing officer for the Commission.

    The existing regulations required Reports and Recommendations of hearing officers to be submitted to the Commission within a time reasonably sufficient to allow the Commission to issue timely Orders. This amendment incorporates a proviso to that rule that in the event a decision before a hearing officer must be rendered within a specified time period, the appeal will be heard by the Commission, rather than by a hearing officer, unless there has been a waiver of the right to an expedited hearing.

    OSMRE Findings: We have determined that the provisions in this section do not have direct Federal counterparts. However, these provisions are not inconsistent with the Federal regulations at 43 CFR 4.1120 through 4.1129. Therefore, we are approving the changes to OAC 1513-3-18.

    1513-3-19 Decisions of the Commission

    This rule clarifies the procedures the Commission will follow when issuing decisions. Additionally, the rule allows the remission, within 30 days after issuing a final decision, of pre-paid civil penalties, where penalties are under appeal. The rule also provides more detailed information about the procedures that will be followed if errors are found in Commission decisions. Specifically, during the time period after a final decision has been issued by the Commission, clerical mistakes in the final decision and errors therein from oversight or omission may be corrected before an appeal of the Commission's final decision is filed. Thereafter, while an appeal is pending before an appellate court, a final decision may be so corrected with leave of the court. However, the correction of a clerical mistake or error in a final decision does not extend the time for filing a notice of appeal in the appellate court. Further, this rule extends the time the Commission may remit, transfer, or accept payment of an increased penalty assessment amount from fifteen days to thirty days.

    OSMRE Finding: We have determined that most of the provisions in this section do not have direct Federal counterparts. However, these provisions are not inconsistent with SMCRA or its implementing regulations, nor inconsistent with Departmental hearings and appeals regulations found at 43 CFR part 4, subparts B and L. Moreover, the amendments pertaining to civil penalties are consistent with the Federal regulations at 43 CFR 4.1157. Therefore, we are approving the changes to OAC 1513-3-19.

    1513-3-20 Costs

    The former “Costs” section is rescinded. Previously, this section allowed the Commission to assess costs against a party to an appeal. The Commission does not, sua sponte, assess such costs, and the rule has not been used by the Commission. Moreover, filing fees are not required for Commission appeals. Additionally, the award of costs and expenses, following petition, are addressed fully in the following section, Awards of Costs and Expenses.

    OSMRE Findings: We have determined that the provisions removed by rescission of this section are replaced by the provisions described in OAC 1513-3-21. As discussed in the OSMRE Findings for OAC 1513-3-21, we have determined that the provisions in the latter section are not inconsistent with SMCRA or regulations at 43 CFR part 4, subparts B and L. Therefore, OSMRE determines the rescission of this section does not render the Ohio program inconsistent with the Federal regulations at 43 CFR 4.1290 through 4.1296, and the rescission is approved.

    1513-3-21 Award of Costs and Expenses

    This rule clarifies the previous version of this rule approved by OSMRE in 2010. See 75 FR 72947, allowing for the recovery of costs and expenses, including attorneys' fees to certain parties. The amendment clarifies that the Commission is also authorized to hear petitions for costs, including attorneys' fees and expenses, where petitions are filed by the DMRM and allege bad faith or harassment by another party. These petitions must conform to section 1513.13 of the ORC. Petitions must be filed within 60 days of receipt of the final decision of the Commission in the action in which the fees were incurred. Petitions by the DMRM must include an affidavit detailing all costs and expenses, receipts, and when attorneys' fees are requested, evidence that the hours expended and the fees requested are reasonable for the appeal and for the locality. A person served with a copy of a petition for costs and expenses must file an answer thereto within 30 days. Awards of attorney fees are appealable consistent with the ORC. This rule clarifies that parties may receive awards of costs and expenses, including attorneys' fees, expert witness fees, and fees reasonably incurred as a result of proceedings before the Commission, and specifies that fees incurred in seeking fees may also be awarded.

    However, the rule at 1513-3-21(D) clarifies that Ohio's statute and regulations relevant to minerals—not including coal or peat, found within Chapter 1514 of the Revised Code, do not include an award of costs and expenses provision similar to those required in Chapter 1513. Specifically, Ohio's rule references the provision found within section 1514.09 that specifically explains that attorneys' fees, costs, and expenses may not be recovered for minerals. Chapter 1514 is not required to be consistent with SMCRA or its implementing regulations, as it does not pertain to coal regulation. Because Chapter 1514 is not part of the approved Ohio program, OSMRE is not making a determination on this portion of the Ohio rule.

    OSMRE Findings: We have determined that the provisions in this section are no less effective than the Federal regulations at 43 CFR 4.1290-4.1296. Therefore, we approve the changes to OAC 1513-3-21.

    1513-3-22 Appeals From Commission Decisions

    This rule clarifies that parties to actions involving coal mining and reclamation brought under section 1513 of the ORC may seek review of a Commission decision in the court of appeals for the county in which the activity addressed by the decision of the Commission occurred, is occurring, or will occur. Moreover, this rule clarifies that parties to actions involving industrial minerals mining and reclamation and brought under section 1514.09, Representation on commission for appeals, of the ORC may seek review of a Commission decision in the court of common pleas in the county where the operation addressed by the decision of the Commission is located, or in the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas. However, Chapter 1514 is not required to be consistent with SMCRA or its implementing regulations, as it does not pertain to coal regulation. Because Chapter 1514 is not part of the approved Ohio program, OSMRE is not making a determination on this portion of the Ohio rule.

    Additionally, the rules provide the Commission with the authority to control the transcription and transmission of the record to the appropriate appellate court.

    OSMRE Findings: We have determined that the provisions in this section are consistent with Section 526 (a)(2) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1276(a)(2)), and with the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 775.13(b) and 43 CFR 4.1369. Therefore, we are approving the changes to OAC 1513-3-22.

    IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments Public Comments

    OSMRE asked for public comments in the May 20, 2014, Federal Register (79 FR 28854) (Administrative Record No. OH-2192-04). OSMRE did not receive any public comments or a request to hold a public meeting or public hearing.

    Federal Agency Comments

    Under Federal regulations at 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i) and section 503(b) of SMCRA, OSMRE requested comments on the amendment from various Federal agencies with an actual or potential interest in the Ohio program (Administrative Record No. OH-2192-02). Specifically, OSMRE solicited comment from the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the United States Department of Labor, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Ohio Historic Preservation Office, and the United States Department of Agriculture. OSMRE did not receive any response to the request for comments.

    Environmental Protection Agency Concurrence and Comments

    Pursuant to the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii), OSMRE is required to get a written concurrence from EPA for those provisions of the program amendment that relate to air or water quality standards issued under the authority of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.).

    None of the revisions that Ohio proposed in the submittal pertain to air or water quality standards. Therefore, we did not ask EPA to concur on the amendment, and as stated above, EPA did not provide comment.

    State Historical Preservation Officer (SHPO) and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP)

    Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(4), we are required to request comments from the SHPO and ACHP on amendments that may have an effect on historic properties. OSMRE requested comments on the Ohio amendment (Administrative Record Number OH-2192-02). We did not receive any comments.

    V. OSMRE's Decision

    Based on the above findings, we approve the amendment Ohio sent us on November 6, 2013, (Administrative Record Number OH-2192-01) with the exception of two provisions. We are not approving the sentence in section 1513-3-07(A), as explained above: “A petition for leave to intervene must be filed at least ten days prior to the beginning of an evidentiary hearing on the merits of an appeal, unless waived by the commission for extraordinary cause.” We are also not approving the deletion of 1513-3-07(D)(4), as explained above: “The effect of intervention on the agency's implementation of its statutory mandate.”

    To implement this decision, we are amending the Federal regulations at 30 CFR part 935 that codify decisions concerning the Ohio program. In accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act, this rule will take effect 30 days after the date of publication. Section 503(a) of SMCRA requires that the State's program demonstrate that the State has the capability of carrying out the provisions of the Act and meeting its purposes. SMCRA requires consistency of State and Federal standards.

    VI. Procedural Determinations Executive Order 12630—Takings

    This rule does not have takings implications. This determination is based on the analysis performed for the counterpart Federal regulations. Other changes implemented through this final rule notice are administrative in nature and have no takings implications.

    Executive Order 12866—Regulatory Planning and Review

    Pursuant to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Guidance dated October 12, 1993, the approval of state program amendments is exempted from OMB review under Executive Order 12866.

    Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice Reform

    The Department of the Interior has reviewed this rule as required by section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988. The Department determined that this Federal Register notice meets the criteria of Section 3 of Executive Order 12988, which is intended to ensure that the agency review its legislation and proposed regulations to eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity; that the agency write its legislation and regulations to minimize litigation; and that the agency's legislation and regulations provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct rather than a general standard, and promote simplification and burden reduction. Because Section 3 focuses on the quality of Federal legislation and regulations, the Department limited its review under this Executive Order to the quality of this Federal Register notice and to changes to the Federal regulations. The review under this Executive Order did not extend to the language of the State regulatory program or to the program amendment that the State of Ohio drafted.

    Executive Order 13132—Federalism

    This rule is not a “[p]olicy that [has] Federalism implications” as defined by section 1(a) of Executive Order 13132 because it does 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.” Instead, this rule approves an amendment to the Ohio program submitted and drafted by that State. OSMRE reviewed the submission with fundamental federalism principles in mind as set forth in sections 2 and 3 of the Executive Order and with the principles of cooperative federalism set forth in SMCRA. See, e.g., 30 U.S.C. 1201(f). As such, pursuant to section 503(a)(1) and (7) (30 U.S.C. 1253(a)(1) and (7)), OSMRE reviewed the program amendment to ensure that it is “in accordance with” the requirements of SMCRA is “consistent with” the regulations issued by the Secretary pursuant to SMCRA.

    Executive Order 13175—Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Government

    In accordance with Executive Order 13175, OSMRE has evaluated the potential effects of this rule on Federally recognized Indian tribes and has determined that the rule does not have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, or the relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian tribes. The basis for this determination is that our decision pertains to the Ohio regulatory program and does not involve a Federal program involving Indian lands or Indian tribes in any way.

    Executive Order 13211—Regulations That Significantly Affect the Supply, Distribution, or Use of Energy

    Executive Order 13211 of May 18, 2001, which requires agencies to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for a rule that is (1) considered significant under Executive Order 12866, and (2) likely to have significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Because this rule is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866 and is not expected to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy, a Statement of Energy Effects is not required.

    National Environmental Policy Act

    This rule does not require an environmental impact statement because section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1292(d)) provides that agency decisions on proposed State regulatory program provisions, including amendments thereto, do not constitute major Federal actions within the meaning of section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)). It is further documented in the DOI Departmental Manual at 516 DM 13.5 that agency decisions on approval of State regulatory programs do not constitute major Federal actions.

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule does not contain information collection requirements that require approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3507 et seq.).

    Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Department of the Interior certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Ohio's submittal, which is the subject of this rule, is based upon counterpart Federal regulations for which an economic analysis was prepared and certification made that such regulations would not have a significant economic effect upon a substantial number of small entities. In making the determination as to whether this rule would have a significant economic impact, the Department relied upon data and assumptions for the counterpart Federal regulations.

    Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This rule: (a) Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million; (b) will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, geographic regions, or Federal, State, or local government agencies; and (c) does not have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises. This determination is based upon the fact that the State submittal, which is the subject of this rule, is based upon counterpart Federal regulations for which an analysis was prepared and a determination made that the Federal regulation was not considered a major rule.

    Unfunded Mandates

    This rule will not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector of $100 million or more in any given year. This determination is based upon the fact that the State submittal, which is the subject of this rule, is based upon counterpart Federal regulations for which an analysis was prepared and a determination made that the Federal regulation did not impose an unfunded mandate.

    List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 935

    Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.

    Dated: August 13, 2018. Thomas Shope, Regional Director, Appalachian Region.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 30 CFR part 935 is amended as set forth below:

    PART 935—OHIO 1. The authority citation for part 935 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.

    2. Section 935.12 is added to read as follows:
    § 935.12 State statutory, regulatory, and proposed program amendments not approved.

    (a) In OAC 1513-3-07(A), we are not approving the following sentence: “A petition for leave to intervene must be filed at least ten days prior to the beginning of an evidentiary hearing on the merits of an appeal, unless waived by the commission for extraordinary cause.”

    (b) In OAC 1513-3-07(D) (4), we are not approving the deletion of the following sentence: “The effect of intervention on the agency's implementation of its statutory mandate.”

    3. Section 935.15 is amended in the table by adding a new entry in chronological order by “Date of final publication” to read as follows:
    § 935.15 Approval of Ohio regulatory program amendments. Original amendment submission date Date of final publication Citation/description *         *         *         *         *         *         * November 6, 2013 August 29, 2018 OAC 1513-3-01 through 1513-3-22, except for a portion of OAC 1513-3-07(A) and the deletion of OAC 1513-3-07(D)(4).
    [FR Doc. 2018-18706 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-05-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG-2018-0779] Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Passaic River, Harrison, NJ AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the operating schedule that governs the Route 280 Bridge across the Passaic River, mile 5.8, at Harrison, New Jersey. The deviation is necessary to perform steel repairs at the lift span. This deviation allows the bridge to remain closed during the construction period.

    DATES:

    This deviation is effective from 12:01 a.m. on October 1, 2018, until 11:59 p.m. on December 14, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this deviation, USCG-2018-0779, is available at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this deviation.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this temporary deviation, call or email Judy K. Leung-Yee, Bridge Management Specialist, First District Bridge Branch, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 212-514-4336, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The owner of the bridge, New Jersey Department of Transportation, requested a temporary deviation in order to perform steel repairs at the lift span.

    The Route 280 Bridge across the Passaic River, mile 5.8, at Harrison, New Jersey is a vertical lift bridge with a vertical clearance of 35 feet at mean high water and 40 feet at mean low water in the closed position. The existing drawbridge operating regulation is listed at 33 CFR 117.739(h).

    This temporary deviation will allow the Route 280 Bridge to remain in the closed position from 12:01 a.m. on October 1, 2018, to 11:59 p.m. on December 14, 2018. The deviation will have minimal effect on navigation. The waterway is transited by recreational and commercial vessels. Coordination with waterway users has indicated no objection to the closure of the draw. Vessels able to pass through the bridge in the closed position may do so at any time. The bridge will not be able to open for emergencies. There is no immediate alternate route for vessels to pass.

    The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterways through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating schedule for the bridge so that vessel operators can arrange their transits to minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.

    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: August 23, 2018. C.J. Bisignano, Supervisory Bridge Management Specialist, First Coast Guard District.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18638 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG-2018-0751] Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Sloop Channel, Hempstead, NY AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the operating schedule that governs the Meadowbrook State Parkway Bridge across Sloop Channel, mile 12.8, at Hempstead, NY. The deviation is necessary to complete structural, mechanical, and electrical rehabilitations on the bridge. This temporary deviation allows the bridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position for two short periods, and allows the bridge to open only one bascule span at a time over various periods to facilitate bridge repairs.

    DATES:

    This deviation is effective from 7 a.m. on September 28, 2018 to 7 a.m. on December 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this deviation, USCG-2018-0751 is available at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH”. Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this deviation.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this temporary deviation, call or email Stephanie E. Lopez, Bridge Management Specialist, First District Bridge Branch, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 212-514-4335, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The owner of the bridge, the New York State Department of Transportation, requested a temporary deviation to facilitate the various structural, mechanical, and electrical rehabilitations. The spanlock platforms and machinery for both the Northbound and Southbound Bridge will be replaced in their entirety. Trunnion tower and rack gear supports repairs will be performed, and the bridge instrumentation will be replaced. The Meadowbrook State Parkway Bridge across the Sloop Channel, mile 12.8, has a vertical clearance in the closed position of 22 feet at mean high water and 25 feet at mean low water. The existing bridge operating regulations are found at 33 CFR 117.799(h).

    This temporary deviation allows the Meadowbrook State Parkway Bridge to open only one bascule span at a time between 7 a.m. and 3 p.m., providing a minimum of 43 feet of available horizontal clearance, on the following days: September 28, 2018; October 1-5, 2018; November 26-30, 2018; and December 3, 2018.

    Additionally, the Meadowbrook State Parkway Bridge shall remain in the closed position from 7 a.m. on October 15, 2018 through 7 a.m. on October 17, 2018 and from 7 a.m. on December 11, 2018 to 7 a.m. December 13, 2018.

    The waterway is transited by commercial and recreational traffic. The Coast Guard notified known waterway users and there were no objections to this temporary deviation. Vessels able to pass under the bridge in the closed position may do so at any time. The bridge will not be able to open for emergencies and there is no immediate alternate route for vessels to pass.

    The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterways through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating schedule for the bridge so that vessel operators can arrange their transits to minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.

    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: August 23, 2018. C.J. Bisignano, Supervisory Bridge Management Specialist, First Coast Guard District.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18637 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG-2018-0754] Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Saugatuck River, Saugatuck, CT AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the operating schedule that governs the Metro-North SAGA Bridge across the Saugatuck River, mile 1.1 at Saugatuck, Connecticut. The deviation is necessary to conduct bridge maintenance and repair work. The deviation allows the bridge to remain closed to maritime navigation on weekdays and requires the bridge to open with 24 hours advance notice on weekends.

    DATES:

    This deviation is effective from 8 a.m. on September 17, 2018, to 8 a.m. on October 29, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this deviation, USCG-2017-0754, is available at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH”. Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this deviation.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this temporary deviation, call or email Jeffrey Stieb, Bridge Management Specialist, First Coast Guard District, Coast Guard; telephone 617-223-8364, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The owner of the bridge, Connecticut Department of Transportation, requested a temporary deviation from the normal operating schedule in order to conduct bridge maintenance and repair work. The Metro-North SAGA Railroad Bridge across the Saugatuck River, mile 1.1, at Saugatuck, Connecticut has a vertical clearance of 13 feet at mean high water in the closed position. The existing bridge operating regulations are listed at 33 CFR 117.221(b).

    Under this temporary deviation, from 8 a.m. on Monday, September 17, 2018, to 8 a.m. on Monday, October 29, 2018, the Metro-North SAGA Bridge may operate as follows: From 8 a.m. Monday to 3 p.m. Friday, the draw may remain closed to marine navigation. From 3 p.m. Friday to 8 a.m. Monday, the draw shall open with 24 hours advance notice.

    The waterway is transited by seasonal recreational vessels of various sizes. Vessels that can pass under the bridge in the closed position may do so at any time. The bridge will not be able to open for emergencies. The Department of Transportation has coordinated the closure with the harbormaster and has posted notice of the closure on the Connecticut Department of Transportation Construction News website. The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterway through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating schedule for the bridge so that vessel operators can arrange their transits to minimize any impact caused by this temporary deviation.

    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: August 23, 2018. C.J. Bisignano, Supervisory Bridge Management Specialist, First Coast Guard District.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18650 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG-2018-0757] Safety Zone; San Francisco Giants Fireworks Display, San Francisco Bay, San Francisco, CA AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of enforcement of regulation.

    SUMMARY:

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

    DATES:

    The regulations in 33 CFR 165.1191, Table 1, Item number 1, will be enforced from 11 a.m. on August 31, 2018 to 10:45 p.m. on August 31, 2018, or as announced via Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this notice, call or email Lieutenant Emily K. Rowan, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Francisco; telephone (415) 399-7443 or email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Coast Guard will enforce a 100 foot safety zone around the fireworks barge during the loading, transit, and arrival of the fireworks barge from the loading location to the display location and until the start of the fireworks display. From 11 a.m. until 5 p.m. on August 31, 2018, the fireworks barge will be loading pyrotechnics from Pier 50 in San Francisco, CA. The fireworks barge will remain at the loading location until its transit to the display location. From 8:30 p.m. to 9 p.m. on August 31, 2018 the loaded fireworks barge will transit from Pier 50 to the launch site near Pier 48 in approximate position 37°46′36″ N, 122°22′56″ W (NAD 83) where it will remain until the conclusion of the fireworks display. Upon the commencement of the 15 minute fireworks display, scheduled to begin at the conclusion of the baseball game, at approximately 10:00 p.m. on August 31, 2018, the safety zone will increase in size and encompass the navigable waters around and under the fireworks barge within a radius of 700 feet near Pier 48 in approximate position 37°46′36″ N, 122°22′56″ W (NAD 83) for the San Francisco Giants Fireworks in 33 CFR 165.1191, Table 1, Item number 1. This safety zone will be in effect from 11 a.m. on August 31, 2018 until 10:45 p.m. on August 31, 2018, or as announced via Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

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

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

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

    Dated: August 23, 2018. R.W. Deakin, Lieutenant Commander, U.S. Coast Guard Chief, Waterways Management Division.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18712 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    POSTAL SERVICE 39 CFR Part 111 Overweight Items AGENCY:

    Postal ServiceTM.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Postal Service is amending Mailing Standards of the United States Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual (DMM®) to implement a process to remove overweight items from the postal network.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: August 29, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Lizbeth Dobbins at (202) 268-3789 or Garry Rodriguez at (202) 268-7261.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Postal Service published a notice of proposed rulemaking on April 20, 2018, (83 FR 17518-17519) to amend the DMM to add a process, which included a fee, for removing overweight items that are found in the postal network. Items that exceed the 70 pound weight limit are nonmailable and are not provided service.

    The Postal Service received 2 formal responses to the proposed rule, one of which included multiple comments.

    Both responses were in agreement with enforcing the 70 pound weight restriction. However, the second responder had several comments, as follows:

    Comment: The responder felt it was unclear whether the fee would be imposed on the appropriate party, specifically in regards to returns.

    Response: The Postal Service is deferring implementation of the fee at this time. When the fee is implemented, the Postal Service expects that, in most instances, including returns, the fee will be requested of the sender. However, certain circumstances (e.g., when the sender is unknown) may require the fee to be requested from the receiver. Customers (sender, receiver) have the responsibility to communicate with each other to determine who is liable for the fee payment.

    Comment: The second comment questioned the application of the fee and provided a hypothetical where the error was a result of an inaccurate Post Office scale.

    Response: Post Office scales are calibrated daily. Customers may request a “sight” verification at the facility where the item was secured.

    Comment: The third comment questioned the $100 fee and whether it could be construed as a price requiring additional approval.

    Response: The fee determination will be made at a later date.

    At this time, the Postal Service is implementing the process for removing items over the 70 pound maximum weight limit for Priority Mail Express®, Priority Mail®, USPS Retail Ground®, Media Mail®, Library Mail, Parcel Select®, and Parcel Return Service. Hazardous materials exceeding the applicable maximum weight limits discovered in the postal network may be subject to a civil penalty under 39 U.S.C. 3018.

    Once the overweight item is identified, it will be secured and either the sender or receiver will be contacted to pick up the item within 14 calendar days. An overweight item not picked up within the 14 calendar day timeframe will be considered abandoned and disposed of at the Postal Service's discretion. Any amounts paid as purported postage and any fees would not be refundable.

    The Postal Service is still determining the appropriate fee. However, because the safety of our employees is paramount, the Postal Service is moving forward immediately with implementing the process for intercepting and holding overweight items for pickup by mailers, without assessing a fee. The Postal Service will publish details regarding the fee in another Federal Register notice, once a final determination on the fee has been made.

    This revision will ensure the safety of our employees while providing a superb customer experience from sender to receiver.

    The Postal Service adopts the following changes to Mailing Standards of the United States Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual (DMM), incorporated by reference in the Code of Federal Regulations. See 39 CFR 111.1. We will publish an appropriate amendment to 39 CFR part 111 to reflect these changes.

    Accordingly, 39 CFR part 111 is amended as follows:

    List of Subjects in 39 CFR Part 111

    Administrative practice and procedure, Incorporation by reference, Postal Service.

    PART 111—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for 39 CFR part 111 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    5 U.S.C. 552(a); 13 U.S.C. 301-307; 18 U.S.C. 1692-1737; 39 U.S.C. 101, 401, 403, 404, 414, 416, 3001-3011, 3201-3219, 3403-3406, 3621, 3622, 3626, 3632, 3633, and 5001.

    2. Revise the Mailing Standards of the United States Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual (DMM) as follows: Mailing Standards of the United States Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual (DMM) 600 Basic Standards for All Mailing Services 601 Mailability 1.0 General Standards

    [Renumber 1.2 and 1.3 as 1.3 and 1.4 and add new 1.2 to read as follows:]

    1.2 Overweight Items

    The maximum Postal Service mailpiece weight limit is 70 pounds, lower weight limits may apply. Any Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, USPS Retail Ground, Media Mail, Library Mail, Parcel Select, and Parcel Return Service item exceeding the 70 pound Postal Service maximum weight limit is nonmailable and if found in the postal network will be secured at the facility identifying the ineligible item for pick-up by the mailer or addressee.

    604 Postage Payment Methods and Refunds 9.0 Exchanges and Refunds 9.2 Postage and Fee Refunds 9.2.4 Postage and Fee Refunds Not Available

    Refunds are not made for the following:

    [Revise the text of 9.2.4 by adding a new item i to read as follows:]

    i. For any amounts paid as purported postage and any fees on overweight items that are nonmailable under 601.1.2.

    Brittany M. Johnson, Attorney, Federal Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18481 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 10 [PS Docket Nos. 15-91 and 15-94, FCC 18-4] Election Whether To Participate in the Wireless Emergency Alert System AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Final rule; announcement of effective date.

    SUMMARY:

    In this document, the Commission announces that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved, the information collection associated with the Commission's a Wireless Emergency Alert Second Report and Order and Second Order on Reconsideration (WEA Second R&O). The WEA Second R&O defines “in whole” or “in part” Wireless Emergency Alert (WEA) participation; specifies the difference between these elections; and requires Commercial Mobile Service (CMS) Providers to update their election status and provide enhanced disclosure to subscribers at the point of sale. This document is consistent with the WEA Second R&O, which states that the Commission would publish a document in the Federal Register announcing the effective date of those rules.

    DATES:

    The amendment to 47 CFR 10.240, published at 83 FR 8619 on February 28, 2018, is effective December 27, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Linda Pintro, Attorney-Advisor, Policy and Licensing Division, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau at 202-418-7490 or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This document announces that, on August 1, 2018, OMB approved, the information collection requirements relating to CMS Provider election of whether to participate in WEA, and the enhanced disclosure rules contained in the Commission's WEA Second R&O, PS Docket Nos. 15-91 and 15-94, FCC 18-4. The OMB Control Number is 3060-1113. The Commission publishes this document as an announcement of the effective date of the rules. If you have any comments on the burden estimates listed below, or how the Commission can improve the collections and reduce any burdens caused thereby, please contact Nicole Ongele, Federal Communications Commission, Room 1-A620, 445 12th Street SW, Washington, DC 20554. Please include the OMB Control Number, 3060-1113, in your communication. The Commission will also accept your comments via email at [email protected]

    To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an email to [email protected] or call the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 (TTY).

    Synopsis

    As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507), the FCC is notifying the public that it received final OMB approval on August 1, 2018, for the information collection requirements contained in the modifications to the Commission's rules in 47 CFR 10.240.

    Under 5 CFR part 1320, an agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a current, valid OMB Control Number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act that does not display a current, valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number is 3060-1113.

    The foregoing notice is required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13, October 1, 1995, and 44 U.S.C. 3507.

    The total annual reporting burdens and costs for the respondents are as follows:

    OMB Control Number: 3060-1113.

    OMB Approval Date: August 1, 2018.

    OMB Expiration Date: August 31, 2021.

    Title: Election Whether to Participate in the Wireless Emergency Alert System.

    Form Number: N/A.

    Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities.

    Number of Respondents and Responses: 1,253 respondents; 5,012 responses.

    Estimated Time per Response: 0.5-12 hours.

    Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement recordkeeping and third-party disclosure requirements.

    Obligation to Respond: Mandatory and voluntary. The statutory authority for this information collection is contained in 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 154(o), 218, 219, 230, 256, 302(a), 303(f), 303(g), 303(r), 403, 621(b)(3), and 621(d).

    Total Annual Burden: 28,820 hours.

    Total Annual Cost: No Cost.

    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: An assurance of confidentiality is not offered because this information collection does not involve confidential information.

    Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No impact(s).

    Needs and Uses: The Warning, Alert and Response Network Act, Title VI of the Security and Accountability for Every Port Act of 2006 (120 Stat. 1884, section 602(a), codified at 47 U.S.C. 1201, et seq., 1202(a)) (WARN Act) gives the Commission authority to adopt relevant technical standards, protocols, procedures and other technical requirements governing Wireless Emergency Alert. The WARN Act also gives the Commission authority to adopt procedures by which CMS Providers disclose their intent to participate in WEA. The Commission created WEA in response to the WARN Act, and to satisfy the Commission's mandate to promote the safety of life and property using wire and radio communication. These information collections involve the WEA system, which allows CMS Providers to elect to transmit emergency alerts to the public. The information collection from CMS Providers include (1) disclosing the extent to which a CMS Provider participates in wireless alerts (“in whole” or “in part”); and (2) enhanced notification of the CMS provider's non-participation in WEA, to new subscribers at the point of sale. These disclosures will allow consumers to make more informed choices about their ability to receive WEA Alert Messages that are relevant to them.

    Federal Communications Commission. Marlene Dortch, Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18704 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 90 Modification of Rules To Codify New Procedure for Non-Federal Public Safety Entities To License Federal Interoperability Channels AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Final rule; announcement of effective date.

    SUMMARY:

    In this document, the Commission announces that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved, for a period of three years, the information collection associated with Order DA 18-282. This document is consistent with Order DA 18-282, which stated that the Commission would publish a document in the Federal Register announcing the effective date of the information collection associated with that order.

    DATES:

    The addition of 47 CFR 90.25, published at 83 FR 19976, May 7, 2018, is effective August 29, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brian Marenco, Policy and Licensing Division, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, at (202) 418-0838, or email: [email protected] For additional information concerning the Paperwork Reduction Act information collection requirements contact Nicole Ongele at (202) 418-2991 or via email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This document announces that, on August 13, 2018, OMB approved, for a period of three years, the information collection requirements relating to new § 90.25 adopted in Order, DA 18-282, published at 83 FR 19976, May 7, 2018. The OMB Control Number is 3060-1257. The Commission publishes this document as an announcement of the effective date of the rules. If you have any comments on the burden estimates listed below, or how the Commission can improve the collection and reduce any burdens caused thereby, please contact Nicole Ongele, Federal Communications Commission, Room 1-A620, 445 12th Street SW, Washington, DC 20554. Please include the OMB Control Number, 3060-1257, in your correspondence. The Commission will also accept your comments via email at [email protected]

    To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an email to fcc504[email protected] or call the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 (TTY).

    Synopsis

    As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507), the FCC is notifying the public that it received final OMB approval on August 13, 2018, for the information collection requirement contained in new rule 47 CFR 90.25.

    Under 5 CFR part 1320, an agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a current, valid OMB Control Number.

    No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act that does not display a current, valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number is 3060-1257.

    The foregoing notice is required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13, October 1, 1995, and 44 U.S.C. 3507.

    The total annual reporting burdens and costs for the respondents are as follows:

    OMB Control Number: 3060-1257.

    OMB Approval Date: August 13, 2018.

    OMB Expiration Date: August 31, 2021.

    Title: New Procedure for Non-Federal Public Safety Entities to License Federal Government Interoperability Channels.

    Form Number: N/A.

    Respondents: Not-for-profit institutions; State, local, or tribal government.

    Number of Respondents and Responses: 45,947 respondents; 45,947 responses.

    Estimated Time per Response: 0.25 hours.

    Frequency of Response: One-time reporting requirement.

    Obligation to Respond: New Section 90.25 adopted in Order DA 18-282, requires any non-federal public safety entity seeking to license mobile and portable units on the Federal Interoperability Channels to obtain written concurrence from its Statewide Interoperability Coordinator (SWIC) or a state appointed official and include such written concurrence with its application for license. A non-federal public safety entity may communicate on designated Federal Interoperability Channels for joint federal/non-federal operations, provided it first obtains a license from the Commission authorizing use of the channels. Statutory authority for these collections are contained in 47 U.S.C. 151, 154, 301, 303, and 332 of the Communications Act of 1934.

    Total Annual Burden: 11,487 hours.

    Total Annual Cost: No cost.

    Privacy Act: No impact(s).

    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: Applicants who include written concurrence from their SWIC or state appointed official with their application to license mobile and portable units on the Federal Interoperability Channels need not include any confidential information with their application. Nonetheless, there is a need for confidentiality with respect to all applications filed with the Commission through its Universal Licensing System (ULS). Although ULS stores all information pertaining to the individual license via an FCC Registration Number (FRN), confidential information is accessible only by persons or entities that hold the password for each account, and the Commission's licensing staff. Information on private land mobile radio licensees is maintained in the Commission's system of records, FCC/WTB-1, “Wireless Services Licensing Records.” The licensee records will be publicly available and routinely used in accordance with subsection (b) of the Privacy Act. TIN Numbers and material which is afforded confidential treatment pursuant to a request made under 47 CFR 0.459 will not be available for Public inspection. Any personally identifiable information (PII) that individual applicants provide is covered by a system of records, FCC/WTB-1, “Wireless Services Licensing Records,” and these and all other records may be disclosed pursuant to the Routine Uses as stated in this system of records notice.

    Needs and Uses: The purpose of requiring a non-federal public safety entity to obtain written consent from its SWIC or state appointed official before communicating with federal government agencies on the Federal Interoperability Channels is to ensure that the non-federal public safety entity operates in accordance with the rules and procedures governing use of the federal interoperability channels and does not cause inadvertent interference during emergencies. Commission staff will use the written concurrence from the SWIC or state appointed official to determine if an applicant's proposed operation on the Federal Interoperability Channels conforms to the terms of an agreement signed by the SWIC or state appointed official with a federal user with a valid assignment from the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) which has jurisdiction over the channels.

    Federal Communications Commission. Marlene Dortch, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18691 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Railroad Administration 49 CFR Part 228 [Docket No. FRA-2012-0101] RIN 2130-AC41 Hours of Service Recordkeeping; Automated Recordkeeping AGENCY:

    Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of Transportation (DOT).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This rule is part of FRA's broader initiative to reduce the paperwork burden of its regulations while still supporting compliance with the Federal hours of service laws and regulations. Current regulations require employees covered by those laws or regulations (covered service employees) to create and retain hours of service records by hand (a paper system) or “certify” the record using a compliant computerized system (an electronic system) with program logic. Cognizant of the burden placed on small operations, FRA provides a simplified method of computerized recordkeeping (an automated system)—in which employees apply their electronic signatures to automated records stored in a railroad computer system without the complexity and functionality of an electronic system—for eligible smaller railroads (and contractors and subcontractors providing covered service employees to such railroads). This rule does not require the use of automated recordkeeping, but, when implemented by the small operations for which it is tailored, it will decrease the burden hours spent on hours of service recordkeeping.

    DATES:

    This final rule is effective August 29, 2018 in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1).

    ADDRESSES:

    For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for accessing the docket.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Patrick J. Hogan, Transportation Specialist, Office of Railroad Safety, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, W33-448, Washington, DC 20590; telephone: 202-493-0277; email: [email protected]; Kyle Fields, Trial Attorney, Office of Chief Counsel, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., W31-232, Washington, DC 20590; telephone 202-493-6168; email: [email protected]; or Emily T. Prince, Trial Attorney, Office of Chief Counsel, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, W31-216, Washington, DC 20590; telephone 202-493-6146; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Commonly Used Abbreviations CFR Code of Federal Regulations FRA Federal Railroad Administration HS Hours of service Table of Contents for Supplementary Information I. Executive Summary II. Background and History III. Scope of the Final Rule IV. Discussion of Comments V. Section-by-Section Analysis VI. Regulatory Impact and Notices A. Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13771 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination C. Federalism D. International Trade Impact Assessment E. Paperwork Reduction Act F. Environmental Assessment G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 H. Energy Impact I. Privacy Act Statement I. Executive Summary

    In 2009, FRA finalized amendments to the HS recordkeeping regulations at 49 CFR part 228 (part 228) to authorize electronic recordkeeping and reporting as a means of compliance with the Federal HS laws. In addition to certification requirements, see 49 CFR 228.9(b), these amendments added new subpart D to part 228, which established comprehensive requirements for electronic recordkeeping systems. Some smaller railroads informed FRA that the requirements of part 228, subpart D make electronic recordkeeping systems infeasible for their operations, which are less complex and variable than larger railroads' operations. Some small railroads already use an automated system for covered service employees to enter required HS data, which the employees then print and sign as a paper HS record. This rule allows a railroad with less than 400,000 employee-hours annually (an “eligible smaller railroad”), and contractors and subcontractors that provide covered service employees to that railroad, to have employees electronically sign the automated records of their hours of duty and to store the records in the railroad's computer system. Thus, this rule eliminates the requirement to print and sign the record.

    This rule amends part 228, subpart D by defining an “automated recordkeeping system” for eligible smaller railroads under new § 228.201(b) and outlining the requirements of such a system under new § 228.206, while retaining the definition of an “electronic recordkeeping system” as § 228.201(a) and the existing requirements under §§ 228.203-228.205. The rule also provides general requirements for automated records, such as electronic signatures, retention periods, and FRA access, under new § 228.9(c), and it modifies training requirements under § 228.207.

    This rule allows an eligible smaller railroad to adopt an automated recordkeeping system without conforming to all the requirements for an electronic recordkeeping system. For example, new § 228.206 does not require an automated recordkeeping system to include some of the program components and other features that are not appropriate or necessary for the operations of eligible smaller railroads, although those features are important for an electronic recordkeeping system in light of the more complex operations of larger railroads. New § 228.206 includes requirements for FRA and participating State inspector access to and ability to search an automated recordkeeping system to effectively monitor compliance with the HS laws and regulations, similar to the search capabilities and access requirements for electronic recordkeeping systems.

    This rule significantly reduces costs and paperwork burdens for eligible smaller railroads because automated records require less time to complete than manual records and the records may be stored digitally, relieving eligible smaller railroads of the burden of storing and maintaining paper records. The costs of implementing an automated recordkeeping system are projected as substantially less than an electronic recordkeeping system and are relatively small compared to the benefits gained by eliminating a paper recordkeeping system. Adopting an automated recordkeeping system is purely voluntary, but FRA expects many eligible smaller railroads currently using manual records to begin creating and maintaining HS records using an automated system, with a projected reduction of over 194,000 burden hours. FRA's economic analysis projects an estimated $87.6 million in net savings over a 10-year period as a result of this rule, and the present value of this savings is $55.1 million (discounted at 7 percent). The final rule is expected to have no negative impact on safety, as it simply provides a voluntary option for eligible smaller railroads and their contractors and subcontractors to use an alternative means of compliance with recordkeeping obligations.

    II. Background and History

    Federal laws governing railroad employees' hours of service date back to 1907 1 and are presently codified at 49 U.S.C. 21101-21109,2 21303, and 21304.3 FRA, under 49 U.S.C. 103(g), 49 CFR 1.89, and internal delegations, has long administered the statutory HS requirements and the agency's HS recordkeeping and reporting regulations (49 CFR part 228, subpart B), which promote compliance with the HS laws. Currently, the HS statutory requirements cover three groups of employees: train employees, signal employees, and dispatching service employees, as those terms are defined at Sec. 21101. The HS recordkeeping and reporting regulations at 49 CFR 228.5 include the statutory definitions of these terms and FRA interpretations discuss them. See FRA's “Requirements of the Hours of Service Act; Statement of Agency Policy and Interpretation” at 49 CFR part 228, appendix A, most of which was issued in the 1970s, and subsequent FRA interpretations of the HS laws published in the Federal Register.

    1 See the Hours of Service Act (Pub. L. 59-274, 34 Stat. 1415 (1907)). Effective July 5, 1994, Public Law 103-272, 108 Stat. 745 (1994), repealed the Hours of Service Act as amended, then codified at 45 U.S.C. 61-64b, and revised and reenacted its provisions, without substantive change, as positive law at 49 U.S.C. 21101-21108, 21303, and 21304. The Hours of Service Act was administered by the Interstate Commerce Commission until these duties were transferred to FRA in 1966.

    2 These sections may also be cited as 49 U.S.C. Chapter 211. Hereinafter, references to a “Sec.” are to a section of title 49 of the U.S. Code unless otherwise specified.

    3 For a table comparing and contrasting the current Federal HS requirements with respect to freight train employees, passenger train employees, signal employees, and dispatching service employees, please see Appendix A to the Second Interim Interpretations. 78 FR 58830, 58850-58854, Sept. 24, 2013.

    Congress has amended the HS statutory requirements several times over the years, most recently in the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (RSIA).4 The RSIA substantially amended the requirements of Secs. 21103 and 21104, applicable to a “train employee” 5 and a “signal employee,” 6 respectively, and added new provisions at Secs. 21102(c) and 21109 that together made a train employee providing rail passenger transportation subject to HS regulations, not Sec. 21103, if the Secretary timely issued regulations. Subsequently, FRA, as the Secretary's delegate, timely issued those regulations, codified at 49 CFR part 228, subpart F (Passenger Train Employee HS Regulations), which became effective October 15, 2011.

    4 Public Law 110-432, Div. A, 122 Stat. 4848.

    5See Sec. 21101(5).

    6See Sec. 21101(4). The RSIA also amended the definition of “signal employee” effective October 16, 2008. Before the RSIA, the term meant “an individual employed by a railroad carrier who is engaged in installing, repairing, or maintaining signal systems.” Emphasis added.

    Additionally, section 108(f)(1) of the RSIA required the Secretary to prescribe a regulation revising the requirements for recordkeeping and reporting for hours of service of railroad employees, specifically to authorize electronic record keeping and reporting of excess service and to require training of affected employees and supervisors, including training of employees in the entry of hours of service data. FRA, as the Secretary's delegate, also issued those regulations, codified at 49 CFR part 228, including subpart D (Electronic Recordkeeping), which became effective July 16, 2009. 74 FR 25330, May 27, 2009 (2009 Recordkeeping Amendments).7

    7 FRA issued its first HS recordkeeping regulation, codified at 49 CFR part 228, subparts A and B, in 1972. See 37 FR 12234, Jun. 21, 1972. Because the regulation did not contemplate electronic recordkeeping, it required HS records be signed manually by the employee whose time was being recorded. Therefore, prior to the effective date of the 2009 Recordkeeping Amendments, railroads that wished to create and maintain their required HS records electronically rather than manually needed FRA's waiver of the requirement for a handwritten signature. See FRA procedural regulations at 49 CFR part 211. At the time the 2009 recordkeeping amendments went into effect, several Class I railroads were creating and maintaining their required HS records using an electronic recordkeeping system approved by FRA pursuant to a waiver. See the preamble of the 2009 Recordkeeping Amendments for further discussion of the history of electronic recordkeeping and the development of waiver-approved electronic recordkeeping systems. See 74 FR 25330, 25330-25334.

    In general, the 2009 Recordkeeping Amendments required that either employees recording their own time, or the reporting crewmember of a train crew or signal gang who was recording time, certify their electronic HS records, instead of signing them by hand, and that the recordkeeping system electronically stamp the records with the name of the certifying employee and the date and time of certification. See 49 CFR 228.9(b). These amendments also established comprehensive requirements for electronic recordkeeping systems. A brief summary of the most significant requirements follows.

    • First, electronic recordkeeping systems must generate records that provide sufficient data fields for an employee to report a wide variety and number of activities that could arise during a duty tour. See 49 CFR 228.201.

    • Second, the systems must have security features to control access to HS records and to identify any individual who entered information on a record. See 49 CFR 228.203(a)(1)(i), (a)(2)-(a)(7), and (b).

    • Third, systems must include program logic that identifies how periods of time spent in any activity that is entered on a record are treated under the HS laws (and the substantive HS regulations for passenger train employees).

    • Fourth, program logic must allow the systems to calculate total time on duty from the data the employee entered, flag employee-input errors so the employee can correct them before certifying the record, and require the employee to enter an explanation when the data entered shows a violation of the HS laws or regulations. See 49 CFR 228.203(c).

    • Fifth, electronic recordkeeping systems must provide a method known as a “quick tie-up” for employees to enter limited HS information when they have met or exceeded the maximum hours allowed for the duty tour, and railroads must have procedures for employees to do a quick tie-up by telephone or facsimile (fax) if computer access is not available. See 49 CFR 228.5 and 228.203(a)(1)(ii).

    • Finally, an electronic recordkeeping system must provide search capability so records may be searched by date or date range and by employee name or identification number, train or job assignment, origin or release location, territory, and by records showing excess service. The results of any such search must yield all records matching specified criteria. See 49 CFR 228.203(d).

    III. Scope of the Final Rule

    The final rule applies only to eligible smaller railroads 8 , as well as contractors and subcontractors to such eligible smaller railroads. FRA is aware that some railroads have been using an automated system in which covered service employees access a blank HS record on a railroad computer, enter required data on the form, and then print and sign the record. The printed record is still considered a manual or paper record, with the associated burden of storage placed on the railroad. FRA expects many eligible smaller railroads will choose to comply with this rule using existing equipment and software already in use. For example, many eligible smaller railroads will find their existing equipment and software can generate forms that will allow employees to enter the information relevant to their duty tours as required by § 228.11 and save those records in a directory structure that would allow either the railroad or FRA to retrieve them using the search criteria provided in this rule.

    8 Railroads that: (1) Reported less than 400,000 employee hours to FRA during the preceding three consecutive calendar years under 49 CFR 225.21(d) on Form FRA 6180.55, Annual Railroad Reports of Manhours by State; or (2) operating less than three consecutive calendar years that reported less than 400,000 employee hours to FRA during the current calendar year under 49 CFR 225.21(d) on Form FRA 6180.55, Annual Railroad Reports of Manhours by State.

    Contractors and subcontractors to eligible smaller railroads are also eligible to use automated recordkeeping systems for their employees working on eligible smaller railroads, but not for their employees working on ineligible railroads. For instance, a contractor or subcontractor that performs covered service for both eligible smaller railroads and Class I railroads is not eligible to use an automated recordkeeping system for the hours of service records of its employees working for Class I railroads. If a contractor or subcontractor small enough to be eligible to use an automated recordkeeping system under this rule performs service for eligible and ineligible railroads and seeks to use an automated recordkeeping system, such a contractor or subcontractor may pursue relief through the waiver process, under 49 CFR 211.41.

    It is appropriate to allow the eligible smaller railroads to use an automated recordkeeping system that lacks the programming and analysis capabilities required of an electronic recordkeeping system because of the less complex and less varied nature of the operations of eligible smaller railroads. For example, this rule does not require an automated system to calculate and fill in total time on duty based on the information an employee enters because that would require costly programming to enable the system to identify how various periods of time are treated. Instead, an employee will enter that information just as if the automated record were a paper record. Similarly, the rule does not require an automated system to include costly programming that would prompt the employee to enter an explanation of a duty tour over 12 hours or that would flag possible input errors or missing data (for example, showing an on-duty location that differs from the released location of the previous duty tour).

    Approximately 746 railroads, 18 commuter railroads, and their contractors and subcontractors, are eligible to use automated recordkeeping systems pursuant to this rule. FRA declines to extend this rule to railroads with 400,000 or more employee-hours annually because the number of employees, volume of HS records, and complexity of operations associated with larger railroads requires a more sophisticated electronic recordkeeping system that complies with part 228, subpart D if those operations want to use an alternative to manual records.9 A larger and more complex operation benefits from an electronic recordkeeping system's program logic that helps to ensure accurate recordkeeping, and search capabilities that help to better identify relevant records for the railroad's own review and in response to FRA requests.

    9 FRA also declines to adopt a per se rule allowing Class III railroads to use automated recordkeeping because the definition of “Class III railroad” includes all terminal and switching operations, regardless of operating revenue, some of which have extensive operations more appropriately served by an electronic recordkeeping system. See 49 CFR 1201.1-1(d). Accordingly, FRA chose to define the rule's applicability based on employee hours.

    Among commuter railroads, for example, Metro-North Commuter Railroad is currently using an electronic recordkeeping system, and New Jersey Transit Railroad is developing an electronic recordkeeping system. FRA understands that these railroads are willing to share some information with other commuter railroads that are ineligible for automated recordkeeping systems to help them develop electronic recordkeeping systems compliant with part 228, subpart D. By developing these partnerships, larger commuter railroads will have a cost-effective opportunity to eliminate paper records and adopt electronic recordkeeping systems even if they do not qualify for automated recordkeeping under this rule. For these reasons, FRA adopts this rule applicable only to eligible smaller railroads.

    IV. Discussion of Comments

    FRA received two public comments on the automated recordkeeping NPRM. The American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association filed a short comment October 23, 2015, indicating the NPRM accurately assessed the ability of small railroads to capture HS data and expressing eagerness to see a final rule in effect. FRA also received an anonymous comment October 22, 2015, indicating only that the NPRM was, “Good.” FRA received no public comments conveying a need to change the scope or substance of the proposed rule.

    V. Section-by-Section Analysis Subpart A—General Section 228.5 Definitions

    FRA adds definitions of “automated recordkeeping system”; “electronic recordkeeping system”; “electronic signature”; and “eligible smaller railroad.”

    The definitions of “automated recordkeeping system” and “electronic recordkeeping system” distinguish the automated systems subject to this rulemaking, which are required to conform to the requirements of new §§ 228.201(b) and 228.206, from the electronic recordkeeping systems that must meet the pre-existing requirements of §§ 228.201(a) and 228.203-228.205.

    The definition of “electronic signature” is consistent with the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act.10 It allows railroads the choice of using two different types of electronic signatures for their employees to sign their HS records: Either (1) a unique digital signature, created based on the employee's identification number and password, or other means used to uniquely identify the employee in the automated recordkeeping system; or (2) a unique digitized version of the employee's handwritten signature that would be applied to the HS record.11 The definition also provides the electronic signature must be created as provided in § 228.19(g) (existing regulatory requirements for creating an electronic signature for railroads' use on their reports of excess service) or § 228.206(a) (new requirements for creating electronic signatures for use on employees' HS records in an automated recordkeeping system).

    10 Public Law 106-229, 114 Stat. 472 (2000); see 15 U.S.C. 7006.

    11 If a railroad creates an electronic signature that is a unique digital signature for each of its employees, the employee's HS record will be signed with the employee's printed name or other identifying information, when the employee signs the record using his or her electronic signature. If the railroad instead creates a digitized version of the employee's handwritten signature, the record will be signed with the employee's handwritten signature when the employee signs the record using his or her electronic signature.

    This rule defines an “eligible smaller railroad”, in general, as a railroad with less than 400,000 employee hours annually, which is eligible to use an automated recordkeeping system under this rule. More specifically, an eligible smaller railroad is defined as a railroad that has reported to FRA it had less than 400,000 employee hours during the preceding three consecutive calendar years on Form FRA 6180.55—Annual Railroad Reports of Manhours by State, as required by 49 CFR 225.21(d). As an exception to the general rule, railroads that have not been operating for three prior consecutive calendar years and expect to have less than 400,000 employee hours annually during the current year may use an automated recordkeeping system. This final rule combines the substantive content of the proposed definitions of “eligible smaller railroad” and “railroad that has less than 400,000 employee hours annually” into the final definition of “eligible smaller railroad.”

    Section 228.9 Records; General

    New § 228.9(c) establishes requirements for automated records that parallel the requirements of paragraph (a) for manual records and paragraph (b) for electronic records. Paragraph (c) requires that automated records be electronically signed and stamped with the certifying employee's electronic signature that meets the requirements of § 228.206(a) and the date and time that the employee electronically signed the record. As in paragraphs (a) and (b), paragraph (c) contains requirements for retaining and accessing the records. Unlike paragraph (b) applicable to electronic records, paragraph (c) does not require using an employee identification (ID) and password to access automated records.12 While some eligible smaller railroads might choose to provide an ID and password for the purpose of accessing an automated system, FRA concludes mandating an ID and password would be more complex than necessary for smaller operations, which may choose, for example, to have a railroad official directly provide access.13 Finally, paragraph (c) requires automated records be capable of being reproduced on printers available at the location where records are accessed, meaning railroads must have printers available at any location where they provide access to records. This requirement also applies to electronic recordkeeping systems under § 228.9(b).

    12 Employee ID and passwords are necessary for employees to certify their hours of service records, but are not required as a mechanism for providing access to the automated recordkeeping system.

    13 It is important to note access must be available as soon as possible and no later than 24 hours after a request, as required by § 228.206(e)(2), as discussed further below. In addition, railroads and managers risk civil and criminal liability if they control access to an automated recordkeeping system in a manner that prevents employees from accurately reporting their hours of service.

    Section 228.11 Hours of Duty Records

    Section 228.11(a) requires each railroad, or a contractor or a subcontractor that provides covered service employees to a railroad, to “keep a record, either manually or electronically, concerning the hours of duty of each employee.” Because HS records created and maintained using an automated recordkeeping system will also be required to comply with the requirements of § 228.11 (see section-by-section analysis of § 228.201(b) below), this rule removes the words “either manually or electronically” from the requirement.

    Section 228.201 Electronic Recordkeeping System and Automated Recordkeeping System; General

    FRA retains the pre-existing requirements of this section for electronic recordkeeping systems as paragraph (a) and adopts new paragraph (b) with similar but simplified requirements for automated recordkeeping systems, in part by cross-referencing those requirements of paragraph (a) also applicable to automated recordkeeping systems. The rule makes minor non-substantive changes to paragraphs (a)(3), (a)(4), and (a)(5) to correct typographical errors, specifically by deleting the “and” after paragraph (a)(3), replacing the periods at the end of paragraphs (a)(4) and (a)(5) with semicolons, and adding “and” after the semicolon at the end of paragraph (a)(5). New § 228.201(b)(1) requires an automated recordkeeping system to comply with new § 228.206. New § 228.201(b)(2) requires eligible smaller railroads using automated recordkeeping systems to comply with the requirements of paragraphs (a)(2) and (a)(4)-(a)(6), requirements also applicable to electronic records and recordkeeping systems. The main difference between the requirements of new § 228.201(b)(2) for automated records and recordkeeping systems and the corresponding existing requirements for electronic records and recordkeeping systems is that automated systems are not required to have monitoring indicators in the system to help the railroad monitor the accuracy of the records. Eligible smaller railroads, however, remain responsible for the accuracy of their required HS records, regardless of whether the record is manual, automated, or electronic.

    Finally, under new § 228.201(c), if a railroad, or a contractor or subcontractor to a railroad with an automated recordkeeping system, ceases to qualify as an “eligible smaller railroad” based on the new definition in § 228.5, that railroad, or contractor or subcontractor to a railroad, may not use an automated recordkeeping system unless FRA grants a waiver under 49 CFR 211.41. As described above, FRA believes larger railroads are better served by the use of an electronic recordkeeping system. In most cases, a railroad with such growth for three consecutive calendar years will have had sufficient time and funding to transition to an electronic recordkeeping system.

    Section 228.206 Requirements for Automated Records and Recordkeeping Systems on Eligible Smaller Railroads

    New § 228.206 establishes the requirements for an automated recordkeeping system, some of which are similar to the requirements for electronic recordkeeping systems found in §§ 228.203 and 228.205. As discussed in Section III above, however, § 228.206 is tailored to the nature and lesser complexity of the operations of eligible smaller railroads. Therefore, the rule does not require an automated system to include some of the program components and other features that apply to electronic recordkeeping systems. These elements are not appropriate or necessary for the operations of eligible smaller railroads; however, the rule requires other elements for the automated systems not used in an electronic recordkeeping system.

    Paragraph (a) mandates an employee creating an automated record must sign the record and establishes the requirements for an electronic signature. These requirements largely track paragraph (g) of § 228.19, which explains the requirements for railroads to establish and use electronic signatures for filing reports of excess service. These requirements are unique to automated recordkeeping systems and do not apply to electronic recordkeeping systems.

    Paragraph (b) provides standards for system security of automated recordkeeping systems. Eligible smaller railroads must control access to the automated recordkeeping system using a user name and password or comparable method. Paragraph (b)(1) restricts data entry to the employee, train crew, or signal gang whose time is being reported, although a railroad may pre-populate some of the known factual data on its employees' HS records. An employee's name or identification number, or the on-duty time for an employee who works a regular schedule, are examples of the kind of data that the automated system can pre-populate; however, the regulation requires that the employee may make changes to any pre-populated data at all times without requiring permission or authorization from any third party, such as, but not limited to, a railroad manager.

    Paragraph (b)(2) requires no two individuals have the same electronic signature, and paragraph (b)(3) requires the system not permit the deletion or alteration of an electronically-signed automated record. Paragraphs (b)(4) and (b)(5) together require that any amendment to a record must (1) be stored digitally apart from the record it amends or attached as information without altering the record and (2) identify the person making the amendment. Finally, paragraphs (b)(6) and (b)(7) require the automated recordkeeping systems maintain records as submitted without corruption or loss of data and ensure supervisors and crew management officials can access, but not delete or alter, an automated record after an employee electronically signs the record. The proposed rule did not establish a specific interval for railroads to back-up the data contained in their automated recordkeeping system. FRA requested comments on the appropriate interval and method of data back-up, but did not receive any comments on this issue. To guarantee sufficient data redundancy to prevent substantial loss of HS records, paragraph (b)(6) now requires back-up of automated recordkeeping systems at least quarterly.

    Paragraph (c) requires the automated recordkeeping system to identify each individual who enters data on a record and which data items each individual entered if more than one person entered data on a given record.

    Paragraph (d) establishes the required search capabilities for an automated recordkeeping system. Though the rule provides specific data fields and other criteria the system must be able to use to search for and retrieve responsive records, the requirements are notably less complex than those for an electronic recordkeeping system.

    Paragraph (e) establishes the requirements for access to automated recordkeeping systems. Eligible smaller railroads must grant FRA inspectors, and participating State inspectors, access to the system using railroad computer terminals as soon as possible, and no later than 24 hours after a request for access. The access must make visible each data field an employee completed, and data fields must be searchable as described in paragraph (d).

    Section 228.207 Training

    This rule revises the training requirements of part 228. Specifically, paragraph (b) of this section, which sets forth the components of initial training, will now require training on how to enter HS data into an automated system. The paragraph currently requires training of employees on the electronic recordkeeping system or the appropriate paper records used by the railroad, contractor, or subcontractor for whom the employees perform covered service. Paragraph (b) will now include a similar training requirement for eligible smaller railroads that develop an automated recordkeeping system in compliance with this rule.

    Similarly, this rule revises paragraph (c) of this section to specifically require eligible smaller railroads with automated systems to provide refresher training emphasizing any changes in HS substantive requirements, HS recordkeeping requirements, or a railroad's HS recordkeeping system since the employee was last provided training. FRA expects any railroad implementing an automated recordkeeping system to replace previously-used paper records would need to provide training on the use of that system to its employees, even if those employees had previously received training for paper records as required by this section.

    VI. Regulatory Impact and Notices A. Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13771 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    This final rule has been evaluated in accordance with existing policies and procedures under Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, Executive Order 13771, and DOT policies and procedures. 44 FR 11034, Feb. 26, 1979; 76 FR 3821, Jan. 21, 2011; 82 FR 9339, Jan. 30, 2017. OMB designated this rule nonsignificant. FRA prepared and placed in the docket a Regulatory Evaluation addressing the economic impacts of this rule.

    FRA will now allow eligible smaller railroads, and their contractors and subcontractors, to use automated recordkeeping systems, a simpler alternative to electronic recordkeeping systems that are infeasible for them, because their operations are less complex and variable than the operations of larger railroads. Both electronic and automated records require substantially less time to complete and cost less to store than manual records. Under this rule, eligible smaller railroads can take advantage of paper-saving technology to create and maintain hours of duty records as required by 49 CFR part 228, subpart B without complying with the more-stringent requirements for electronic recordkeeping systems under 49 CFR part 228, subpart D that may not be relevant to their operations. As part of its regulatory evaluation, FRA explained the benefits/cost savings of automated records and recordkeeping systems under this rule and provided a monetized value. The rule substantially reduces costs compared to current paper recordkeeping systems by allowing eligible smaller railroads to use automated recordkeeping systems. FRA believes the majority of eligible smaller railroads will take advantage of the opportunity for cost savings and incur a small burden to realize projected significant net cost savings. The final rule also follows the direction of Executive Order 13563, which emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility.

    Finally, this final rule is considered an E.O. 13771 deregulatory action. Details on the estimated cost savings of this proposed rule can be found in the rule's economic analysis.

    FRA estimates this regulation will result in a total estimated reduction of just over 194,000 burden hours annually. Based on railroads' annual 6180.55 reports to FRA for 2016, this rule will apply to a total of approximately 764 railroads with less than 400,000 employee-hours annually. These 764 railroads include the eligible employees of 746 probable small freight railroads and 18 small commuter railroads, as well as their contractors and subcontractors. FRA estimates 615 of these entities will adopt an automated recordkeeping system: 80 percent of the 746 small railroads and all 18 of the small commuter railroads.

    The economic analysis 14 provides a quantitative evaluation of the costs, cost savings, and benefits of the rule. The cost savings equals the reduced time an employee spends entering hours of duty in an automated system compared to the time they currently spend to manually produce a paper record of hours on duty. FRA calculated a reduction of 8 minutes per record.

    14 The Regulatory Evaluation for Docket No. FRA-2012-101, Notice No. 2, is placed in the regulatory docket for this final rule.

    FRA estimated the net cost savings expected from this final rule. In particular, over a 10-year period, $87.6 million in net savings could accrue through the adoption of automated recordkeeping systems. The present value of this savings is $55.1 million (discounted at 7 percent). FRA concludes the eligible small railroads would benefit significantly from adoption of the final rule.

    Railroads are already producing HS records manually on paper records to comply with 49 CFR 228.11, and adopting an automated recordkeeping system is voluntary. FRA expects a relatively small implementation investment cost for railroads electing to use the automated system to realize the significant benefits (cost burden reduction). Costs are primarily labor driven along with the potential purchase of hardware 15 and software. 16 FRA estimates that if each of these railroads were to expend $5,590 discounted at 7 percent over a 10-year period to set up and operate an automated recordkeeping system for HS records, the railroads would reduce their paperwork burden by $95,174 discounted at 7 percent over that same period.

    15 The equipment needed for an automated recordkeeping system includes, a PC and other computer accessories such as printers.

    16 Examples of the types of software that might be purchased are simple programmable accounting type spreadsheets, or electronic signature and encryption software.

    Therefore, this final rule would have a positive effect on these railroads, saving each railroad approximately a net $89,584 in costs at discounted 7 percent over the 10-year analysis. The table below presents the estimated net cost savings associated with the final rule, over the 10-year analysis.

    Table 1—10-Year Estimated Net Cost Savings of Final Rule Costs to prepare and operate automated record keeping $3,438,058 Cost Savings: Reduced Hours of recordkeeping 58,532,167 Net Cost Savings 55,094,109 Dollars are discounted at a present value rate of 7%. B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    Both the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), Public Law 96-354, as amended, and codified as amended at 5 U.S.C. 601-612, and Executive Order 13272—Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking, 67 FR 53461, Aug. 16, 2002, require agency review of proposed and final rules to assess their impact on “small entities” for purposes of the RFA. An agency must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis unless it determines and certifies a final rule is not expected to have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Pursuant to the RFA, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the Administrator of FRA certifies this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Although this final rule could affect many small railroads, they may voluntarily adopt the requirements. Moreover, the effect on those railroads that do voluntarily adopt the requirements is primarily beneficial and not significant because it will reduce their labor burden for hours of service recordkeeping and reporting.

    The term “small entity” is defined in 5 U.S.C. 601 (Section 601). Section 601(6) defines “small entity” as having the same meaning as “the terms `small business', `small organization' and `small governmental jurisdiction' defined in paragraphs (3), (4), and (5) of this section.” In turn, Section 601(3) defines a “small business” as generally having the same meaning as “small business concern” under Section 3 of the Small Business Act, and includes any a small business concern that is independently owned and operated, and is not dominant in its field of operation. Next, Sec. 601(4) defines “small organization” as generally meaning any not-for-profit enterprises that is independently owned and operated, and not dominant in its field of operations. Additionally, Sec. 601(5) defines “small governmental jurisdiction” in general to include governments of cities, counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special districts with populations less than 50,000.

    The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) stipulates “size standards” for small entities. It provides that, in order to qualify for “small entity” status, a for-profit railroad business firm may have a maximum of 1,500 employees for “Line-Haul Operating” railroads and 500 employees for “Short-Line Operating” railroads. See “Size Eligibility Provisions and Standards,” 13 CFR part 121, subpart A.

    Under exceptions in Section 601, Federal agencies may adopt their own size standards for small entities in consultation with SBA, and in conjunction with public comment. Under that authority, FRA published a “Final Policy Statement Concerning Small Entities Subject to the Railroad Safety Laws” (Policy) which formally establishes that small entities include among others, the following: (1) Railroads that Surface Transportation Board (STB) regulations classify as Class III and (2) commuter railroads “that serve populations of 50,000 or less.” 17 See 68 FR 24891, May 9, 2003, codified at appendix C to 49 CFR part 209. Currently, railroads eligible for small entity status under the Policy also must have $20 million or less in annual operating revenue, adjusted annually for inflation. The $20 million limit (adjusted annually for inflation) is based on the STB's threshold for a Class III railroad, which is adjusted by applying the railroad revenue deflator adjustment. For further information on the calculation of the specific dollar limit, see 49 CFR part 1201. FRA uses this definition of “small entity” for this final rule.

    17 “In the Interim Policy Statement [62 FR 43024, Aug. 11, 1997], FRA defined `small entity,' for the purpose of communication and enforcement policies, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., and the Equal Access for Justice Act 5 U.S.C. 501 et seq., to include only railroads which are classified as Class III. FRA further clarified the definition to include, in addition to Class III railroads, hazardous materials shippers that meet the income level established for Class III railroads (those with annual operating revenues of $20 million per year or less, as set forth in 49 CFR 1201.1-1); railroad contractors that meet the income level established for Class III railroads; and those commuter railroads or small governmental jurisdictions that serve populations of 50,000 or less.” 68 FR 24892 (May 9, 2003). “The Final Policy Statement issued today is substantially the same as the Interim Policy Statement.” 68 FR 24894.

    FRA amends its hours of service recordkeeping regulations to provide simplified recordkeeping requirements by allowing eligible smaller railroads, and their contractors and subcontractors, to utilize an automated system to create and maintain hours of duty records as required by 49 CFR 228.11. As stated above, FRA reports indicate there are 742 Class III railroads that are eligible to use the simplified automated recordkeeping system this final rule provides. However, if they are affected, it is voluntary because this final rule does not require any railroad to develop and use an automated recordkeeping system. As stated above, there are also 18 commuter railroads, each of which is run by a State, County, or Municipal Agency, eligible under this final rule to develop and use an automated recordkeeping system, but all serve populations of 50,000 or more and are not designated as small businesses.18

    18 Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), “small governmental jurisdictions” are governments of cities, counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special districts with a population of less than 50,000.

    FRA estimates 80 percent of small railroads and all small commuter railroads to convert to automated recordkeeping. For the purposes of this analysis, the 615 railroads FRA estimates are affected by this final rule are assumed to be small railroads. However, as discussed above, the economic impact on these small railroads is not significant. This final rule does not affect any other small entities other than these small railroads. As stated above in Section VI.A., although FRA estimates each of these railroads will expend $5,590, this final rule will have a positive net economic effect on these railroads, saving each railroad approximately $89,584 in costs at discounted 7 percent over the 10-year period analyzed. Since this amount is relatively small and beneficial, FRA concludes this final rule does not have a significant impact on these railroads.

    To determine the significance of the economic impact for this RFA, during the NPRM process, FRA invited comments from all interested parties concerning the potential economic impact of this rulemaking on small entities. However, FRA did not receive any comments related to small entities.

    FRA expects the final rule will reduce the paperwork burden for smaller railroads. Therefore, this RFA concludes this final rule will not cause an economic impact on any small entities.

    Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601(b), the FRA Administrator hereby certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. FRA continues to invite comments from members of the public who foresee a significant impact.

    C. Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, “Federalism” (64 FR 43255, Aug. 10, 1999), requires FRA to develop an accountable process to ensure “meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.” The executive order defines “policies that have federalism implications” to include regulations that 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.” Under Executive Order 13132, the agency may not issue a regulation with federalism implications that imposes substantial direct compliance costs and that is not required by statute, unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by State and local governments or the agency consults with State and local government officials early in the process of developing the regulation. Where a regulation has federalism implications and preempts State law, the agency seeks to consult with State and local officials in the process of developing the regulation.

    FRA analyzed this final rule consistent with the principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132. FRA determined the final rule will not have substantial direct effects on States, on the relationship between the national government and States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. In addition, FRA determined this final rule will not impose substantial direct compliance costs on State and local governments. Therefore, the consultation and funding requirements of Executive Order 13132 do not apply.

    This final rule amends FRA's HS reporting and recordkeeping regulations to allow a railroad with less than 400,000 employee hours annually, and a contractor or subcontractor providing covered service employees to such a railroad, to create and maintain HS records for its covered service employees using an automated recordkeeping system. FRA is not aware of any State with regulations covering the subject of this final rule. However, FRA notes this rule could have preemptive effect under Section 20106 of the former Federal Railroad Safety Act of 1970, that Congress repealed, reenacted without substantive change, codified at 49 U.S.C. 20106, and later amended (Section 20106). Section 20106 provides that States may not adopt or continue in effect any law, regulation, or order related to railroad safety or security that covers the subject matter of a regulation prescribed or order issued by the Secretary of Transportation (with respect to railroad safety matters), unless the State law, regulation, or order (1) qualifies under the “essentially local safety or security hazard” exception to Section 20106, (2) is not incompatible with a law, regulation, or order of the U.S. Government, and (3) does not unreasonably burden interstate commerce.

    In sum, FRA analyzed this final rule consistent with the principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132. As explained above, FRA determined this final rule has no federalism implications other than possible preemption of State laws under 49 U.S.C. 20106 and 21109 (providing regulatory authority for hours of service). Accordingly, FRA determined it is not required to prepare a federalism summary impact statement for this final rule.

    D. International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreement Act of 1979 prohibits Federal agencies from engaging in any standards or related activities that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. Legitimate domestic objectives, such as safety, are not considered unnecessary obstacles. The statute also requires consideration of international standards, and, where appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards. This rulemaking is purely domestic in nature and is not expected to affect trade opportunities for U.S. firms doing business overseas or for foreign firms doing business in the United States.

    E. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements in this final rule are being submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The sections that contain the new and current information collection requirements are duly designated, and the estimated time to fulfill each requirement is as follows:

    CFR section-49 CFR Respondent universe Total annual
  • responses
  • Average time per
  • response
  • Total
  • annual
  • burden
  • hours
  • 228.11—Hours of duty records 785 railroads/signal contractors & subcontactors 27,511,875 records 2 min./5 min./8 min 2,733,439 228.17—Dispatchers record of train movements 150 dispatch offices 200,750 records 3 hours 602,250 228.19—Monthly reports of excess service 300 railroads 2,670 reports 2 hours 5,340 228.103—Construction of Employee Sleeping Quarters—Petitions to allow construction near work areas 50 railroads 1 petition 16 hours 16 228.201(b)—Electronic recordkeeping system and Automated system—RR automated systems (Revised Requirement) 764 railroads 615 automated systems 24 hours 14,760 (c)—Waiver requests by railroads/contractors/subcontractors no longer eligible use an automated recordkeeping system to refrain from having to begin keeping manual or electronic records or refrain from retaining its automated records as required under section 228.9(c) (New Requirement) 615 railroads 2 waiver requests 8 hours 16 228.206—New Requirements—Requirements for automated records and for automated recordkeeping systems on eligible smaller railroads, and their contractors or subcontractors that provide covered service employees to such railroads 100,500 employees 19,365 signed certifications 5 minutes 1,614 Certification of employee's electronic signature 100,500 employees 75 signed certifications 5 minutes 6 —Additional certification/testimony provided by employee upon FRA request 615 railroads 615 procedures 90 minutes 923 —Procedure for providing FRA/state inspector with system access upon request 228.207—Revised Requirements—Training in use of electronic or automated system—Initial training 615 railroads 5,931 trained employees 2 hours 11,862 —Employee refresher training on relevant changes to hours of service laws, the recording or reporting requirements in Subparts B and D of this Part, or the electronic, automated, or manual recordkeeping system of the railroad/contractor 785 railroads/contractors & subcontractors 47,000 trained employees 1 hour 47,000 49 U.S.C. 21102—The Federal Hours of Service Laws—Petitions for exemption from laws 10 railroads 1 petition 10 hours 10 228.407—Analysis of work schedules—RR analysis of one cycle of work schedules of employees engaged in commuter or intercity passenger transportation 168 railroads 2 analyses 20 hours 40 —RR Report to FRA Administrator of each work schedule that exceeds fatigue threshold 168 railroads 1 report 2 hours 2 —RR Fatigue mitigation plan—submission and FRA approval 168 railroads 1 plan 4 hours 4 —Work schedules, proposed mitigation plans/tools, determinations of operational necessity—found deficient by FRA and needing correction 168 railroads 1 corrected document 2 hours 2 —Follow-up analyses submitted to FRA for approval 168 railroads 5 analyses 4 hours 20 —Deficiencies found by FRA in revised work schedules and accompanying fatigue mitigation tools and determinations of operational necessity needing correction 168 railroads 1 corrected document 2 hours 2 —Updated fatigue mitigation plans 168 railroads 8 plans 4 hours 32 —RR Consultation with directly affected employees on: (i) RR Work schedules at risk for fatigue level possibly compromising safety; and 168 railroads 5 consultations 2 hours 10 (ii) Railroad's selection of fatigue mitigation tools; and (iii) All RR Submissions required by this section seeking FRA approval —Filed employee statements with FRA explaining any issues related to paragraph (f)(1) of this section where consensus was not reached RR Employee Organizations 2 filed statements 2 hours 4 228.411—RR Training programs on fatigue and related topics (e.g., rest, alertness, changes in rest cycles, etc.) 168 railroads 14 training programs 5 hours 70 —Refresher training for new employees 168 railroads 150 initially trained employees 1 hour 150 —RR Every 3 Years refresher training for existing employees 168 railroads 3,400 trained employees 1 hour 3,400 —RR Record of employees trained in compliance with this section 168 railroads 3,550 records 5 minutes 296 —Written declaration to FRA by tourist, scenic, historic, or excursion RR seeking exclusion from this section's requirements because its employees are assigned schedules wholly within the hours of 4 a.m. to 8 p.m. on the same calendar day that comply with the provisions of section 228.405 140 railroads 2 written declarations 1 hour 2 Appendix D—Guidance on fatigue management plan—RR reviewed and updated fatigue management plans 168 railroads 2 updated plans 10 hours 20

    All estimates include the time for reviewing instructions; searching existing data sources; gathering or maintaining the needed data; and reviewing the information. Pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(B), FRA solicits comments concerning: Whether these information collection requirements are necessary for the proper performance of the functions of FRA, including whether the information has practical utility; the accuracy of FRA's estimates of the burden of the information collection requirements; the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and whether the burden of collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, may be minimized. For information or a copy of the paperwork package submitted to OMB, contact Mr. Robert Brogan, Information Collection Clearance Officer, Office of Railroad Safety, at 202-493-6292, or Ms. Kim Toone, Information Collection Clearance Officer, Office of Railroad Administration, at 202-493-6132, or via email at the following addresses: [email protected]; [email protected]

    Organizations and individuals desiring to submit comments on the collection of information requirements should direct them to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Washington, DC 20503, Attention: FRA Desk Officer. Comments may also be sent via email to the Office of Management and Budget at the following address: [email protected]

    OMB is required to make a decision concerning the collection of information requirements contained in this final rule between 30 and 60 days after publication of this document in the Federal Register. Therefore, a comment to OMB is best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication.

    FRA cannot impose a penalty on persons for violating information collection requirements which do not display a current OMB control number, if required. FRA intends to obtain current OMB control numbers for any new information collection requirements resulting from this rulemaking action prior to the effective date of this final rule. The OMB control number assigned to the collection of information associated with the current rule is OMB No. 2130-0005.

    F. Environmental Assessment

    FRA evaluated this final rule consistent with its “Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts” (FRA's Procedures) (64 FR 28545, May 26, 1999) as required by the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), other environmental statutes, Executive Orders, and related regulatory requirements. FRA determined this final rule is not a major FRA action requiring the preparation of an environmental impact statement or environmental assessment because it is categorically excluded from detailed environmental review under section 4(c)(20) of FRA's Procedures.See 64 FR 28547, May 26, 1999. Section 4(c)(20) states certain classes of FRA actions have been determined to be categorically excluded from the requirements of FRA's Procedures as they do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment, including the promulgation of railroad safety rules and policy statements that do not result in significantly increased emissions of air or water pollutants or noise or increased traffic congestion in any mode of transportation.

    FRA further concluded no extraordinary circumstances exist with respect to this final regulation that might trigger the need for a more detailed environmental review under sections 4(c) and (e) of FRA's Procedures. As a result, FRA finds that this final rule is not a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.

    G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    Under section 201 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4, 2 U.S.C. 1531), each Federal agency “shall, unless otherwise prohibited by law, assess the effects of Federal regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal governments, and the private sector (other than to the extent that such regulations incorporate requirements specifically set forth in law).” Section 202 of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1532) further requires written statements from agencies before promulgating any general notice of proposed rulemaking that includes any Federal mandate that may result in expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any 1 year and before promulgating any final rule for which a general notice of proposed rulemaking was published. The written statement, if required, would detail the effect on State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector.

    For the year 2015, FRA adjusted the monetary amount of $100,000,000 to $156,000,000 for inflation. This final rule would not result in the expenditure of more than $156,000,000 by the public sector in any one year, and thus preparation of such a statement is not required.

    H. Energy Impact

    Executive Order 13211 requires Federal agencies to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for any “significant energy action.” 66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001. Under the Executive Order, “significant energy action” means any action by an agency (normally published in the Federal Register) that promulgates, or is expected to lead to the promulgation of, a final rule or regulation (including a notice of inquiry, advance NPRM, and NPRM) that (1)(i) is a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 or any successor order and (ii) is likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy; or (2) is designated by the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy action. FRA evaluated this rule consistent with Executive Order 13211. FRA determined this rule will not have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy and, thus, is not a “significant energy action” under the Executive Order 13211.

    List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 228

    Administrative practice and procedures, Buildings and facilities, Hazardous materials transportation, Noise control, Penalties, Railroad employees, Railroad safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    The Rule

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, FRA amends part 228 of chapter II, subtitle B of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:

    PART 228—PASSENGER TRAIN EMPLOYEE HOURS OF SERVICE; RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING; SLEEPING QUARTERS 1. The authority citation for part 228 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

    49 U.S.C. 20103, 20107, 21101-21109; Sec. 108, Div. A, Pub. L. 110-432, 122 Stat. 4860-4866, 4893-4894; 49 U.S.C. 21301, 21303, 21304, 21311; 28 U.S.C. 2461, note; 49 U.S.C. 103; and 49 CFR 1.89.

    2. The heading of part 228 is revised to read as set forth above. 3. In § 228.5, add definitions of “Automated recordkeeping system”; “Electronic recordkeeping system”; “Electronic signature”; and “Eligible smaller railroad” in alphabetical order to read as follows:
    § 228.5 Definitions.

    Automated recordkeeping system means a recordkeeping system that—

    (1) An eligible smaller railroad, or a contractor or subcontractor to such a railroad, may use instead of a manual recordkeeping system or electronic recordkeeping system to create and maintain any records subpart B of this part requires; and

    (2) Conforms to the requirements of § 228.206.

    Electronic recordkeeping system means a recordkeeping system that—

    (1) A railroad may use instead of a manual recordkeeping system or automated recordkeeping system to create and maintain any records required by subpart B of this part; and

    (2) Conforms to the requirements of §§ 228.201-228.205.

    Electronic signature means an electronic sound, symbol, or process that—

    (1) Is attached to, or logically associated with, a contract or other record;

    (2) Is executed or adopted by a person with the intent to sign the record, to create either an individual's unique digital signature, or unique digitized handwritten signature; and

    (3) Complies with the requirements of § 228.19(g) or § 228.206(a).

    Eligible smaller railroad means either:

    (1) A railroad that reported to FRA that it had less than 400,000 employee hours during the preceding three consecutive calendar years under § 225.21(d) of this chapter on Form FRA 6180.55, Annual Railroad Reports of Employee Hours by State; or

    (2) A railroad operating less than 3 consecutive calendar years that reported to FRA that it had less than 400,000 employee hours during the current calendar year under § 225.21(d) of this chapter on Form FRA 6180.55, Annual Railroad Reports of Employee Hours by State.

    4. In § 228.9, revise the section heading, add headings to paragraphs (a) and (b), and add new paragraph (c) to read as follows:
    § 228.9 Manual, electronic, and automated records; general.

    (a) Manual records. * * *

    (b) Electronic records. * * *

    (c) Automated records. Each automated record maintained under this part shall be—

    (1) Signed electronically by the employee whose time on duty is being recorded or, in the case of a member of a train crew or a signal employee gang, digitally signed by the reporting employee who is a member of the train crew or signal gang whose time is being recorded as provided by § 228.206(a);

    (2) Stamped electronically with the certifying employee's electronic signature and the date and time the employee electronically signed the record;

    (3) Retained for 2 years in a secured file that prevents alteration after electronic signature;

    (4) Accessible by the Administrator through a computer terminal of the railroad; and

    (5) Reproducible using printers at the location where records are accessed.

    5. In § 228.11, revise the first sentence of paragraph (a) to read as follows:
    § 228.11 Hours of duty records.

    (a) In general. Each railroad, or a contractor or a subcontractor of a railroad, shall keep a record of the hours of duty of each employee. * * *

    6. Revise the heading of subpart D to read as follows: Subpart D—Electronic Recordkeeping System and Automated Recordkeeping System 7. In § 228.201, revise the section heading, designate the introductory text as paragraph (a), add a heading to newly designated paragraph (a), redesignate paragraphs (1) through (6) as paragraphs (a)(1) through (6), revise the paragraphs newly designated as (a)(1), (a)(3), (a)(4), and (a)(5), and add new paragraph (b) to read as follows:
    § 228.201 Electronic recordkeeping system and automated recordkeeping system; general.

    (a) Electronic recordkeeping system. * * *

    (1) The system used to generate the electronic record meets all requirements of this paragraph (a) of this section and all requirements of §§ 228.203 and 228.205;

    (3) The railroad, or contractor or subcontractor to the railroad, monitors its electronic database of employee hours of duty records through a sufficient number of monitoring indicators to ensure a high degree of accuracy of these records;

    (4) The railroad, or contractor or subcontractor to the railroad, trains its affected employees on the proper use of the electronic recordkeeping system to enter the information necessary to create their hours of service record, as required by § 228.207;

    (5) The railroad, or contractor or subcontractor to the railroad, maintains an information technology security program adequate to ensure the integrity of the system, including the prevention of unauthorized access to the program logic or individual records; and

    (b) Automated recordkeeping system. For purposes of compliance with the recordkeeping requirements of subpart B of this part, an eligible smaller railroad, or a contractor or a subcontractor that provides covered service employees to such a railroad, may create and maintain any of the records required by subpart B using an automated recordkeeping system if all of the following conditions are met:

    (1) The automated recordkeeping system meets all requirements of paragraph (b) of this section and all requirements of § 228.206; and

    (2) The eligible smaller railroad or its contractor or subcontractor complies with all of the requirements of paragraphs (a)(2) and (a)(4) through (6) of this section for its automated records and automated recordkeeping system.

    (c) If a railroad, or a contractor or subcontractor to the railroad, is no longer eligible to use an automated recordkeeping system to record data subpart B of this part requires, the entity must begin keeping manual or electronic records and must retain its automated records as required under § 228.9(c) unless the entity requests, and FRA grants, a waiver under § 211.41 of this chapter.

    8. Add § 228.206 to read as follows:
    § 228.206 Requirements for automated records and for automated recordkeeping systems on eligible smaller railroads, and their contractors or subcontractors that provide covered service employees to such railroads.

    (a) Use of electronic signature. Each employee creating a record required by subpart B of this part must sign the record using an electronic signature that meets the following requirements:

    (1) The record contains the printed name of the signer and the date and actual time the signature was executed, and the meaning (such as authorship, review, or approval) associated with the signature;

    (2) Each electronic signature is unique to one individual and shall not be used by, or assigned to, anyone else;

    (3) Before an eligible smaller railroad, or a contractor or subcontractor to such a railroad, establishes, assigns, certifies, or otherwise sanctions an individual's electronic signature, or any element of such electronic signature, the organization shall verify the identity of the individual;

    (4) A person using an electronic signature shall, prior to or at the time of each such use, certify to FRA that the person's electronic signature in the system, used on or after August 29, 2018 is the legally binding equivalent of the person's traditional handwritten signature;

    (5) Each employee shall sign the initial certification of his or her electronic signature with a traditional handwritten signature, and each railroad using an automated system shall maintain certification of each electronic signature at its headquarters or the headquarters of any contractor or subcontractor providing employees who perform covered service to such a railroad, and railroads, contractors, and subcontractors must make the certification available to FRA upon request; and

    (6) A person using an electronic signature in such a system shall, upon FRA request, provide additional certification or testimony that a specific electronic signature is the legally binding equivalent of his or her handwritten signature.

    (b) System security. Railroads using an automated recordkeeping system must protect the integrity of the system by the use of an employee identification number and password, or a comparable method, to establish appropriate levels of program access meeting all of the following standards:

    (1) Data input is restricted to the employee or train crew or signal gang whose time is being recorded, except that an eligible smaller railroad, or a contractor or subcontractor to such a railroad, may pre-populate fields of the hours of service record provided that—

    (i) The eligible smaller railroad, or its contractor or subcontractor, pre-populates fields of the hours of service record with information the railroad, or its contractor or subcontractor knows is factually accurate for a specific employee.

    (ii) The recordkeeping system may allow employees to copy data from one field of a record into another field, where applicable.

    (iii) The eligible smaller railroad, or its contractor or subcontractor does not use estimated, historical, or arbitrary information to pre-populate any field of an hours of service record.

    (iv) An eligible smaller railroad, or a contractor or a subcontractor to such a railroad, is not in violation of paragraph (b)(1) of this section if it makes a good faith judgment as to the factual accuracy of the data for a specific employee but nevertheless errs in pre-populating a data field.

    (v) The employee may make any necessary changes to the data by typing into the field without having to access another screen or obtain clearance from railroad, or contractor or subcontractor to the railroad.

    (2) No two individuals have the same electronic signature.

    (3) No individual can delete or alter a record after the employee who created the record electronically signs the record.

    (4) Any amendment to a record is either:

    (i) Electronically stored apart from the record that it amends; or

    (ii) Electronically attached to the record as information without changing the original record.

    (5) Each amendment to a record uniquely identifies the individual making the amendment.

    (6) The automated system maintains the records as originally submitted without corruption or loss of data. Beginning August 29, 2018, an eligible smaller railroad must retain back-up data storage for its automated records for the quarters prescribed in the following table for the time specified in § 228.9(c)(3), to be updated within 30 days of the end of each prescribed quarter—

    Quarter 1 January 1 through March 31. Quarter 2 April 1 through June 30. Quarter 3 July 1 through September 30. Quarter 4 October 1 through December 31.

    (7) Supervisors and crew management officials can access, but cannot delete or alter, the records of any employee after the employee electronically signs the record.

    (c) Identification of the individual entering data. If a given record contains data entered by more than one individual, the record must identify each individual who entered specific information within the record and the data the individual entered.

    (d) Search capabilities. The automated recordkeeping system must store records using the following criteria so all records matching the selected criteria are retrieved from the same location:

    (1) Date (month and year);

    (2) Employee name or identification number; and

    (3) Electronically signed records containing one or more instances of excess service, including duty tours in excess of 12 hours.

    (e) Access to records. An eligible smaller railroad, or contractor or subcontractor providing covered service employees to such a railroad, must provide access to its hours of service records under subpart B that are created and maintained in its automated recordkeeping system to FRA inspectors and State inspectors participating under 49 CFR part 212, subject to the following requirements:

    (1) Access to records created and maintained in the automated recordkeeping system must be obtained as required by § 228.9(c)(4);

    (2) An eligible smaller railroad must establish and comply with procedures for providing an FRA inspector or participating State inspector with access to the system upon request and must provide access to the system as soon as possible but not later than 24 hours after a request for access;

    (3) Each data field entered by an employee on the input screen must be visible to the FRA inspector or participating State inspector; and

    (4) The data fields must be searchable as described in paragraph (d) of this section and must yield access to all records matching the criteria specified in a search.

    9. In § 228.207, revise paragraphs (b)(1)(iii)(B) and (c)(1)(i) to read as follows:
    § 228.207 Training.

    (b) * * *

    (1) * * *

    (iii) * * *

    (B) The entry of hours of service data, into the electronic system or automated system or on the appropriate paper records used by the railroad or contractor or subcontractor to a railroad for which the employee performs covered service; and

    (c) * * *

    (1) * * *

    (i) Emphasize any relevant changes to the hours of service laws, the recording and reporting requirements in subparts B and D of this part, or the electronic, automated, or manual recordkeeping system of the railroad or contractor or subcontractor to a railroad for which the employee performs covered service since the employee last received training; and

    Issued in Washington, DC. Ronald Louis Batory, Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18639 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 679 [Docket No. 107816769-8162-02] RIN 0648-XG396 Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Cod by Trawl Catcher Vessels in the Central Regulatory Area of the Gulf of Alaska 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 cod by catcher vessels using trawl gear in the Central Regulatory Area of the Gulf of Alaska (GOA). This action is necessary to prevent exceeding the annual allowance of the 2018 Pacific cod total allowable catch apportioned to trawl catcher vessels in the Central Regulatory Area of the GOA.

    DATES:

    Effective 1200 hours, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), September 1, 2018, through 2400 hours, A.l.t., December 31, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Obren Davis, 907-586-7228.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    NMFS manages the groundfish fishery in the GOA exclusive economic zone according to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska (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. Regulations governing sideboard protections for GOA groundfish fisheries appear at subpart B of 50 CFR part 680.

    The annual allowance of the 2018 Pacific cod total allowable catch (TAC) apportioned to trawl catcher vessels in the Central Regulatory Area of the GOA not participating in the cooperative fishery of the Rockfish Program is 2,275 metric tons (mt), as established by the final 2018 and 2019 harvest specifications for groundfish of the GOA (83 FR 8768, March 1, 2018).

    In accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(i), the Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS (Regional Administrator) has determined that the annual allowance of the 2018 Pacific cod TAC apportioned to trawl catcher vessels in the Central Regulatory Area of the GOA is necessary to account for the incidental catch in other anticipated fisheries. Therefore, the Regional Administrator is establishing a directed fishing allowance of 0 mt and is setting aside the remaining 2,275 mt as bycatch to support other anticipated groundfish fisheries. 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 cod by catcher vessels using trawl gear in the Central Regulatory Area of the GOA. While this closure is effective the maximum retainable amounts at § 679.20(e) and (f) apply at any time during a trip. This closure does not apply to fishing by vessels participating in the cooperative fishery of the Rockfish Program for the Central GOA.

    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 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 directed fishing closure of Pacific cod by catcher vessels using trawl gear in the Central Regulatory Area of the GOA. NMFS was unable to publish a notice providing time for public comment because the most recent, relevant data only became available as of August 22, 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: August 24, 2018. Margo B. Schulze-Haugen, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18727 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    83 168 Wednesday, August 29, 2018 Proposed Rules COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION 17 CFR Part 50 RIN 3038-AE33 Amendments to Clearing Exemption for Swaps Entered Into by Certain Bank Holding Companies, Savings and Loan Holding Companies, and Community Development Financial Institutions AGENCY:

    Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (Commission or CFTC) is proposing rule amendments pursuant to its authority under section 4(c) of the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) to exempt from the clearing requirement set forth in section 2(h)(1) of the CEA certain swaps entered into by certain bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before October 29, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by RIN number 3038-AE33 by any of the following methods:

    CFTC website: http://comments.cftc.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments through the Comments Online process on the website.

    Mail: Christopher Kirkpatrick, Secretary of the Commission, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW, Washington, DC 20581.

    Hand Delivery/Courier: Same as Mail above.

    Please submit your comments using only one method.

    All comments must be submitted in English, or if not, accompanied by an English translation. Comments will be posted as received to http://www.cftc.gov. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. If you wish the Commission to consider information that you believe is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), a petition for confidential treatment of the exempt information may be submitted according to the procedures established in section 145.9 of the Commission's regulations.1

    1 Commission regulation 145.9. Commission regulations referred to herein are found on the Commission's website at: http://www.cftc.gov/LawRegulation/CommodityExchangeAct/index.htm.

    The Commission reserves the right, but shall have no obligation, to review, pre-screen, filter, redact, refuse or remove any or all of your submission from http://www.cftc.gov that it may deem to be inappropriate for publication, such as obscene language. All submissions that have been redacted or removed that contain comments on the merits of the rulemaking will be retained in the public comment file and will be considered as required under the Administrative Procedure Act and other applicable laws, and may be accessible under the FOIA.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sarah E. Josephson, Deputy Director, at 202-418-5684 or [email protected]; Megan A. Wallace, Senior Special Counsel, at 202-418-5150 or [email protected]; or Melissa D'Arcy, Special Counsel, at 202-418-5086 or [email protected]; Division of Clearing and Risk or Ayla Kayhan, Office of the Chief Economist, at 202-418-5947 or [email protected], in each case at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW, Washington, DC 20581.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Table of Contents I. Background A. Project KISS B. Swap Clearing Requirement C. Swaps With Small Banks, Savings Associations, Farm Credit System Institutions, and Credit Unions in Commission Regulation Not Subject to the Clearing Requirement D. DCR No-Action Letter for Relief From the Clearing Requirement for Certain Bank Holding Companies and Savings and Loan Holding Companies With Consolidated Assets of $10 Billion or Less E. DCR No-Action Letter for Relief From the Clearing Requirement for Community Development Financial Institutions II. Proposed Amendments to Commission Regulation 50.5 A. Proposed Definition of Bank Holding Company and Savings and Loan Holding Company B. Proposed Definition of Community Development Financial Institution C. Proposed Exemptions From the Clearing Requirement for Certain Bank Holding Companies, Certain Savings and Loan Holding Companies, and Community Development Financial Institutions 1. Certain Bank Holding Companies and Savings and Loan Holding Companies 2. Community Development Financial Institutions D. The Commission's Section 4(c) Authority III. Proposed Rules Do Not Effect Margin Requirements for Uncleared Swaps IV. Cost-Benefit Considerations A. Statutory and Regulatory Background B. Consideration of the Costs and Benefits of the Commission's Action 1. Costs 2. Benefits C. Section 15(a) Factors 1. Protection of Market Participants and the Public 2. Efficiency, Competitiveness, and Financial Integrity of Swap Markets 3. Price Discovery 4. Sound Risk Management Practices 5. Other Public Interest Considerations D. General Request for Comment E. Antitrust Considerations V. Related Matters A. Regulatory Flexibility Act B. Paperwork Reduction Act I. Background A. Project KISS

    On May 9, 2017, the Commission published in the Federal Register a request for information 2 pursuant to the Commission's “Project K.I.S.S.” initiative seeking suggestions from the public for simplifying the Commission's regulations and practices, removing unnecessary burdens, and reducing costs. In response, a number of commenters asked the Commission to adopt certain staff no-action letters and codify Commission guidance through rulemakings.3 In its review, the Commission has identified a number of CFTC staff letters that it preliminarily believes should be codified in rulemakings, including the no-action letters that the Commission's Division of Clearing and Risk (DCR) issued in 2016 4 providing that DCR would not recommend the Commission take enforcement action against certain small bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions, as such entities were described in the letters, for not clearing swaps covered by the clearing requirement of section 2(h)(1) of the CEA (Clearing Requirement), if they satisfied the terms and conditions in the letters. This proposed rulemaking is consistent with those no-action letters. Specifically, the Commission is proposing to adopt regulatory revisions pursuant to its authority in section 4(c) of the CEA to exempt from the Clearing Requirement certain swaps entered into with certain bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions.

    2See 82 FR 21494 (May 6, 2017) and 82 FR 23765 (May 24, 2017).

    3See, e.g., Comment Letter from the Institute of International Banking, International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc., and Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association dated July 24, 2017, at 2.

    4 CFTC Letter No. 16-01 (Jan. 8, 2016); CFTC Letter No. 16-02 (Jan. 8, 2016). Chatham Financial filed a comment letter recognizing the value of codifying and refining staff guidance and no-action relief where appropriate, and recommending codifying no-action letters on which several of Chatham's clients rely, including CFTC Letter No. 16-01. See Comment Letter from Chatham Financial, at 7 (Sept. 29, 2017); see also Comment Letter from ISDA, at 12 (Sept. 29, 2017) (commenting that the current end-user exception applicable to non-financial institutions and to banks, savings associations, farm credit institutions, and credit unions with total assets of $10 billion or less is too narrow and unnecessarily burdensome as it fails to cover other types of entities that trade minimally and do not pose risks to the U.S. financial system, and supporting a shift from an asset size-based threshold applicable to certain financial institutions to a more risk-based threshold).

    As discussed more fully below, the proposed revisions to Commission regulation 50.5 would exempt from the Clearing Requirement a swap entered into to hedge or mitigate commercial risk if one of the counterparties to the swap is either (a) a bank holding company or savings and loan holding company, each having no more than $10 billion in consolidated assets, or (b) a community development financial institution transacting in certain types and quantities of swaps. The Commission believes that this proposal would be consistent with the exemption from the Clearing Requirement the Commission granted for transactions entered into with small banks, savings associations, farm credit institutions, and credit unions.5

    5See End-User Exception to the Clearing Requirement for Swaps, 77 FR 42560 (Jul. 19, 2012) (2012 End-User Exception final rule).

    B. Swap Clearing Requirement

    The CEA, as amended by Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act),6 establishes a comprehensive regulatory framework for swaps. The CEA requires a swap: (1) To be cleared through a derivatives clearing organization (DCO) that is registered under the CEA, or a DCO that is exempt from registration under the CEA, if the Commission has determined that the swap is required to be cleared, unless an exception to the Clearing Requirement applies; 7 (2) to be reported to a swap data repository (SDR) or the Commission; 8 and (3) if the swap is subject to the Clearing Requirement, to be executed on a designated contract market (DCM), or swap execution facility (SEF) that is registered with the Commission pursuant to section 5h of the CEA or a SEF that has been exempted from registration pursuant to section 5h(g) of the CEA, unless no DCM or SEF has made the swap available to trade.9

    6 Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010).

    7 Section 2(h)(1)(A) of the CEA.

    8See Sections 2(a)(13)(G), and 4r, and 21(b) of the CEA.

    9 Section 2(h)(8) of the CEA.

    Pursuant to section 2(h)(1)(A) of the CEA, if a swap is subject to the Clearing Requirement, it shall be unlawful for any person to engage in a swap unless that person submits such swap for clearing to a DCO that is registered under the CEA or a DCO that is exempt from registration under the CEA.10 In 2012, the Commission issued its first clearing requirement determination, pertaining to four classes of interest rate swaps and two classes of credit default swaps.11 In 2016, the Commission expanded the classes of interest rate swaps subject to the Clearing Requirement to cover fixed-to-floating interest rate swaps denominated in nine additional currencies, as well as certain additional basis swaps, forward rate agreements, and overnight index swaps.12

    10 Section 2(h)(1)(A) of the CEA.

    11 Clearing Requirement Determination Under Section 2(h) of the CEA, 77 FR 74284 (Dec. 13, 2012).

    12 Clearing Requirement Determination Under Section 2(h) of the CEA for Interest Rate Swaps, 81 FR 71202 (Oct. 14, 2016).

    C. Swaps With Small Banks, Savings Associations, Farm Credit System Institutions, and Credit Unions Not Subject to the Clearing Requirement

    Section 2(h)(7)(A) of the CEA provides that the Clearing Requirement of section 2(h)(1)(A) of the CEA shall not apply to a swap if one of the counterparties to the swap: (i) Is not a financial entity; (ii) is using swaps to hedge or mitigate commercial risk; and (iii) notifies the Commission, in a manner set forth by the Commission, how it generally meets its financial obligations associated with entering into non-cleared swaps.13 Section 2(h)(7)(C)(ii) of the CEA further directed the Commission to consider whether to exempt from the definition of “financial entity” small banks, savings associations, farm credit system institutions, and credit unions, including: (I) Depository institutions with total assets of $10 billion or less; (II) farm credit system institutions with total assets of $10 billion or less; or (III) credit unions with total assets of $10 billion or less.14

    13 Section 2(h)(7)(A) of the CEA.

    14 Section 2(h)(7)(C)(ii) of the CEA.

    In the 2012, End-User Exception final rule implementing sections 2(h)(7)(A) and 2(h)(7)(C) of the CEA,15 the Commission adopted Commission regulation 50.50(d) which allows a counterparty to elect not to clear swaps used to hedge or mitigate commercial risk if entered into with small banks, savings associations, farm credit system institutions, and credit unions with total assets of $10 billion or less (small financial institutions).16

    15 Commission regulation 50.50; see also 2012 End-User Exception final rule, 77 FR 42560.

    16 Commission regulation 50.50(d) exempts for the purposes of the Clearing Requirement, a person that is a “financial entity” solely because of section 2(h)(7(C)(i)(VIII) of the CEA if the person: (1) Is organized as a bank, as defined in section 3(a) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, the deposits of which are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; a savings association, as defined in section 3(b) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, the deposits of which are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; a farm credit system institution chartered under the Farm Credit Act of 1971; or an insured Federal credit union or State-chartered credit union under the Federal Credit Union Act; and (2) has total assets of $10,000,000,000 or less on the last day of such person's most recent fiscal year. Commission regulation 50.50(d) does not excuse the affected persons from compliance with any other applicable requirements of the CEA or in the Commission's regulations.

    In adopting Commission regulation 50.50(d), the Commission noted that these small financial institutions tend to serve smaller, local markets and are well situated to provide swaps to the customers in their markets for the purpose of hedging commercial risk.17 The Commission also acknowledged that, as indicated by commenters, a large portion of the swaps executed by small financial institutions with customers likely hedge interest rate risk associated with commercial loans.18 The Commission also noted that small financial institutions typically hedge customer swaps by entering into matching swaps, and if those swaps had to be cleared, small financial institutions would have to post margin to satisfy the requirements of the DCO—which could raise the costs for small financial institutions of hedging the risks related to these types of customer swaps to the extent they need to fund the cost of the margin posted.19 The Commission acknowledged that some of these small financial institutions may incur initial and annual fixed clearing fees and other expenses that may be incrementally higher relative to the number of swaps executed over a given period of time.20 Finally, the Commission stated that given the relatively low notional volume swap books held by these small institutions, and the commercial customer purposes these swaps satisfy, the Commission believed that the swaps executed by these entities were what Congress was considering when it directed the Commission to consider an exemption from the definition of “financial entity,” thereby allowing these entities to elect not to clear swaps that are otherwise eligible for the End-User Exception.21

    17 77 FR at 42578.

    18Id. The Commission noted that many of these loans and the related swaps are not secured by cash or other highly liquid collateral, but by less liquid assets of the customer such as the property or inventory purchased with the loan proceeds. Id.

    19See id.

    20Id.

    21Id. The Commission noted that because the End-User Exception only applies to a swap if one of the counterparties to the swap is using swaps to hedge or mitigate commercial risk small financial institutions are not exempt from the Clearing Requirement for speculative trades. Id. n.79.

    D. DCR No-Action Letter for Relief From the Clearing Requirement for Certain Bank Holding Companies and Savings and Loan Holding Companies With Consolidated Assets of $10 Billion or Less

    In 2016, in response to a request from the American Bankers Association (ABA), DCR issued a no-action letter stating that DCR would not recommend that the Commission take enforcement action against bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies with no more than $10 billion in consolidated assets 22 for failure to comply with the Clearing Requirement if they elect not to clear a swap in accordance with the requirements of Commission regulation 50.50.23 Because section 2(h)(7)(C)(ii) of the CEA and Commission regulation 50.50(d) only apply to depository institutions and savings associations themselves and not to bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies, bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies are not eligible to use the End-User Exception.

    22 Under CFTC Letter No. 16-01, the limitation of no more than $10 billion in consolidated assets means that the aggregate value of all the assets of all the bank holding company's or savings and loan holding company's subsidiaries on the last day of each subsidiary's most recent fiscal year, do not exceed $10 billion. CFTC Letter No. 16-01, at 4.

    23 CFTC Letter No. 16-01. Those requirements are that the small bank holding company or small savings and loan holding company is using swaps to hedge or mitigate commercial risk and notifies the Commission how it generally meets the obligations associated with entering into non-cleared swaps.

    DCR was persuaded by the ABA's representation that many bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies enter into interest rate swaps to hedge interest rate risk that they incur as a result of issuing debt securities or making loans to finance their subsidiary banks or savings associations.24 DCR accepted the ABA's further representation that these swaps generally have a notional amount of $10 million or less, and that these bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies enter into swaps less frequently than other swap counterparties.25 The ABA also represented that the swaps need to be entered into by the bank holding company or savings and loan holding company, rather than by the subsidiary bank or savings association, in order to gain hedge accounting treatment.26 DCR believed bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies having no more than $10 billion in consolidated assets should be treated like small financial institutions, and issued a no-action letter.27

    24 CFTC Letter No. 16-01, at 3.

    25Id.

    26Id.

    27Id. (highlighting the Commission's statements that small financial institutions “may incur initial and annual fixed clearing fees and other expenses that may be incrementally higher relative to the small number of swaps they execute over a given period of time” and that “given the relatively low notional volume [of] swap books held by small section 2(h)(7)(C)(ii) institutions and the commercial customer purposes these swaps satisfy, the Commission believes that swaps executed by small section 2(h)(7)(C)(ii) institutions are what Congress was considering when it directed the Commission to consider an exemption from the `financial entity' definition for small financial institutions. . . .”). Letter No. 16-01 also noted that the letter did not excuse the affected persons from compliance with any other applicable requirements contained in the CEA or in the Commission's regulations. Id. at 4.

    E. DCR No-Action Letter for Relief From the Clearing Requirement for Community Development Financial Institutions

    Also in 2016, in response to a request from a coalition of community development financial institutions (Coalition), DCR issued a no-action letter stating DCR would not recommend that the Commission take enforcement action against a community development financial institution for failure to comply with the Clearing Requirement, provided the entity elects not to clear a swap in accordance with the requirements of Commission regulation 50.50 and meets the terms and conditions of the letter.28 Some community development financial institutions are not eligible for the End-User Exception because they are not depository institutions.29

    28See CFTC Letter No. 16-02.

    29See Certification as a Community Development Financial Institution, 12 CFR 1805.201.

    DCR accepted the Coalition's representation that there are public interest benefits that may be served by permitting community development financial institutions to engage in tailored and limited swaps to pursue their public interest goals without the expense of posting margin to a DCO, and the cost of initial and annual fixed clearing fees and other expenses.30 The Coalition further represented that community development financial institutions do not provide swaps directly to customers, but there is a public interest benefit in having institutions that are able to serve smaller, local markets.31 DCR was persuaded that status as a community development financial institution pursuant to certification by the U.S. Department of the Treasury's (Treasury Department) Community Development Financial Institutions Fund (CDFI Fund) 32 would ensure that community development financial institutions operate under a specific community development organizational mission and provide financial and community development services to a target market.33 Additionally, DCR believed the costs of clearing for community development financial institutions are similar to those faced by small financial institutions, and the benefits that community development financial institutions bring to communities may be the same or greater than those contributed by small financial institutions.34

    30 CFTC Letter No. 16-02, at 3.

    31Id.

    32 Community development financial institutions are small in scale and tend to serve smaller, local markets. They operate under an organizational mission of providing financial and community development services to underserved target markets. Community development financial institutions are entities that must apply for, and receive, certification from the CDFI Fund. The CDFI Fund was created by section 104 of the Community Development Banking and Financial Institutions Act of 1994 (CDFI Act), which is contained in Title I of the Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994 (Riegle Act). See Public Law 103-325, 108 Stat. 2160 (1994).

    33See CFTC Letter No. 16-02, at 3.

    34Id.

    DCR limited the letter to community development financial institutions certified as such by the Treasury Department that only engage in swaps within specific product classes that meet certain criteria, and required that each community development financial institution enter into no more than 10 swaps per year, with an aggregate notional value cap of $200 million per year.35

    35Id. at 4. DCR also required community development financial institutions to file a notice of election and additional information as described in Commission regulation 50.50(b), and limited the election of the exception to swaps entered into for the sole purpose of hedging or mitigating commercial risk as described in Commission regulation 50.50(c). Id. Letter No. 16-02 also noted that the letter did not excuse the affected persons from compliance with any other applicable requirements contained in the CEA or in the Commission's regulations. Id.

    II. Proposed Amendments to Commission Regulation 50.5

    The Commission proposes to exempt from the Clearing Requirement certain swap transactions entered into with bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies with no more than $10 billion in consolidated assets, and community development financial institutions certified by the CDFI Fund. Although these entities are not eligible for the End-User Exception, the Commission believes that the same policy reasons that the Commission considered when exempting small financial institutions from the definition of a “financial entity” for purposes of the End-User Exception support an exemption for swap transactions entered into with certain bank holding companies, savings and loan association holding companies, and community development financial institutions.36 The Commission notes that the proposed exemptions are intended to be consistent with the Commission's policy set forth in the 2012 End-User Exception final rule and would not limit the applicability of any CEA provision or Commission regulation to any person or transaction except as provided in the proposed rulemaking.

    36See Section 2(h)(7)(C)(ii) of the CEA.

    A. Proposed Definition of Bank Holding Company and Savings and Loan Holding Company

    The Commission proposes to adopt the definitions for “bank holding company” and “savings and loan holding company” referenced in the Federal Deposit Insurance Act.37 These definitions represent the accepted meaning for “bank holding company” and “savings and loan holding company.” The Commission used the Federal Deposit Insurance Act definitions for the banks and savings associations eligible for an exemption from the definition of “financial entity” in Commission regulation 50.50(d)(1).38

    37 12 U.S.C. 1811 et seq. Section 3(w) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act states that a “bank holding company” has the meaning given to such term in section 2 of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956. 12 U.S.C. 1813(w)(2). Section 3(w)(3) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act states that a “savings and loan holding company” has the meaning given to such term in section 10 of the Home Owners' Loan Act. 12 U.S.C. 1813(w)(3).

    38 Commission regulation 50.50(d) provides that for the purposes of section 2(h)(7)(A) of the Act, a person that is a “financial entity” solely because of section 2(h)(7)(C)(i)(VIII) shall be exempt from the definition of `financial entity' if such person: (1) Is organized as a bank, as defined in section 3(a) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, the deposits of which are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; a savings association, as defined in section 3(b) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, the deposits of which are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; a farm credit system institution chartered under the Farm Credit Act of 1971; or an insured Federal credit union or State-chartered credit union under the Federal Credit Union Act; and (2) Has total assets of $10,000,000,000 or less on the last day of such person's most recent fiscal year.

    Proposed revised regulation 50.5(a) would define “bank holding company” to mean an entity that is organized as a bank holding company, as defined in section 2 of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956. Section 2 of the Bank Holding Company Act generally defines a “bank holding company,” subject to limited exceptions, as any company which has control over any bank or over any company that is or becomes a bank holding company.39

    39 12 U.S.C. 1841(a)(1) (subject to exceptions described in paragraph (5) therein).

    Proposed revised regulation 50.5(a) would define “savings and loan holding company” to mean an entity that is organized as a savings and loan holding company, as defined in section 10 of the Home Owners' Loan Act of 1933. Section 10 of the Home Owners' Loan Act generally defines a “savings and loan holding company,” subject to limited exceptions, as any company that directly or indirectly controls a savings association or that controls any other company that is a savings and loan company.40

    40 12 U.S.C. 1467(a)(1)(D)(i) (subject to exclusions described in clause (ii)).

    Request for Comment. The Commission seeks comment on the proposed definitions.

    B. Proposed Definition of Community Development Financial Institution

    Proposed revised regulation 50.5(a) would define community development financial institution to mean a community development financial institution, as defined in section 103(5) of the Community Development Banking and Financial Institutions Act of 1994, that is certified by the U.S. Department of the Treasury's Community Development Financial Institution Fund under the requirements set forth in 12 CFR 180.201(b). The proposed definition limits the entities that are eligible for the exemption. The Commission is proposing to limit the scope of entities that may qualify for an exemption from the Clearing Requirement as a community development financial institution to institutions that meet the definition of a “community development financial institution” in section 103 of the CDFI Act.41 Under section 103, a “community development financial institution” means a person (other than an individual) that: (i) Has a primary mission of promoting community development; (ii) serves an investment area or targeted population; (iii) provides development services in conjunction with equity investments or loans, directly or through a subsidiary or affiliate; (iv) maintains, through representation on its governing board or otherwise, accountability to residents of its investment area or targeted population; and (v) is not an agency or instrumentality of the United States, or of any State or political subdivision of a State.42

    41 12 U.S.C. 4702(5).

    42Id.

    The Commission believes that it is appropriate to require all community development financial institutions included in the proposed exemption from the Clearing Requirement to have received and maintained certification by the CDFI Fund. Certification is a formal acknowledgment from the CDFI Fund that a financial institution meets certain community development finance criteria.43 In the event certification is not maintained, a community development financial institution would no longer meet the definition and would no longer be able to rely on the exemption from the Clearing Requirement being proposed herein.

    43 The criteria are: (1) It has a primary mission of community development; (2) its predominant business activity is the provision of financial products or financial services; (3) it serves one or more target markets such as an investment area or target population; (4) it has a track record of providing development services to borrowers in conjunction with financing activities; (5) it maintains accountability to the residents of its target market; and (6) it is a non-government entity. See Certification as a Community Development Financial Institution, 12 CFR 1805.201(b)(1)-(6).

    The Commission believes that this definition is appropriate because community development financial institutions are certified under the auspices of the Treasury Department's CDFI Fund to promote economic revitalization and community development in low-income communities.44 Community development financial institutions certified by the CDFI Fund serve rural and urban low-income people and communities across the nation that lack adequate access to affordable financial products and services.45 Through financial assistance and grants from the CDFI Fund, community development financial institutions are able to make loans and investments, and to provide related services for the benefit of designated investment areas, target populations, or both.46 The Commission believes that certification by the CDFI Fund is an appropriate definition for the entities whose transactions may be exempt from the Clearing Requirement.

    44 As of May 31, 2018, there were 1094 certified community development financial funds consisting of 138 banks, 16 venture capital funds, 297 credit unions, 90 depository institution holding companies, and 553 loan funds. See list available at: https://www.cdfifund.gov/programs-training/certification/cdfi/Pages/default.aspx.

    45See supra n.27; see also Community Development Financial Institutions Fund, Notice of Funds Availability, 83 FR 4750 (Feb. 1, 2018) (stating the priorities of the CDFI Fund).

    46See 68 FR 5704 (Feb. 4, 2003). Additional information is available at the CDFI Fund's website: https://www.cdfifund.gov/about/Pages/default.aspx.

    Request for Comment. The Commission seeks comment on this definition.

    C. Proposed Exemptions From the Clearing Requirement for Certain Bank Holding Companies, Certain Savings and Loan Holding Companies and Community Development Financial Institutions

    The Commission proposes to exempt from the Clearing Requirement swaps entered into with bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions as defined in proposed Commission regulation 50.5(a) from the Clearing Requirement.47

    47 The proposed exemptions would not excuse the affected persons from compliance with any other applicable requirements contained in the CEA or the Commission's regulations. The Commission notes that uncleared swaps with a counterparty that is subject to the CEA and Commission regulations with regard to that transaction must still comply with the CEA and Commission regulations as they pertain to uncleared swaps.

    1. Certain Bank Holding Companies and Savings and Loan Holding Companies

    The Commission proposes to add a new paragraph (e) to Commission regulation 50.5 exempting certain swaps entered into with bank holding companies or savings and loan holding companies from the Clearing Requirement under regulation 50.2. The Commission believes these entities generally enter into interest rate swaps to hedge interest rate risk that they incur as a result of making loans or issuing debt securities, the proceeds of which are generally used to finance their subsidiaries, which are themselves small financial institutions.48

    48 CFTC Letter No. 16-01, at 3.

    The Commission believes that the bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies that meet the conditions of CFTC Letter No. 16-01, and which would meet the requirements of proposed Commission regulation 50.5(e), enter into swaps to hedge risk from financing transactions infrequently and have relatively low notional volume swap books.49 Since the issuance of CFTC Letter No. 16-01, five bank holding companies and two domestic financial holding companies 50 submitted forms to the Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation's (DTCC's) swap data repository, DTCC Data Repository (DDR), indicating they would elect the end-user exception for interest rate swaps between June 2016 and June 2018. Between January 1, 2017 and December 31, 2017, one bank holding company executed ten interest rate swaps with an aggregate notional value of $43.6 million, and a second bank holding company executed one interest rate swap with a notional value of $25 million. Nine entities submitted an end-user form to DDR between June 2016 and June 2018 indicating they would be electing the end-user exception for credit default swaps.51 However, the data indicates that no credit default swaps were executed between January 1, 2017 and December 31, 2017.

    49Id.

    50 Under the Bank Holding Company Act, a bank holding company may elect to be a financial holding company. Although CFTC Letter No. 16-01 does not include no-action relief for financial holding companies, we are including these entities as they believe they are eligible for an exception and indicated they may claim the exception. Another entity indicated it was electing the end-user exception as a captive finance company rather than a small bank or other entity according to its DDR reporting form.

    51 The nine entities included the five bank holding companies, three domestic financial holding companies, and one entity electing the exception as a captive finance company.

    The Commission believes that bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies with consolidated assets of no more than $10 billion should be considered to be sufficiently similar to the type of non-financial entity Congress was considering when it directed the Commission to consider an exemption from the Clearing Requirement for small banks and savings associations.52 Accordingly, the Commission is proposing to require in new regulation (e)(1) that bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies be subject to the same asset cap as small financial institutions. New paragraph (e)(1) would require that a bank holding company or savings and loan holding company have aggregated assets, including the assets of all its subsidiaries, not exceeding $10 billion according to the value of assets of each subsidiary on the last day of each subsidiary's most recent fiscal year.

    52 In the preamble to the 2012 End-User Exception final rule, the Commission determined that small banks and small savings associations were not “financial entities” for purposes of the Clearing Requirement. 77 FR at 42578.

    The Commission preliminarily believes there is less counterparty risk with transactions entered into with bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies that have no more than $10 billion in consolidated assets because the Commission understands that these entities generally enter into swaps with a notional amount of $10 million or less.53 The Commission believes it is appropriate to adopt the same limitation on asset size for bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies as the Commission determined was appropriate for small financial institutions in the 2012 End-User Exception final rule.54 Congress determined that the Commission should base its determination of whether a bank or savings association is “small” on a $10 billion asset level.55 In adopting the cap of $10 billion for small banks and savings associations, the Commission made the policy decision not to exempt institutions with substantially higher total asset amounts, such as $30 billion, $50 billion, or higher levels because it believed that Congress has identified large financial institutions as more likely to cause systemic risk and directed prudential regulators to consider prudential standards for “large” institutions having assets of $50 billion or more.56 The Commission rejected the $30 billion asset level since it was three times greater than the level Congress identified as indicative of a “small” financial institution.57 Therefore, the proposed exemption is would apply to bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies with no more than $10 billion in consolidated assets, meaning that the aggregate value of the assets of all of the bank holding company's or savings and loan holding company's subsidiaries on the last day of each subsidiary's most recent fiscal year, do not exceed $10 billion.

    53See CFTC Letter No. 16-01, at 3.

    54 77 FR at 42578.

    55Id.

    56Id.

    57Id.

    As with other exemptions under Commission regulation 50.5, the Commission is proposing in new regulation 50.5(e)(2) that the exemption be available only if the swap is reported to an SDR pursuant to regulations 45.3 and 45.4 of this chapter. The Commission is additionally proposing that the bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies subject to this proposal be required to report the information described in regulation 50.50(b) to an SDR. Commission regulation 50.50(b) requires a counterparty to notify the Commission that a swap is not subject to the Clearing Requirement and to indicate how the electing counterparty generally meets its financial obligations associated with its non-cleared swaps. The Commission believes that the reporting requirements are appropriate so it can verify that the exemption from the Clearing Requirement is being used in the way the Commission intended and track the entities using the Clearing Requirement exemption.

    The Commission also proposes in new 50.5(e)(3) that only swaps used to hedge or mitigate commercial risk, as defined under regulation 50.50(c) of this part, may be exempt from the Clearing Requirement. The Commission believes this limitation appropriately reflects how these entities use swaps.58 Moreover, it reflects the Commission's 2012 policy determination and Congress's determination that transactions with similar entities (such as those entered into by small banks, savings associations, farm credit system institutions, and credit unions) should be exempt from the Clearing Requirement if the transactions are used for hedging and not speculation, as long as the swap is reported to an SDR.59 In that regard, the Commission believes that the extension of that policy to bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies subject to the proposed regulation is appropriate and consistent with Congressional intent.

    58See CFTC Letter No. 16-01, at 3.

    59See Section 2(h)(7)(A) of the CEA.

    Request for Comment. The Commission requests comment on the proposed exemption from the Clearing Requirement for swaps entered into by certain bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies with total consolidated assets of no more than $10 billion. Is such an exemption appropriate? Does such an exemption pose any risks to the swap markets or the financial system, and if so, what are those risks? Should the Commission clarify or modify the definitions included in the proposed rules? If so, what specific modifications are appropriate or necessary?

    2. Community Development Financial Institutions

    Proposed regulation 50.5(f) would exempt swap transactions entered into with a community development financial institution from the Clearing Requirement. The Commission believes that these entities only enter into limited interest rate swaps in the fixed-to-floating swap class and forward rate agreement class to hedge interest rate risk incurred as a result of issuing debt securities or making loans in pursuit of their organizational missions.60 As such, the Commission believes there are public interest benefits that may be served by permitting community development financial institutions to engage in tailored and limited swaps to pursue their public interest goals without the expense of posting margin to a DCO, and the cost of initial and annual fixed clearing fees and other expenses. The Commission believes that the community development financial institutions that meet the conditions of CFTC Letter No. 16-02, and which would meet the requirements of proposed Commission regulation 50.5(f), enter into swaps to hedge risk from financing transactions infrequently and have relatively low notional volume swap books.61

    60See CFTC Letter No. 16-02, at 2.

    61Id.

    Since the issuance of CFTC Letter No. 16-02, five community development financial institutions submitted forms to DTCC's swap data repository, DDR, indicating they would elect the end-user exception for interest rate swaps between June 2016 and June 2018. Between January 1, 2017 and June 29, 2018, three community development financial institutions executed interest rate swaps: One executed two swaps with an aggregate notional value of $5.6 million; another executed three swaps with an aggregate notional value of $116 million; and another executed three swaps with an aggregate notional value of $130 million.

    The Commission believes that community development financial institutions should be considered to be sufficiently similar to the type of non-financial entities Congress was considering when it directed the Commission to consider an exemption from the Clearing Requirement for small banks and savings associations.62

    62 77 FR at 42578.

    As with the proposed exemptions discussed above for bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies, the Commission is proposing in new regulation 50.5(f)(1) that the exemption be available only if the swap is reported to an SDR pursuant to regulations 45.3 and 45.4 of this chapter, and if all information in regulation 50.50(b) is reported to an SDR. Commission regulation 50.50(b) requires a counterparty to notify the Commission that a swap is not subject to the Clearing Requirement and to indicate how the electing counterparty generally meets its financial obligations associated with its non-cleared swaps. The Commission believes that the additional reporting requirement is appropriate so it can verify that the exemption from the Clearing Requirement is being used in the way the Commission intended and track which entities are using the Clearing Requirement exemption.

    The Commission proposes to require in new regulation 50.5(f)(2)-(5) four additional requirements for swaps entered into with a community development financial institution: (1) The swap is an interest rate swap in the fixed-to-floating swap class or the forward rate agreement class, denominated in U.S. dollars, that would otherwise be subject to the Clearing Requirement; (2) the total aggregate notional value of the interest rate swaps and forward rate agreements entered into by each community development financial institution is no more than $200 million per year; (3) a community development financial institution may enter into no more than ten swap transactions as outlined above per year; and (4) the swap is used to hedge or mitigate commercial risk, as defined under Commission regulation 50.50(c). These conditions generally track the conditions in CFTC Letter No. 16-02, including that the exempted swaps are used to hedge or mitigate commercial risk.

    The Commission believes the requirements in proposed regulation 50.5(f)(2)-(5) properly circumscribe the transactions into which these community development financial institutions may enter while providing these institutions with the flexibility to enter into swaps that will contribute to their ability to carry on their mission.63 By limiting the product scope to U.S. dollar interest rate swaps in the fixed-to-floating swap class and forward rate agreement class, the Commission is recognizing the need to hedge or mitigate the interest rate risk of the loans, investments, and financial services provided by community development financial institutions to the target populations. In addition, the Commission preliminarily believes that limiting the total aggregate notional value of all interest rate swaps and forward rate agreements entered into during the twelve-month calendar year to less than or equal to $200 million is consistent with its policy that the swaps be used to hedge or mitigate commercial risk. In that same regard, the Commission believes the limitation of no more than 10 swaps per year that meet the other criteria also prevents these entities from arbitrarily increasing the number of swap transactions into which they enter.

    63 Between June 2016 and June 2018, five community development financial institutions submitted a form to DTTC's SDR indicating they would elect the end-user exception. Three community development financial institutions entered into eight interest rate swaps using the exception.

    Request for Comment. The Commission requests comment on whether it is in the public interest to exempt swap transactions entered into by community development financial institutions from the Clearing Requirement. The Commission is not proposing an asset cap at this time because the Commission believes that no community development financial institution certified by the CDFI Fund has consolidated assets greater than $10 billion.64 Should the Commission consider an asset cap such that transactions entered into with a community development financial institution would not be exempt from the Clearing Requirement if the community development financial institution had aggregated assets in excess of the cap? Why or why not? If yes, should the cap be $10 billion, as with certain bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies, or another amount? The Commission also requests comment on the proposed limitations and proposed alternatives, if any.

    64See CDFI Program and NACA Program Awardees: A Snapshot in 2015, slide 4, “Asset Size by Institution Type in 2015,” prepared by the CDFI Fund (August 2017), available at: https://www.cdfifund.gov/news-events/news/Pages/news-detail.aspx?NewsID=271&Category=Press%20Releases.

    D. The Commission's Section 4(c) Authority

    Section 4(c)(1) of the CEA empowers the Commission to promote responsible economic or financial innovation and fair competition by exempting any transaction or class of transactions, including swaps, from any of the provisions of the CEA (subject to exceptions not relevant here).65 In enacting CEA section 4(c)(1), Congress noted that the goal of the provision “is to give the Commission a means of providing certainty and stability to existing and emerging markets so that financial innovation and market development can proceed in an effective and competitive manner.” 66 Section 4(c)(2) of the CEA further provides that the Commission may not grant exemptive relief unless it determines that: (A) The exemption is consistent with the public interest and purposes of the CEA; and (B) the transaction will be entered into solely between “appropriate persons” and the exemption will not have a material adverse effect on the ability of the Commission or any contract market to discharge its regulatory or self-regulatory responsibilities under the CEA.

    65 Section 4(c)(1) of the CEA, provides that in order to promote responsible economic or financial innovation and fair competition, the Commission by rule, regulation, or order, after notice and opportunity for hearing, may (on its own initiative or on application of any person) exempt any agreement, contract, or transaction (or class thereof) that is otherwise subject to section 4(a) either unconditionally or on stated terms or conditions or for stated periods and either retroactively or prospectively, or both, from any of the requirements of section 4(a), or from any other provision of the CEA. The Commission is proposing to promulgate the proposed exemptive rule pursuant to sections 4(c)(1) and 8a(5) of the CEA.

    66 H.R. Rep. No. 102-978, 102d Cong. 2d Sess. At 81 (Oct. 2, 1992), reprinted in 1992 U.S.C.C.A.N. 3179, 3213.

    The Commission believes that it would be consistent with the public interest and the purposes of the CEA to exempt from the Clearing Requirement swap transactions entered into with certain bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions as discussed above. In enacting the Dodd-Frank Act, Congress recognized that it may be appropriate for the Commission to exempt transactions entered into with certain small financial institutions from the Clearing Requirement. The Commission was directed to consider whether to exempt these small financial institutions from the definition of “financial entity” for purposes of the End-User Exception.67

    67See Section 2(h)(7)(C)(ii) of the CEA.

    Because they are not depository institutions, bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions are not eligible for the exemption from the financial entity definition.68 The Commission believes, however, that the same policy reasons that Congress considered in directing the Commission to consider exempting swaps entered into with small financial institutions from the “financial entity” definition, making them eligible for the End-User Exception, support an exemption for certain swap transactions entered into with certain bank holding companies, savings and loan association holding companies, and community development financial institutions. The Commission preliminarily believes these entities tend to serve smaller, local markets and that the swaps executed by these entities likely hedge interest rate risk associated with financing in the same way as small financial institutions use swaps exempt from the Clearing Requirement through the End-User Exception to hedge the interest rate risk of commercial loans.69

    68 While some community development financial institutions may be depository institutions, for purposes of the proposed exemption, these entities are acting under the auspices of their CDFI Fund certification.

    69See 2012 End-User Exception final rule, 77 FR at 42578.

    Based on the representations of market participants, the Commission also believes the bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions subject to the proposed regulation would tend to enter into swaps that have smaller notional amounts.70 While the Commission believes these entities use swaps infrequently, the Commission recognizes that these entities may choose to enter into more swaps to hedge against rising interest rates. The Commission believes that swaps are an important risk management tool and that these small entities should be afforded the means to hedge their capital costs economically in order to promote the public interest objectives of smaller financial institutions serving smaller, local markets. The Commission believes that an exemption from the Clearing Requirement may promote responsible economic or financial innovation and fair competition because there appears to be substantial fixed costs associated with clearing swaps. For these entities, the Commission believes that the cost of clearing may be particularly costly (on a per-swap basis) in light of the small number of trades.71 The Commission requests updated information on the clearing related costs for small entities.

    70See CFTC Letter No. 16-01, at 3; CFTC Letter No. 16-02, at 2.

    71 The 2012 End-User Exception final rule's cost estimate for clearing related costs pursuant to the End-User Exemption (“institutions will spend between $2,500 and $25,000 in legal fees related to reviewing and negotiating clearing-related documentation, and . . . a minimum of between $75,000 and $125,000 per year on fees paid to each [futures commission merchant] with which it maintains a relationship”). See 77 FR at 42577 n.74.

    Based on the discussion above, the Commission preliminarily believes that an exemption from the Clearing Requirement for these small entities should lower the cost of financing which, in turn, should enable these entities to better manage their financing risks and provide cost-effective loans to their subsidiaries, and small and middle market businesses. Additionally, the Commission also believes that the interest rate swaps may need to be entered into by the bank holding company or savings and loan holding company, rather than the subsidiary, in order to gain hedge accounting treatment which may promote efficiencies to benefit their subsidiaries.72 Accordingly, while bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies are not depository institutions and do not themselves issue commercial loans, the Commission preliminarily believes that the exemption would ultimately support the commercial lending and depository activities of their subsidiaries.

    72 CFTC Letter No. 16-01, at 3.

    The Commission believes that the proposed amendments to the Clearing Requirement would be available only to “appropriate persons.” Section 4(c)(3) of the CEA includes within the term “appropriate person” a number of specified categories of persons, including among others, banks, savings associations and such other persons that the Commission determines to be appropriate in light of their financial or other qualifications, or the applicability of appropriate regulatory protections. Sections 2(e) and 5(d)(11)(A) of the CEA provide that only eligible contract participants (ECPs) may enter into uncleared swaps.73 The Commission believes the bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions subject to this proposed regulation are ECPs pursuant to section 1a(18)(A)(i) of the CEA. Because the ECP definition is generally more restrictive than the comparable elements of the enumerated “appropriate person” definition, the Commission believes that the class of persons eligible to rely on the proposed exemptions will be limited to “appropriate persons” within the scope of section 4(c) of the CEA.

    73 Section 2(e) of the CEA limits non-ECPs to executing swaps transactions on DCMs and section 5(d)(11)(A) of the CEA requires all DCM transactions to be cleared. Accordingly, the two provisions read together only permit ECPs to execute uncleared swap transactions.

    The Commission notes that certain bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions have not been clearing certain swaps covered by the Clearing Requirement in reliance on the DCR no action letters. The Commission is not aware of any increase in counterparty risk attributable to the affected entities' reliance on the no-action letters. The proposed exemptions from the Clearing Requirement are limited in scope and, as described further below, the Commission will continue to have access to information regarding the swaps subject to this exemption because they will be reported to an SDR as required by existing Commission regulation 50.50. In addition, the Commission retains its special call, anti-fraud, and anti-evasion authorities, which will enable it to adequately discharge its regulatory responsibilities under the CEA. The Commission therefore preliminarily believes the exemption would not have a material adverse effect on the ability of the Commission to discharge its regulatory responsibilities under the CEA.

    For the reasons described in this proposal, the Commission believes it would be appropriate and consistent with the public interest to amend Commission regulation 50.5 as proposed.

    Request for Comment. The Commission requests general comments regarding the proposal and on whether the proposed amendments to regulation 50.5 would be an appropriate exercise of the Commission's authority under CEA section 4(c), including whether the proposed exemptions promote the public interest. Are there any entities covered by this proposed rulemaking that would not be “appropriate persons” under section 4(c)(3) of the CEA? Additionally, the Commission requests comment on whether the proposed exemptions provide certainty and stability to existing and emerging markets so that financial innovation and market development can proceed in an effective and competitive manner.

    III. Proposed Rules Do Not Effect Margin Requirements for Uncleared Swaps

    Under Commission regulation 23.150(b)(1), the margin requirements for uncleared swaps under Part 23 of the Commission's regulations do not apply to a swap if the counterparty qualifies for an exception from clearing under section 2(h)(7)(A) and implementing regulations.74 Commission regulation 23.150(b) was added to the final margin rules after the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2015 (TRIPRA) 75 amended section 731 of the Dodd-Frank Act by adding section 4s(e)(4) to the CEA to provide that the initial and variation margin requirements will not apply to an uncleared swap in which a non-financial entity (including a small financial institution and a captive finance company) qualifies for an exception under section 2(h)(7)(A) of the CEA, as well as two exemptions from the clearing requirement that are not relevant in this context.76

    74 Commission regulation 23.150(b)(1).

    75 Public Law 114-1, 129 Stat. 3.

    76 Commission regulation 23.150(b)(2) provides that certain cooperative entities that are exempt from the Commission's clearing requirement pursuant to section 4(c)(1) authority also are exempt from the initial and variation margin requirements. None of the entities included in this proposal is a cooperative that would meet the conditions in Commission regulation 23.150(b)(2). In addition, the regulation 23.150(b)(3), which pertains to affiliated entities, does not apply in this context.

    The proposed rules are not implementing section 2(h)(7)(A) of the CEA. The Commission, pursuant to its 4(c) authority (as discussed above), is proposing to exempt swaps entered into by certain bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies and community development financial institutions from the Clearing Requirement. The Commission is not proposing to exclude these entities from the “financial entity” definition of section 2(h)(7)(C) of the CEA. Therefore, the bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions under the proposed rules are not eligible to elect the End-User Exception under Commission regulation 50.50, and they remain financial entities under the definition of section 2(h)(7)(C) of the CEA.

    For the reasons stated above, the proposed rules do not implicate any of the provisions of section 4s(e)(4) of the CEA or Commission regulation 23.150.77

    77 The Commission also preliminarily believes that the proposed rules do not affect the margin rules for entities that are supervised by the prudential regulators. The prudential regulators' rules contain provisions that are identical to Commission regulation 23.150. See Margin and Capital Requirements for Covered Swap Entities, 80 FR 74916, 74923 (Nov. 20, 2015).

    IV. Cost-Benefit Considerations A. Statutory and Regulatory Background

    Section 15(a) of the CEA requires the Commission to consider the costs and benefits of its actions before promulgating a regulation under the CEA or issuing certain orders.78 Section 15(a) further specifies that the costs and benefits shall be evaluated in light of the following five broad areas of market and public concern: (1) Protection of market participants and the public; (2) efficiency, competitiveness and financial integrity; (3) price discovery; (4) sound risk management practices; and (5) other public interest considerations (collectively referred to herein as the Section 15(a) Factors).

    78 Section 15(a) of the CEA.

    The baseline for the Commission's consideration of the costs and benefits of this proposed rulemaking is the market as it exists under section 2(h)(1) of the CEA and existing Commission Regulation 50.5. The effect of the proposing release is the exemption of certain swaps with certain bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions from the Clearing Requirement through new proposed regulations 50.5(e) and (f). The Commission believes the entities whose transactions will be exempted by this proposing release are similar to the entities that are already exempt by Commission regulation 50.50(d) both in terms of their operational and business practices and their participation in the swaps markets.79 Consequently, the Commission preliminarily expects the effects of the proposed amendments and the resulting costs and benefits will parallel the considerations of the 2012 End-User Exception final rule. The Commission recognizes that, to the extent that market participants have relied on CFTC Letter Nos. 16-01 and 16-02, the actual costs and benefits of the proposed rule as realized in the market may not be as significant as compared to the baseline. The Commission has endeavored to assess the expected costs and benefits of the proposed rule in quantitative terms where possible. Where estimation or quantification is not feasible, the Commission has provided its discussion in qualitative terms.

    79See Commission regulation 50.50(d).

    The Commission notes that the consideration of costs and benefits below is based on the understanding that the markets function internationally, with many transactions involving U.S. firms taking place across international boundaries; with some Commission registrants being organized outside of the United States; with leading industry members typically conducting operations both within and outside the United States; and with industry members commonly following substantially similar business practices wherever located. Where the Commission does not specifically refer to matters of location, the below discussion of costs and benefits refers to the effects of the proposed rule on all activity subject to the proposed and amended regulations, whether by virtue of the activity's physical location in the United States or by virtue of the activity's connection with or effect on U.S. commerce under section 2(i) of the CEA.80 In particular, the Commission notes that some entities affected by this proposed rulemaking may be located outside of the United States.

    80 Section 2(i) of the CEA.

    In the sections that follow, the Commission considers: (1) The costs and benefits of the proposed exemptions for certain bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions from the Clearing Requirement in Commission Regulation 50.5, and (2) the impact of the exemptions on the Section 15(a) Factors.

    B. Consideration of the Costs and Benefits of the Commission's Action 1. Costs

    Proposed regulations 50.5(e) and (f) would exempt certain swap transactions entered into with certain bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions from the Clearing Requirement. By exempting transactions with these entities from the Clearing Requirement, the Commission recognizes that the benefits of central clearing will not accrue to swaps entered into by these entities. The primary cost of the proposed exemptions from the Clearing Requirement is, therefore, that transactions with certain bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions would not be subject to the Clearing Requirement.

    In general, the principal risk to the financial system that central clearing seeks to address is counterparty credit risk. A DCO manages this risk by collecting initial and variation margin from its clearing members. DCOs set margin levels and calculate and collect variation margin daily as prices move. This allows DCOs to mitigate the possibility of its default, and to cover the losses due to default of a clearing member. By exempting transactions with these entities from the Clearing Requirement, the Commission recognizes that the risk-mitigating benefits of clearing will not attach to those transactions.

    However, the Commission believes that the entities covered by the proposed exemptions tend to be entities that would have relatively modest contributions to systemic risk. For instance, the Commission believes that the bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies subject to the proposed regulation generally enter into swaps with a notional amount of $10 million or less and enter into swaps less frequently that other counterparties. Under the proposed rule, the exemption would only extend to swaps with community development financial institutions to the extent that they engage in swaps within specific product classes and the total aggregate notional value of all interest rate swaps and forward rate agreements entered into during a calendar year is less than $200 million.

    The Commission proposes to require counterparties using the proposed exemption to comply with Commission regulation 50.50(b). Commission regulation 50.50(b) requires a counterparty to notify the Commission that the swap is not subject to the Clearing Requirement and to indicate how the electing counterparty generally meets its financial obligations associated with its non-cleared swaps. In general, the Commission believes the notification will be made by the swap dealer (SD). The bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions subject to this proposed regulation would provide the notification only for those swaps that are not entered into with a SD as the counterparty. While the Commission anticipates that the number of such swaps would be small, there is a lack of specific quantitative evidence regarding that number. As a practical matter, the procedure in proposed regulation 50.5 is the same as that required under the DCR no-action letter currently in effect. For this reason, the Commission believes that the practical effect of the rule change will not impose substantial additional compliance costs on these entities.

    The $10 billion cap applied to certain bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies is a bright line. Due to the nature of using a bright line as a threshold, it is possible that some entities with attributes similar to those exempted entities may not be eligible for the exemption.81 It is also possible that some bank holding companies or savings and loan holding companies could make operational and business decisions that would allow them to qualify for the exemption from the Clearing Requirement. However, the Commission does not expect that an entity will limit its potential revenue in order to maintain a smaller size thereby permitting it to rely on this proposed exemption.

    81 While the Commission is not proposing a size threshold for community development financial institutions, the Commission believes, as discussed above, that community development financial institutions generally fall under the same $10 billion size threshold.

    For these reasons, the costs associated with the proposed rule are likely to be low.

    Request for Comment. The Commission requests comment on whether the proposed exemptions for certain bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions from the Clearing Requirement would contribute to systemic risk. The Commission requests comment, including any analysis, on the number of bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions would rely on the proposed exemption. The Commission also requests comment, including any analysis, on the number of bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions that have exercised an election not to clear swaps pursuant to the DCR no-action letters. The Commission requests comment, including any available quantitative data and analysis, of the swap trading behavior of these entities.

    2. Benefits

    Certain bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions would benefit from an exemption from the Clearing Requirement for their transactions used to hedge interest rate risk because project financing and risk management transactions with these entities would not be subject to the Clearing Requirement or have the added expense of required clearing. The Commission believes the financial system benefits from having the bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies subject to this proposal enter into interest rate swaps to hedge interest rate risk they incur as a result of issuing debt securities or making loans to finance their subsidiary banks or savings associations. The Commission also preliminarily believes that the interest rate swaps may need to be entered into by the bank holding company or savings and loan holding company, rather than the subsidiary, in order to gain hedge accounting treatment that may promote efficiencies to benefit their subsidiaries.82 The Commission preliminarily believes that costs of clearing for community development financial institutions are similar to those faced by small financial institutions and the benefits that community development financial institutions bring to communities may be significant.83 The Commission believes that small communities and certain target populations will benefit from the proposed exemptions through cost savings by not having to clear a swap.

    82Id. at 3.

    83Id.

    Request for Comment. The Commission requests comment on the benefits of providing an exemption from the Clearing Requirement to certain bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions as discussed above. In particular, the Commission is interested in quantitative data on the magnitude of the costs savings from the exemption, and how these lower costs might affect the entities' behavior.

    C. Section 15(a) Factors

    The discussion that follows supplements the related costs and benefit considerations addressed in the preceding section and addresses the overall effect of the proposed rule in terms of the factors set forth in section 15(a) of the CEA.

    1. Protection of Market Participants and the Public

    Section 15(a)(2)(A) of the CEA requires the Commission to evaluate the costs and benefits of a proposed regulation in light of considerations of protection of market participants and the public. In developing the proposed rule, the Commission was cognizant that in enacting the Dodd-Frank Act, Congress directed the Commission to consider an exemption from the definition of “financial entity,” and therefore an exemption from the Clearing Requirement, for small banks, savings associations, farm credit system institutions, and credit unions.84 The extension of similar regulatory treatment to swaps entered into by certain bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions makes the Commission's policy consistent with the existing exemption granted for small depository institutions by section 2(h)(7)(C)(ii) and Commission regulation 50.50(d).

    84See Section 2(h)(7)(C)(ii) of the CEA.

    Like the financial institutions listed in section 2(h)(7)(C)(ii), the Commission believes these entities are likely to have limited swap exposure, both in terms of value and number. As such, the Commission preliminarily believes the exemption will have a minimal impact on market participants. In addition, counterparties to a swap entered into with a bank holding company, savings and loan holding company, or community development financial institution subject to this proposed regulation will have some degree of protection against default because the electing entity is required to indicate how it generally meets the financial obligations associated with its non-cleared swaps as required by Commission regulation 50.50(b). This will ensure that counterparties are aware of the potential exposure each transaction may have on the overall risk profile of the entities.

    The Commission also preliminarily believes that the asset cap for bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies whose transactions will be subject to an exemption from the Clearing Requirement, combined with the required adherence to the requirements of Commission regulation 50.50(b) and (c) means the proposed exemptions are not likely to pose systemic or significant counterparty risk. Therefore, the Commission believes the proposed exemptions are not likely to have a negative impact on market participants or the public.

    2. Efficiency, Competitiveness, and Financial Integrity of Swap Markets

    Section 15(a)(2)(B) of the CEA requires the Commission to evaluate the costs and benefits of a proposed regulation in light of efficiency, competitiveness, and financial integrity considerations. As noted above, the Commission preliminarily believes that the proposed amendments to Commission regulation 50.5 would lower the cost of using swaps for the bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions subject to this proposal, and in that sense, make trading more efficient. The Commission preliminarily believes that because of the small number of anticipated entities falling under the exemption and the low notional value of the swaps they execute, there would be a minimal impact on the efficiency of the swap marketplaces they operate in and the financial integrity of the swap markets. Consequently, the Commission believes the impact of the proposed exemptions on the efficiency, competitiveness, and financial integrity of the swap markets to be negligible.

    3. Price Discovery

    Section 15(a)(2)(C) of the CEA requires the Commission to evaluate the costs and benefits of a proposed regulation in light of price discovery considerations. The Commission preliminarily believes that the proposed rule will not have a significant impact on price discovery. Swap transactions, regardless of the counterparty, are required by section 2(a)(13)(G) of the CEA to be reported to an SDR. Moreover, the proposed regulation maintains this reporting requirement; the price discovery function of the reporting requirement to an SDR is therefore unchanged.

    4. Sound Risk Management Practices

    Section 15(a)(2)(D) of the CEA requires the Commission to evaluate the costs and benefits of a proposed regulation in light of sound risk management practices. These proposed exemptions reflect the Commission's determination that sound public policy supports the finding that certain swaps entered into by certain bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions subject to this proposal should not be subject to the Clearing Requirement. This preliminary conclusion is based on the Commission's determination that swaps entered into by these entities are similar to swaps entered into by the small financial institutions set out in section 2(h)(7)(C)(ii) of the CEA and should be treated in a similar manner. The Commission believes that the proposed exemptions therefore should better serve the financial markets by enabling these entities to use swaps for hedging purposes at a potentially lower cost. Furthermore, the Commission does not believe that swap transactions with these entities pose risk to the U.S. financial markets. As discussed earlier, the Commission believes that these entities generally use swaps to mitigate the interest rate risk exposure associate with their financing activities.

    5. Other Public Interest Considerations

    Section 15(a)(2)(E) of the CEA requires the Commission to evaluate the costs and benefits of a proposed regulation in light of other public interest considerations. The Commission has not identified any public interest considerations relevant to this proposed rule beyond those already noted above.

    D. General Request for Comment

    The Commission requests comment on all aspects of the costs and benefits relating to the proposed exemption of swaps entered into by certain bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions from the Clearing Requirement. The Commission requests that commenters provide any data or other information that would be useful in estimating the quantifiable costs and benefits of this proposed rulemaking.

    E. Antitrust Considerations

    Section 15(b) of the CEA requires the Commission to take into consideration the public interest to be protected by the antitrust laws and endeavor to take the least anticompetitive means of achieving the purposes of the CEA, in issuing any order or adopting any Commission rule or regulation (including any exemption under section 4(c) or 4c(b)), or in requiring or approving any bylaw, rule, or regulation of a contract market or registered futures association established pursuant to section 17 of the CEA.85

    85 Section 15(b) of the CEA.

    The Commission believes that the public interest to be protected by the antitrust laws is generally to protect competition. The Commission requests comment on whether the proposed rule implicates any other specific public interest to be protected by the antitrust laws.

    The Commission has considered the proposed rule to determine whether it is anticompetitive and does not anticipate that the proposed rule will have any anticompetitive effects or result in anticompetitive behavior. The Commission nevertheless encourages comments from the public on any aspect of the proposal that may be inconsistent with the antitrust laws or anticompetitive in nature. For example, the Commission is generally interested in whether providing this exemption to certain bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions could have anticompetitive effects. Accordingly, the Commission requests comment on whether the proposal in total, or its individual parts, could be deemed anticompetitive.

    Because the Commission has preliminarily determined that the proposed rule is not anticompetitive and has no anticompetitive effects, the Commission has not identified any less anticompetitive means of achieving the purposes of the CEA. The Commission requests comment on whether there are less anticompetitive means of achieving the relevant purposes of the CEA that would otherwise be served by adopting the proposed rule.

    IV. Related Matters A. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) requires federal agencies to consider whether the regulations they propose will have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities and, if so, provide a regulatory flexibility analysis on the impact.86 The Commission previously has established certain definitions of small entities to be used in evaluating the impact of its regulations on small entities in accordance with the RFA.87 The proposed regulations will not affect any small entities as that term is used in the RFA. The proposed rule would affect specific counterparties to an uncleared swap: Bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions subject to the proposed regulations. Pursuant to sections 2(e) and 5(d)(11)(A) of the CEA, only ECPs may enter into uncleared swaps. As financial institutions, these bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and community development financial institutions are ECPs pursuant to CEA section 1a(18)(A)(i). The Commission previously determined that ECPs are not small entities for RFA purposes.88 Because ECPs are not small entities, and persons not meeting the definition of ECP may not conduct transactions in uncleared swaps, the Commission need not conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis respecting the effect of these proposed rules on ECPs.

    86 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.

    87 47 FR 18618 (Apr. 30, 1982).

    88See 66 FR 20740, 20743 (Apr. 25, 2001).

    Accordingly, this proposed rule will not have a significant economic effect of any small entity. Therefore, the Chairman, on behalf of the Commission, hereby certifies pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that the proposed regulations will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) 89 imposes certain requirements on Federal agencies, including the Commission, in connection with their conducting or sponsoring any collection of information, as defined by the PRA. This proposed rulemaking would not result in a new collection of information from these entities within the meaning of the PRA.90

    89 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).

    90 The applicable collections of information are “Regulations 45.2. 45.3, and 45.4—Swap Data Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirement,” OMB control number 3038-0086; “Rule 50.50 End-User Notification of Non-Cleared Swaps,” OMB control number 3038-0085.

    List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 50

    Business and industry; Swaps.

    For the reasons set for in the preamble, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission proposes to amend part 50 of title 17 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

    PART 50—CLEARING REQUIREMENT AND RELATED RULES 1. The authority citation for part 50 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 2(h), 6(c), and 7a-1 as amended by Pub. L. 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376.

    2. In § 50.5, a. Redesignate paragraphs (a) and (b) as paragraphs (b) and (c); b. Add new paragraph (a); c. Add and reserve paragraph (d); and d. Add paragraphs (e) and (f).

    The additions read as follows:

    § 50.5 Swaps exempt from a clearing requirement.

    (a) Definitions. For the purposes of § 50.5:

    Bank holding company means an entity that is organized as a bank holding company, as defined in section 2 of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956;

    Community development financial institution means a community development financial institution, as defined in section 103(5) of the Community Development Banking and Financial Institutions Act of 1994, and is certified by the U.S. Department of the Treasury's Community Development Financial Institution Fund as meeting the requirements set forth in 12 CFR 1805.201(b);

    Savings and loan holding company means an entity that is organized as a savings and loan holding company, as defined in section 10 of the Home Owners' Loan Act of 1933.

    (d) [Reserved]

    (e) Swaps entered into by a bank holding company or savings and loan holding company shall be exempt from the clearing requirement under § 50.2, provided that:

    (1) The bank holding company or savings and loan holding company has aggregated assets, including the assets of all its subsidiaries, that do not exceed $10,000,000,000 according to the value of assets of each subsidiary on the last day of each subsidiary's most recent fiscal year;

    (2) The bank holding company or savings and loan holding company reports the swap to a swap data repository pursuant to §§ 45.3 and 45.4 of this chapter, and reports all information described under § 50.50(b) to a swap data repository; and

    (3) The swap is used to hedge or mitigate commercial risk, as defined under § 50.50(c).

    (f) Swaps entered into by a community development financial institution shall be exempt from the clearing requirement under § 50.2 provided, that:

    (1) The community development financial institution reports the swap to a swap data repository pursuant to §§ 45.3 and 45.4 of this chapter, and reports all information described under § 50.50(b) to a swap data repository; and

    (2) The swap is a U.S. dollar denominated interest rate swap in the fixed-to-floating class or the forward rate agreement class of swaps that would otherwise be subject to the clearing requirement under § 50.2;

    (3) The total aggregate notional value of the interest rate swaps and forward rate agreements entered into during the twelve-month calendar year is less than or equal to $200,000,000;

    (4) The swap is one of ten or fewer swap transactions that the community development financial institution enters into within a twelve-month calendar year; and

    (5) The swap is used to hedge or mitigate commercial risk, as defined under § 50.50(c).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 23, 2018, by the Commission. Christopher Kirkpatrick, Secretary of the Commission. Note:

    The following appendices will not appear in the Code of Federal Regulations.

    Appendices to Amendments to Clearing Exemption for Swaps Entered Into by Certain Bank Holding Companies, Savings and Loan Holding Companies, and Community Development Financial Institutions Appendix 1—Commission Voting Summary

    On this matter, Chairman Giancarlo and Commissioners Quintenz and Behnam voted in the affirmative. No commissioner voted in the negative.

    Appendix 2—Statement of Chairman J. Christopher Giancarlo

    Consistent with the overall goals of Project KISS, this proposal would codify Commission policy laid out in the preamble to the 2012 End-User Exception final rule and several staff no-action letters. It will also provide clarity and reduce unnecessary burdens on bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies with consolidated assets of $10 billion or less, and certain community development financial institutions.

    I want to thank Commission staff for their intelligent work on this proposal. I am grateful to Commissioners Quintenz and Behnam and for their thoughtful input and unanimous support.

    [FR Doc. 2018-18618 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement 30 CFR Part 943 [SATS No. TX-068-FOR; Docket ID: OSM-2018-0002; S1D1S SS08011000 SX064A000 189S180110; S2D2S SS08011000 SX064A000 18XS501520] Texas Regulatory Program AGENCY:

    Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule; public comment period and opportunity for public hearing on proposed amendment.

    SUMMARY:

    We, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE), are announcing receipt of a proposed amendment to the Texas regulatory program (Texas program) under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA or the Act). Texas proposes revisions to its regulations regarding annual permit fees for calendar years 2017 and 2018. Texas also proposes to remove a restriction in its rules that conflicts with the United States Bankruptcy Code.

    This document gives the times and locations where the Texas program documents and this proposed amendment to that program are available for your inspection, establishes the comment period during which you may submit written comments on the amendment, and describes the procedures that we will follow for the public hearing, if one is requested.

    DATES:

    We will accept written comments on this amendment until 4:00 p.m., CST, September 28, 2018. If requested, we will hold a public hearing on the amendment on September 24, 2018. We will accept requests to speak at a hearing until 4:00 p.m., CST on September 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by SATS No. TX-068-FOR, by any of the following methods:

    Mail/Hand Delivery: William Joseph, Director, Tulsa Field Office, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 1645 South 101st East Avenue, Suite 145, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74128-4629.

    Fax: (918) 581-6419.

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: The amendment has been assigned Docket ID OSM-2018-0002. If you would like to submit comments go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this rulemaking. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the “Public Comment Procedures” heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

    Docket: For access to the docket to review copies of the Texas program, this amendment, a listing of any scheduled public hearings, and all written comments received in response to this document, you must go to the address listed below during normal business hours, Monday through Friday, excluding holidays. You may receive one free copy of the amendment by contacting OSMRE's Tulsa Field Office, or the full text of the program amendment is available for you to review at www.regulations.gov.

    William Joseph, Director, Tulsa Field Office, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 1645 South 101st East Avenue, Suite 145, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74128-4629, Telephone: (918) 581-6430, Email: [email protected]

    In addition, you may review a copy of the amendment during regular business hours at the following location:

    Surface Mining and Reclamation Division, Railroad Commission of Texas, 1701 North Congress Avenue, P.O. Box 12967, Austin, Texas 78711-2967, Telephone: (512) 463-6900
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    William Joseph, Director, Tulsa Field Office. Telephone: (918) 581-6430, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background on the Texas Program II. Description of the Proposed Amendment III. Public Comment Procedures IV. Procedural Determinations I. Background on the Texas Program

    Section 503(a) of the Act permits a State to assume primacy for the regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations on non-Federal and non-Indian lands within its borders by demonstrating that its program includes, among other things, State laws and regulations that govern surface coal mining and reclamation operations in accordance with the Act and consistent with the Federal regulations. See 30 U.S.C. 1253(a)(1) and (7). On the basis of these criteria, the Secretary of the Interior conditionally approved the Texas program effective February 16, 1980. You can find background information on the Texas program, including the Secretary's findings, the disposition of comments, and the conditions of approval of the Texas program in the February 27, 1980, Federal Register (45 FR 12998). You can also find later actions concerning the Texas program and program amendments at 30 CFR 943.10, 943.15, and 943.16.

    II. Description of the Proposed Amendment

    By letter dated February 7, 2018 (Administrative Record No. TX-706), Texas sent us an amendment to its program under SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.) at its own initiative. Below is a summary of the changes proposed by Texas. The full text of the program amendment is available for you to read at the locations listed above under ADDRESSES.

    § 12.108. Permit Fees.

    Texas proposes to revise its regulation at 16 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) section 12.108(b) regarding annual permit fees by:

    (1) Amending the calendar years specified in paragraph (b) to calendar year 2017 and 2018;

    (2) Decreasing the amount of the fee, from $13.05 to $12.85, for each acre of land within a permit area covered by a reclamation bond on December 31st of the year; and

    (3) Decreasing the amount of the fee, from $6,600 to $6,170, for each permit in effect on December 31st of the year.

    Texas fully funds its share of costs to regulate the coal mining industry with fees paid by the coal industry. To meet these costs, Texas charges a permit application fee and two annual fees, as mentioned above. The proposed fee revisions are intended to provide adequate funding to pay the State's cost of operating its regulatory program, and provide incentives for industry to accomplish reclamation and achieve bond release as quickly as possible.

    § 12.309. Terms and Conditions of the Bond.

    Texas proposes to revise its regulation at 16 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) section 12.309(j)(2)(B) by:

    (1) Removing the condition that self-bond applicants not have been subject to bankruptcy proceedings during the 5-year period immediately preceding the date of application.

    Texas proposes this revision to conform with the United States Bankruptcy Code at 11 U.S.C. 525(a) and 30 CFR 800.23(b)(2).

    III. Public Comment Procedures

    Under the provisions of 30 CFR 732.17(h), we are seeking your comments on whether the amendment satisfies the applicable program approval criteria of 30 CFR 732.15. If we approve the amendment, it will become part of the State program.

    Electronic or Written Comments

    If you submit written comments, they should be specific, confined to issues pertinent to the proposed regulations, and explain the reason for any recommended change(s). We appreciate any and all comments, but those most useful and likely to influence decisions on the final program will be those that either involve personal experience or include citations to and analyses of SMCRA, its legislative history, its implementing regulations, case law, other pertinent State or Federal laws or regulations, technical literature, or other relevant publications.

    We cannot ensure that comments received after the close of the comment period (see DATES) or sent to an address other than those listed (see ADDRESSES) will be included in the docket for this rulemaking and considered.

    Public Availability of Comments

    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.

    Public Hearing

    If you wish to speak at the public hearing, contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by 4:00 p.m., CST on September 13, 2018. If you are disabled and need reasonable accommodations to attend a public hearing, contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We will arrange the location and time of the hearing with those persons requesting the hearing. If no one requests an opportunity to speak, we will not hold a hearing.

    To assist the transcriber and ensure an accurate record, we request, if possible, that each person who speaks at the public hearing provide us with a written copy of his or her comments. The public hearing will continue on the specified date until everyone scheduled to speak has been given an opportunity to be heard. If you are in the audience and have not been scheduled to speak and wish to do so, you will be allowed to speak after those who have been scheduled. We will end the hearing after everyone scheduled to speak and others present in the audience who wish to speak, have been heard.

    Public Meeting

    If only one person requests an opportunity to speak, we may hold a public meeting rather than a public hearing. If you wish to meet with us to discuss the amendment, please request a meeting by contacting the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. All such meetings are open to the public and, if possible, we will post notices of meetings at the locations listed under ADDRESSES. We will make a written summary of each meeting a part of the administrative record.

    IV. Procedural Determinations Executive Order 12866—Regulatory Planning and Review

    Pursuant to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Guidance and dated October 12, 1993, the approval of state program amendments is exempted from OMB review under Executive Order 12866.

    Other Laws and Executive Orders Affecting Rulemaking

    When a State submits a program amendment to OSMRE for review, our regulations at 30 CFR 732.17(h) require us to publish a notice in the Federal Register indicating receipt of the proposed amendment, its text or a summary of its terms, and an opportunity for public comment. We conclude our review of the proposed amendment after the close of the public comment period and determine whether the amendment should be approved, approved in part, or not approved. At that time, we will also make the determinations and certifications required by the various laws and executive orders governing the rulemaking process and include them in the final rule.

    List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 943

    Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.

    Dated: August 14, 2018. Alfred L. Clayborne, Regional Director, Mid-Continent Region.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18705 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-05-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Defense Acquisition Regulations System 48 CFR Parts 212, 219, and 252 [Docket DARS-2018-0035] RIN 0750-AJ21 Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Inapplicability of Certain Laws and Regulations to Commercial Items (DFARS Case 2017-D010); Reopening of Comment Period AGENCY:

    Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense (DoD).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule; reopening of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    DoD is proposing to amend the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to implement sections of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 that addresses the inapplicability of certain laws and regulations to the acquisition of commercial items, including commercially available off-the-shelf items. The comment period on the proposed rule is reopened for 60 days.

    DATES:

    For the proposed rule published on June 29, 2018 (83 FR 30646), submit comments by October 28, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments identified by DFARS Case 2017-D010, using any of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Search for “DFARS Case 2017-D010.” Select “Comment Now” and follow the instructions provided to submit a comment. Please include “DFARS Case 2017-D010” on any attached documents.

    Email: [email protected] Include DFARS Case 2017-D010 in the subject line of the message.

    Fax: 571-372-6094.

    Mail: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Attn: Ms. Barbara J. Trujillo, OUSD(D&S)DPC/DARS, Room 3B941, 3060 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-3060.

    Comments received generally will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. To confirm receipt of your comment(s), please check www.regulations.gov, approximately two to three days after submission to verify posting (except allow 30 days for posting of comments submitted by mail).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Barbara J. Trujillo, telephone 571-372-6102.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    On June 29, 2018, DoD published a proposed rule in the Federal Register at 83 FR 30646 to implement the requirement of section 874 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Pub. L. 114-328). Section 874 requires DoD to address the inapplicability of certain laws and regulations to the acquisition of commercial items, including commercially available off-the-shelf items.

    The comment period for the proposed rule is reopened 60 days, from August 28, 2018, to October 28, 2018, to provide additional time for interested parties to comment on the proposed DFARS changes.

    48 CFR Parts 212, 219, and 252

    Government procurement.

    Jennifer Lee Hawes, Regulatory Control Officer, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18616 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    83 168 Wednesday, August 29, 2018 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Rural Business-Cooperative Service Inviting Applications for the Delta Health Care Services Grant Program AGENCY:

    Rural Business-Cooperative Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This Notice announces that the Rural Business-Cooperative Service (Agency) is accepting fiscal year (FY) 2018 applications for the Delta Health Care Services (DHCS) grant program. The Agency will publish the program funding level on the Rural Development website: https://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/delta-health-care-services-grants. The purpose of this program is to provide financial assistance to address the continued unmet health needs in the Delta Region through cooperation among health care professionals, institutions of higher education, research institutions, and economic development entities in the Delta Region.

    DATES:

    You must submit completed applications for grants according to the following deadlines:

    Paper copies must be postmarked and mailed, shipped, or sent overnight no later than Midnight Eastern Time November 26, 2018. Electronic copies must be received by Midnight Eastern Time November 19, 2018. Late applications are not eligible for funding under this Notice and will not be evaluated.

    ADDRESSES:

    You should contact your USDA Rural Development State Office (State Office) if you have questions. You are encouraged to contact your State Office well in advance of the application deadline to discuss your Project and ask any questions about the application process. A list of State Office contacts can be found at: http://www.rd.usda.gov/contact-us/state-offices. Program guidance as well as application templates may be obtained at: http://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/delta-health-care-services-grants or by contacting your State Office. If you want to submit an electronic application, follow the instructions for the DHCS funding announcement located at: http://www.grants.gov. Please review the Grants.gov website for instructions on the process of registering your organization as soon as possible to ensure you can meet the electronic application deadline. You are strongly encouraged to file your application early and allow sufficient time to manage any technical issues that may arise. If you want to submit a paper application, send it to the State Office located in the State where the Project will primarily take place.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Grants Division, Cooperative Programs, Rural Business-Cooperative Service, United States Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, MS 3253, Room 4208-South, Washington, DC 20250-3250, or call 202-690-1374.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Preface

    The Agency encourages applications that will support recommendations made in the Rural Prosperity Task Force report to help improve life in rural America, https://www.usda.gov/topics/rural/rural-prosperity. Applicants are encouraged to consider projects that provide measurable results in helping rural communities build robust and sustainable economies through strategic investments in infrastructure, partnerships and innovation. Key strategies include:

    • Achieving e-Connectivity for rural America • Developing the Rural Economy • Harnessing Technological Innovation • Supporting a Rural Workforce • Improving Quality of Life Overview

    Federal Agency Name: USDA Rural Business-Cooperative Service.

    Funding Opportunity Title: Delta Health Care Services Grant Program.

    Announcement Type: Initial Notice.

    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 10.874.

    Dates: Application Deadline. You must submit your complete application by Midnight Eastern Time November 26, 2018, or it will not be considered for funding. Electronic copies must be received by www.grants.gov no later than Midnight Eastern Time November 19, 2018, or it will not be considered for funding.

    Executive Order (E.O.) 13175 Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    This Executive Order imposes requirements on Rural Development in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications or preempt tribal laws. Rural Development has determined that this Notice does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribe(s) or on either the relationship or the distribution of powers and responsibilities between the Federal Government and the Indian tribes. Thus, this Notice is not subject to the requirements of Executive Order 13175. Tribal Consultation inquiries and comments should be directed to RD's Native American Coordinator at [email protected] or (720) 544-2911.

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act requires Federal agencies to seek and obtain Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval before undertaking a collection of information directed to ten or more persons. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the Agency conducted an analysis to determine the number of applications the Agency estimates that it will receive under the DHCS grant program. It was determined that the estimated number of applications was fewer than nine and in accordance with 5 CFR 1320, thus no OMB approval is necessary at this time.

    A. Program Description

    The DHCS program is authorized by Section 379G of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 2008u), as amended by the Agricultural Act of 2014 (Pub. L. 113-79). The primary objective of the program is to provide financial assistance to address the continued unmet health needs in the Delta Region through cooperation among health care professionals, institutions of higher education, research institutions, and other individuals and entities in the Delta Region. Grants are awarded on a competitive basis. The maximum award amount per grant is $1,000,000.

    Definitions

    The definitions you need to understand are as follows:

    Academic Health and Research Institute—A combination of a medical school, one or more other health profession schools or educational training programs (such as allied health, dentistry, graduate studies, nursing, pharmacy, public health), and one or more owned or affiliated teaching hospitals or health systems; or a health care nonprofit organization or health system, including nonprofit medical and surgical hospitals, that conduct health related research exclusively for scientific or educational purposes.

    Conflict of Interest—A situation in which a person or entity has competing personal, professional, or financial interests that make it difficult for the person or business to act impartially. Federal procurement standards prohibit transactions that involve a real or apparent conflict of interest for owners, employees, officers, agents, or their immediate family members having a financial or other interest in the outcome of the Project; or that restrict open and free competition for unrestrained trade. Specifically, Project Funds may not be used for services or goods going to, or coming from, a person or entity with a real or apparent conflict of interest, including, but not limited to, owner(s) and their immediate family members. An example of conflict of interest occurs when the consortium member's employees, board of directors, or the immediate family of either, have the appearance of a professional or personal financial interest in the recipients receiving the benefits or services of the grant.

    Consortium—A group of three or more entities that are regional Institutions of Higher Education, Academic Health and Research Institutes, and/or Economic Development Entities located in the Delta Region that have at least 1 year of prior experience in addressing the health care issues in the region. At least one of the consortium members must be legally organized as an incorporated organization or other legal entity and have legal authority to contract with the Federal Government.

    Delta Region—The 252 counties and parishes within the states of Alabama, Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and Tennessee that are served by the Delta Regional Authority. (The Delta Region may be adjusted by future Federal statute.) To view the areas identified within the Delta Region visit http://dra.gov/about-dra/dra-states.

    Economic Development Entity—Any public or non-profit organization whose primary mission is to stimulate local and regional economies within the Delta Region by increasing employment opportunities and duration of employment, expanding or retaining existing employers, increasing labor rates or wage levels, reducing outmigration, and/or creating gains in other economic development-related variables such as land values. These activities shall primarily benefit low and moderate-income individuals in the Delta Region.

    Health System—The complete network of agencies, facilities, and all providers of health care to meet the health needs of a specific geographical area or target populations.

    Institution of Higher Education—A postsecondary (post-high school) educational institution that awards a bachelor's degree or provides not less than a 2-year program that is acceptable for full credit toward such a degree, or a postsecondary vocational institution that provides a program of training to prepare students for gainful employment in a recognized occupation.

    Nonprofit Organization—An organization or institution, including an accredited institution of higher education, where no part of the net earnings of which may inure, to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual.

    Project—All activities funded by the DHCS grant.

    Project Funds—Grant funds requested plus any other contributions to the proposed Project.

    Rural and rural area—Any area of a State:

    • Not in a city or town that has a population of more than 50,000 inhabitants, according to the latest decennial census of the United States; and

    • The contiguous and adjacent urbanized area,

    • Urbanized areas that are rural in character as defined by 7 U.S.C. 1991(a)(13).

    • For the purposes of this definition, cities and towns are incorporated population centers with definite boundaries, local self-government, and legal powers set forth in a charter granted by the State.

    State—Includes each of the 50 States, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands of the United States, Guam, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and, as may be determined by the Secretary to be feasible, appropriate and lawful, the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Republic of Palau.

    B. Federal Award Information

    Type of Award: Competitive Grant.

    Total Funding: $3,558,000.

    Maximum Award: $1,000,000.

    Minimum Award: $50,000.

    Project Period: Up to 24 months.

    Anticipated Award Date: January 31, 2019.

    C. Eligibility Information

    Applicants must meet all of the following eligibility requirements. Your application will not be considered for funding if it does not provide sufficient information to determine eligibility or is missing required elements. Applicants that fail to submit the required elements by the application deadline will be deemed ineligible and will not be evaluated further. Information submitted after the application deadline will not be accepted.

    1. Eligible Applicants

    Grants funded through DHCS may be made to a Consortium as defined in Paragraph A of this Notice. Consortiums are eligible to receive funding through this Notice. One member of the Consortium must be designated as the lead entity by the other members of the Consortium and have legal authority to contract with the Federal Government.

    The lead entity is the recipient (see 2 CFR 200.86) of the DHCS grant funds and accountable for monitoring and reporting on the Project performance and financial management of the grant. In addition, the lead entity (recipient) is responsible for subrecipient monitoring and management in accordance with 2 CFR 200.330 and 200.331, respectively. The remaining consortium members are subrecipients (see 2 CFR 200.93). They may receive subawards (see 2 CFR 200.94) from the recipient and are responsible for monitoring and reporting the Project performance and financial management of their subaward to the recipient.

    (a) An applicant is ineligible if they do not submit “Evidence of Eligibility” and “Consortium Agreements” as described in Section D.2. of this Notice.

    (b) An applicant is ineligible if they have been debarred or suspended or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs under Executive Order 12549, “Debarment and Suspension.” The Agency will check the System for Award Management (SAM) to determine if the applicant has been debarred or suspended. In addition, an applicant will be considered ineligible for a grant due to an outstanding judgment obtained by the U.S. in a Federal Court (other than U.S. Tax Court), is delinquent on the payment of Federal income taxes, or is delinquent on Federal debt. The applicant must certify as part of the application that they do not have an outstanding judgment against them. The Agency will check the Credit Alert Interactive Voice Response System (CAIVRS) to verify this.

    (c) Any corporation (1) that has been convicted of a felony criminal violation under any Federal law within the past 24 months or (2) that has any unpaid Federal tax liability that has been assessed, for which all judicial and administrative remedies have been exhausted or have lapsed, and that is not being paid in a timely manner pursuant to an agreement with the authority responsible for collecting the tax liability, is not eligible for financial assistance provided with funds appropriated by the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 (Pub. L. 115-141), unless a Federal agency has considered suspension or debarment of the corporation and has made a determination that this further action is not necessary to protect the interests of the Government.

    (d) Applications will be deemed ineligible if the application includes any funding restrictions identified under Section D.6.

    (e) Applications will be deemed ineligible if the application is not complete in accordance with the requirements stated in Section C.3.g.

    2. Cost Sharing or Matching

    Matching funds are not required. However, if you are adding any other contributions to the proposed Project, you must provide documentation indicating who will be providing the matching funds, the amount of funds, when those funds will be provided, and how the funds will be used in the Project budget. Examples of acceptable documentation include: A signed letter from the source of funds stating the amount of funds, when the funds will be provided, and what the funds can be used for or a signed resolution from your governing board authorizing the use of a specified amount of funds for specific components of the Project. The matching funds you identify must be for eligible purposes and included in your work plan and budget. Additionally, expected program income may not be used as matching funds at the time you submit your application. However, if you have a contract to provide services in place at the time you submit your application, you can verify the amount of the contract as matching funds. If you choose, you may use a template to summarize the matching funds. The template is available either from your State Office or the program website at: http://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/delta-health-care-services-grants.

    3. Other Eligibility Requirements

    (a) Use of Funds. Your application must propose to use Project Funds for eligible purposes. Eligible Project purposes include the development of:

    • Health care services;

    • health education programs;

    • health care job training programs; and

    • the development and expansion of public health-related facilities in the Delta Region.

    (b) Project Eligibility. The proposed Project must take place within the Delta Region as defined in this Notice. However, the applicant need not propose to serve the entire Delta Region.

    (c) Project Input. Your proposed Project must be developed based on input from local governments, public health care providers, and other entities in the Delta Region.

    (d) Grant Period Eligibility. All awards are limited to up to a 24 month grant period based upon the complexity of the Project. Your proposed grant period should begin no earlier than February 1, 2019, and should end no later than 24 months following that date. If you receive an award, your grant period will be revised to begin on the actual date of award—the date the grant agreement is executed by the Agency—and your grant period end date will be adjusted accordingly. Your Project activities must begin within 90 days of the date of award. If you request funds for a time period beginning before February 1, 2019, and/or ending later than 24 months from that date, your application will be ineligible. The length of your grant period should be based on your Project's complexity, as indicated in your application work plan.

    (e) Multiple Application Eligibility. The Consortium, including its members, is limited to submitting one application for funding under this Notice. We will not accept applications from Consortiums that include members who are also members of other Consortiums that have submitted applications for funding under this Notice. If we discover that a Consortium member is a member of multiple Consortiums with applications submitted for funding under this Notice, all applications will be considered ineligible for funding.

    (f) Satisfactory Performance Eligibility. If you have an existing DHCS award, you must be performing satisfactorily to be considered eligible for a new DHCS award. Satisfactory performance includes being up-to-date on all financial and performance reports as prescribed in the grant award, and current on tasks and timeframes for utilizing grant and matching funds as approved in the work plan and budget. If you have any unspent grant funds on DHCS awards prior to FY 2016, your application will not be considered for funding. If your FY 2016 and/or 2017 award has unspent funds of 50 percent or more than what your approved work plan and budget projected at the time your FY 2018 application is evaluated, your application may not be considered for funding. The Agency will verify the performance status of FY 2016 and 2017 awards and make a determination after the FY 2018 application period closes.

    (g) Completeness Eligibility. Your application must provide all of the information requested in Section D.2. of this Notice. Applications lacking sufficient information to determine eligibility and scoring will be deemed ineligible and will not be considered for scoring.

    (h) Indirect Costs. Your negotiated indirect cost rate approval does not need to be included in your application, but you will be required to provide it if a grant is awarded. Approval for indirect costs that are requested in an application without an approved indirect cost rate agreement is at the discretion of the Agency.

    D. Application and Submission Information 1. Address To Request Application Package

    The application template for this funding opportunity is located at: http://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/delta-health-care-services-grants. Use of the application template is strongly recommended to assist you with the application process. You may also contact your State Office for more information. Contact information for State Offices is located at: http://www.rd.usda.gov/contact-us/state-offices. You may also obtain an application package by calling 202-690-1374.

    2. Content and Form of Application Submission

    You may submit your application in paper form or electronically through Grants.gov. Your application must contain all required information. If you submit in paper form, any forms requiring signatures must include an original signature.

    To apply electronically, you must follow the instructions for this funding announcement at: http://www.grants.gov. Please note that we cannot accept emailed or faxed applications.

    You can locate the Grants.gov downloadable application package for this program by using a keyword, the program name, or the CFDA number for this program.

    When you enter the Grants.gov website, you will find information about applying electronically through the site, as well as the hours of operation.

    To use Grants.gov, you must already have a DUNS number and you must also be registered and maintain registration in SAM. We strongly recommend that you do not wait until the application deadline date to begin the application process through Grants.gov.

    You must submit all of your application documents electronically through Grants.gov. Applications must include electronic signatures. Original signatures may be required if funds are awarded.

    After applying electronically through Grants.gov, you will receive an automatic acknowledgement from Grants.gov that contains a Grants.gov tracking number.

    If you want to submit a paper application, send it to the State Office located in the State where the Project will primarily take place. You can find State Office contact information at: http://www.rd.usda.gov/contact-us/state-offices.

    The organization submitting the application will be considered the lead entity. The Contact/Program Manager must be associated with the lead entity submitting the application.

    Your application must also contain the following required forms and proposal elements:

    (a) Form SF-424, “Application for Federal Assistance.” The application for Federal assistance must be completed by the lead entity as described in Section C.1. of this Notice. Your application must include your DUNS number and SAM Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code and expiration date (or evidence that you have begun the SAM registration process). Because there are no specific fields for a CAGE code and expiration date, you may identify them anywhere you want to on the form. If you do not include the DUNS number in your application, it will not be considered for funding. The form must be signed by an authorized representative.

    (b) Form SF-424A, “Budget Information—Non-Construction Programs.” This form must be completed and submitted as part of the application package for non-construction Projects.

    (c) Form SF-424B, “Assurances—Non-Construction Programs.” This form must be completed, signed, and submitted as part of the application package for non-construction Projects.

    (d) Form SF-424C, “Budget Information—Construction Programs.” This form must be completed, signed, and submitted as part of the application package for construction Projects.

    (e) Form SF-424D, “Assurances—Construction Programs.” This form must be completed, signed, and submitted as part of the application package for construction Projects.

    (f) Form AD-3030. Form AD-3030, “Representations Regarding Felony Conviction and Tax Delinquent Status for Corporate Applicants,” if you are a corporation. A corporation is any entity that has filed articles of incorporation in one of the 50 States, the District of Columbia, the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of Palau, and the Republic of the Marshall Islands, or the various territories of the United States including American Samoa, Guam, Midway Islands, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, or the U.S. Virgin Islands. Corporations include both for profit and non-profit entities.

    (g) Executive Summary. You must provide a summary of the proposal, not to exceed one page, briefly describing the Project, tasks to be completed, and other relevant information that provides a general overview of the Project.

    (h) Evidence of Eligibility. You must provide evidence of the Consortium's eligibility to apply under this Notice. This section must include a detailed summary demonstrating how each Consortium member meets the definition of an eligible entity as defined under Definitions of this Notice.

    (i) Consortium Agreements. The application must include a formal written agreement with each Consortium member that addresses the negotiated arrangements for administering the Project to meet Project goals, the Consortium member's responsibilities to comply with administrative, financial, and reporting requirements of the grant, including those necessary to ensure compliance with all applicable Federal regulations and policies, and facilitate a smooth functioning collaborative venture. Under the agreement, each Consortium member must perform a substantive role in the Project and not merely serve as a conduit of funds to another party or parties. This agreement must be signed by an authorized representative of the lead entity and an authorized representative of each partnering consortium entity.

    (j) Scoring Criteria. Each of the scoring criteria in this Notice must be addressed in narrative form. Failure to address each scoring criterion will result in the application being determined ineligible.

    (k) Performance Measures. The Agency has also established annual performance measures to evaluate the DHCS program. You must provide estimates on the following performance measures as part of your application:

    • Number of businesses assisted;

    • Number of jobs created;

    • Number of jobs saved;

    • Number of individuals assisted/trained.

    It is permissible to have a zero in a performance element. When you calculate jobs created, estimates should be based upon actual jobs to be created by your organization as a result of the DHCS funding or actual jobs to be created by businesses as a result of assistance from your organization. When you calculate jobs saved, estimates should be based only on actual jobs that would have been lost if your organization did not receive DHCS funding or actual jobs that would have been lost without assistance from your organization.

    You can also suggest additional performance elements for example where job creation or jobs saved may not be a relevant indicator. These additional elements should be specific, measurable performance elements that could be included in an award document.

    (l) Financial Information and Sustainability. You must provide current financial statements and a narrative description demonstrating sustainability of the Project, all of which show sufficient resources and expertise to undertake and complete the Project and how the Project will be sustained following completion. Applicants must provide 3 years of pro-forma financial statements for the Project.

    (m) Evidence of Legal Authority and Existence. The lead entity must provide evidence of its legal existence and authority to enter into a grant agreement with the Agency and perform the activities proposed under the grant application.

    (n) Service Area Maps. You must provide maps with sufficient detail to show the area that will benefit from the proposed facilities and services and the location of the facilities improved or purchased with grant funds if applicable.

    (o) Certification of no current outstanding Federal judgment. You must certify that there are no current outstanding Federal judgments against your property and that you will not use grant funds to pay for any judgment obtained by the United States. You must also certify that you are not delinquent on the payment of Federal income taxes, or any Federal debt. To satisfy the Certification requirement, you should include this statement in your application: “[INSERT NAME OF APPLICANT] certifies that the United States has not obtained an unsatisfied judgment against its property, is not delinquent on the payment of Federal income taxes, or any Federal debt, and will not use grant funds to pay any judgments obtained by the United States.” A separate signature is not required.

    (p) Environmental information necessary to support the Agency's environmental finding. Required information can be found in 7 CFR part 1970, specifically in Subpart B, Exhibit C and Subpart C, Exhibit B. These documents can be found here: http://www.rd.usda.gov/publications/regulations-guidelines/instructions. Non-construction Projects applying under this Notice are hereby classified as Categorical Exclusions according to 7 CFR 1970.53(b), the award of financial assistance for planning purposes, management and feasibility studies, or environmental impact analyses, which do not require any additional documentation.

    3. DUNS Number and SAM Registration

    In order to be eligible (unless you are exempted under 2 CFR 25.110(b), (c) or (d), you are required to:

    (a) Provide a valid DUNS number in your application, which can be obtained at no cost via a toll-free request line at (866) 705-5711;

    (b) Register in SAM before submitting your application. You may register in SAM at no cost at: https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/; and

    (c) Continue to maintain an active SAM registration with current information at all times during which you have an active Federal award or an application or plan under consideration by a Federal awarding agency.

    The Agency may not make a Federal award to you until you have complied with all applicable DUNS and SAM requirements. If you have not fully complied with requirements by the time the Agency is ready to make a Federal award, the Agency may determine that the applicant is not qualified to receive a Federal award and the Agency may use this determination as a basis for making an award to another applicant.

    4. Submission Date and Time

    Application Deadline Date: November 26, 2018.

    Explanation of Deadlines: Complete paper applications must be postmarked and mailed, shipped, or sent overnight by November 26, 2018. The Agency will determine whether your application is late based on the date shown on the postmark or shipping invoice. You may also hand carry your application to one of our field offices, but it must be received by close of business on the deadline date. If the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the reporting package is due the next business day. Late applications are not eligible for funding.

    Electronic applications must be RECEIVED by: http://www.grants.gov by midnight Eastern Time November 19, 2018, to be eligible for funding. Please review the Grants.gov website at: http://grants.gov/applicants/organization_registration.jsp for instructions on the process of registering your organization as soon as possible to ensure you can meet the electronic application deadline. Grants.gov will not accept applications submitted after the deadline.

    5. Intergovernmental Review

    Executive Order (E.O.) 12372, Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs, applies to this program. This E.O. requires that Federal agencies provide opportunities for consultation on proposed assistance with State and local governments. Many States have established a Single Point of Contact (SPOC) to facilitate this consultation. For a list of States that maintain a SPOC, please see the White House website: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/SPOC-Feb.-2018.pdf. If your State has a SPOC, you may submit your application directly for review. Any comments obtained through the SPOC must be provided to your State Office for consideration as part of your application. If your State has not established a SPOC or you do not want to submit your application to the SPOC, your State Office will submit your application to the SPOC or other appropriate agency or agencies.

    You are also encouraged to contact Cooperative Programs at 202-690-1374 or [email protected] if you have questions about this process.

    6. Funding Restrictions

    Project Funds may not be used for ineligible purposes. In addition, you may not use Project Funds for the following:

    (a) To duplicate current services or to replace or to substitute support previously provided. However, Project Funds may be used to expand the level of effort or a service beyond what is currently being provided;

    (b) To pay for costs to prepare the application for funding under this Notice;

    (c) To pay for costs of the Project incurred prior to the effective date of the period of performance;

    (d) To pay expenses for applicant employee training not directly related to the Project;

    (e) Fund political activities;

    (f) To pay for assistance to any private business enterprise which does not have at least 51 percent ownership by those who are either citizens of the United States or reside in the United States after being legally admitted for permanent residence;

    (g) To pay any judgment or debt owed to the United States;

    (h) Engage in any activities that are considered a Conflict of Interest, as defined by this Notice; or

    (i) Fund any activities prohibited by 2 CFR 200;

    In addition, your application will not be considered for funding if it does any of the following:

    i. Requests more than the maximum grant amount; or

    ii. Proposes ineligible costs that equal more than 10 percent of the Project Funds.

    We will consider your application for funding if it includes ineligible costs of 10 percent or less of total Project Funds, if it is determined eligible otherwise. However, if your application is successful, those ineligible costs must be removed and replaced with eligible costs before the Agency will make the grant award or the amount of the grant award will be reduced accordingly. If we cannot determine the percentage of ineligible costs, your application will not be considered for funding.

    7. Other Submission Requirements

    (a) You should not submit your application in more than one format. You must choose whether to submit your application in hard copy or electronically. Applications submitted in hard copy should be mailed or hand-delivered to the State Office where the Project will primarily take place. You can find State Office contact information at: http://www.rd.usda.gov/contact-us/state-offices. To apply electronically, you must follow the instructions for this funding announcement at: http://www.grants.gov. A password is not required to access the website.

    (b) National Environmental Policy Act. This Notice has been reviewed in accordance with 7 CFR part 1970, “Environmental Policies and Procedures.” We have determined that an Environmental Impact Statement is not required because the issuance of regulations and instructions, as well as amendments to them, describing administrative and financial procedures for processing, approving, and implementing the Agency's financial programs is categorically excluded in the Agency's National Environmental Policy Act regulation found at 7 CFR 1970.53(f), “Environmental Policies and Procedures.” We have determined that this Notice does not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.

    The Agency will review each grant application to determine its compliance with 7 CFR part 1970. The applicant may be asked to provide additional information or documentation to assist the Agency with this determination.

    (c) Civil Rights Compliance Requirements. All grants made under this Notice are subject to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as required by the USDA (7 CFR part 15, subpart A) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

    E. Application Review Information

    The State Offices will review applications to determine if they are eligible for assistance based on requirements in this Notice, and other applicable Federal regulations. If determined eligible, your application will be scored by a panel of USDA employees in accordance with the point allocation specified in this Notice. Applications will be funded in rank order until the funding limitation has been reached. Applications that cannot be fully funded may be offered partial funding at the Agency's discretion.

    1. Scoring Criteria

    All eligible and complete applications will be evaluated based on the following criteria. Evaluators will base scores only on the information provided or cross-referenced by page number in each individual scoring criterion. DHCS is a competitive program, so you will receive scores based on the quality of your responses. Simply addressing the criteria will not guarantee higher scores. The total points possible for the criteria are 110. The minimum score requirement for funding is 60 points. It is at the Agency's discretion to fund applications with a score of 59 points or less if it is in the best interest of the Federal Government.

    (a) Community Needs and Benefits derived from the Project (maximum of 30 points). A panel of USDA employees will assess how the Project will benefit the residents in the Delta Region. This criterion will be scored based on the documentation in support of the community needs for health services and public health-related facilities and the benefits to people living in the Delta Region derived from the implementation of the proposed Project. It should lead clearly to the identification of the Project participant pool and the target population for the Project and provide convincing links between the Project and the benefits to the community to address its health needs. The Agency will consider:

    (1) The extent of the applicant's documentation explaining the health care needs, issues, and challenges facing the service area. Include what problems the residents face and how the Project will benefit the residents in the region.

    (2) The extent to which the applicant is able to show the relationship between the Project's design, outcome, and benefits.

    (3) The extent to which the applicant explains the Project and its implementation and provides milestones which are well-defined and can be realistically completed.

    (4) The extent to which the applicant clearly outlines a plan to track, report, and evaluate performance outcomes.

    Applicants should attempt to quantify benefits in terms of outcomes from the Project; that is, ways in which peoples' lives, or the community, will be improved. Provide estimates of the number of people affected by the benefits arising from the Project.

    (b) The Project Management and Organization Capability (maximum of 30 points). A panel of USDA employees will evaluate the Consortium's experience, past performance, and accomplishments addressing health care issues to ensure effective Project implementation. This criterion will be scored based on the documentation of the Project's management and organizational capability. The Agency will consider:

    (1) The degree to which the organization has a sound management and fiscal structure including: Well-defined roles for administrators, staff, and established financial management systems.

    (2) The extent to which the applicant identifies and demonstrates that qualifications, capabilities, and educational background of the identified key personnel (at a minimum the Project Manager) who will manage and implement programs are relevant and will contribute to the success of the Project.

    (3) The extent to which the applicant demonstrates current successful and effective experience (or demonstrated experience within the past 5 years) addressing the health care issues in the Delta Region.

    (4) The extent to which the applicant has experience managing grant-funded programs.

    (5) The extent to which administrative/management costs are balanced with funds designated for the provision of programs and services.

    (6) The extent and diversity of eligible entity types within the applicant's Consortium of regional institutions of higher education, academic health and research institutes, and economic development entities located in the Delta Region.

    (c) Work Plan and Budget (maximum of 30 points). You must provide a work plan and budget that includes the following: (1) The specific activities, such as programs, services, trainings, and/or construction-related activities for a facility to be performed under the Project; (2) the estimated line item costs associated with each activity, including grant funds and other necessary sources of funds; (3) the key personnel who will carry out each activity (including each Consortium member's role); and (4) the specific time frames for completion of each activity.

    An eligible start and end date for the Project and for individual Project tasks must be clearly shown and may not exceed Agency specified timeframes for the grant period. You must show the source and use of both grant and other contributions for all tasks. Other contributions must be spent at a rate equal to, or in advance of, grant funds.

    A panel of USDA employees will evaluate your work plan for detailed actions and an accompanying timetable for implementing the proposal. Clear and comprehensive work plans detailing all project goals, tasks, timelines, costs, and responsible personnel in a logical and realistic manner will result in a higher score.

    (d) Local Support (maximum 10 points). A panel of USDA employees will evaluate your application for local support of the proposed Project. The application must include documentation detailing support solicited from local government, public health care providers, and other entities in the Delta Region. Evidence of support can include; but is not limited to surveys conducted amongst Delta Region residents and stakeholders, notes from focus groups, or letters of support from local entities.

    (e) Administrator Discretionary Points (maximum of 10 points). The Administrator may choose to award:

    i. Up to 5 points for projects with a primary purpose of providing treatment and counseling services for opioid abuse. Applicants who want to be considered for discretionary points must discuss how their workplan and budget addresses opioid misuse in the Delta Region; and

    ii. up to 5 points for projects that seek to help rural communities build robust and sustainable economies through strategic investment in infrastructure, partnerships and innovation. Eligible applicants who want to be considered for discretionary points must discuss how their workplan and budget supports one or more of the five following key strategies:

    • Achieving e-Connectivity for Rural America;

    • Improving Quality of Life;

    • Supporting a Rural Workforce;

    • Harnessing Technological Innovation; and

    • Economic Development

    2. Review and Selection Process

    The State Offices will review applications to determine if they are eligible for assistance based on requirements in this Notice, and other applicable Federal regulations. If determined eligible, your application will be scored by a panel of USDA employees in accordance with the point allocation specified in this Notice. The review panel will convene to reach a consensus on the scores for each of the eligible applications. The Administrator may choose to award up to 10 Administrator discretionary points based on criterion (e) in section E.1. of this Notice. These points will be added to the cumulative score for a total possible score of 110. Applications will be funded in highest ranking order until the funding limitation has been reached. Applications that cannot be fully funded may be offered partial funding at the Agency's discretion. If your application is ranked and not funded, it will not be carried forward into the next competition.

    F. Federal Award Administration Information 1. Federal Award Notices

    If you are selected for funding, you will receive a signed notice of Federal award by postal mail, containing instructions on requirements necessary to proceed with execution and performance of the award.

    If you are not selected for funding, you will be notified in writing via postal mail and informed of any review and appeal rights. Funding of successfully appealed applications will be limited to available FY 2018 funding.

    2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements

    Additional requirements that apply to grantees selected for this in program can be found in 2 CFR parts 25, 170, 180, 200, 400, 415, 417, 418, and 421; and 48 CFR 31.2, and successor regulations to these parts. All recipients of Federal financial assistance are required to report information about first-tier subawards and executive compensation (see 2 CFR part 170). You will be required to have the necessary processes and systems in place to comply with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act reporting requirements (see 2 CFR 170.200(b), unless you are exempt under 2 CFR 170.110(b)). These regulations may be obtained at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/index.html.

    The following additional requirements apply to grantees selected for this program:

    • Agency approved Grant Agreement.

    • Letter of Conditions.

    • Form RD 1940-1, “Request for Obligation of Funds.”

    • Form RD 1942-46, “Letter of Intent to Meet Conditions.”

    • Form AD-1047, “Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, and Other Responsibility Matters—Primary Covered Transactions.”

    • Form AD-1048, “Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary Exclusion-Lower Tier Covered Transactions.”

    • Form AD-1049, “Certification Regarding a Drug-Free Workplace Requirement (Grants).”

    • Form AD-3031, “Assurance Regarding Felony Conviction or Tax Delinquent Status for Corporate Applicants.” Must be signed by corporate applicants who receive an award under this Notice.

    • Form RD 400-4, “Assurance Agreement.”

    • RD Instruction 1940-Q, Exhibit A-1, “Certification for Contracts, Grants and Loans.”

    • SF-LLL, “Disclosure of Lobbying Activities” if applicable.

    3. Reporting

    After grant approval and through grant completion, you will be required to provide the following:

    a. A SF-425, “Federal Financial Report,” and a project performance report will be required on a semiannual basis (due 30 working days after end of the semiannual period). For the purposes of this grant, semiannual periods end on June 30 and December 31. The project performance reports shall include a comparison of actual accomplishments to the objectives established for that period;

    b. Reasons why established objectives were not met, if applicable;

    c. Reasons for any problems, delays, or adverse conditions, if any, which have affected or will affect attainment of overall project objectives, prevent meeting time schedules or objectives, or preclude the attainment of particular objectives during established time periods. This disclosure shall be accompanied by a statement of the action taken or planned to resolve the situation; and

    d. Objectives and timetable established for the next reporting period.

    e. Provide a final project and financial status report within 90 days after the expiration or termination of the grant.

    f. Provide outcome project performance reports and final deliverables.

    G. Agency Contacts

    If you have questions about this Notice, please contact the State Office as identified in the ADDRESSES section of this Notice. You are also encouraged to visit the application website for application tools, including an application template. The website address is: http://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/delta-health-care-services-grants.

    H. Other Information Nondiscrimination Statement

    In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident.

    Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English.

    To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at: http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by:

    (1) Mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410;

    (2) Fax: (202) 690-7442; or

    (3) Email: [email protected].

    Dated: August 16, 2018. Bette B. Brand, Administrator, Rural Business-Cooperative Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18682 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-XY-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Rural Utilities Service Information Collection Activity; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Rural Utilities Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

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

    DATES:

    Comments on this notice must be received by October 29, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Michele Brooks, Team Lead, Rural Development Innovation Center—Regulatory Team, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, STOP 1522, Room 5162, South Building, Washington, DC 20250-1522. Telephone: (202) 690-1078. Email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) regulation (5 CFR 1320) implementing provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13) requires that interested members of the public and affected agencies have an opportunity to comment on information collection and recordkeeping activities (see 5 CFR 1320.8(d)). This notice identifies an information collection that RUS is submitting to OMB for extension.

    Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments may be sent to: Michele Brooks, Team Lead, Rural Development Innovation Center—Regulatory Team, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, STOP 1522, Room 5162, South Building, Washington, DC 20250-1522. Telephone: (202) 690-1078. Email [email protected]

    Title: 7 CFR part 1717, subpart Y, Settlement of Debt Owed by Electric Borrowers.

    OMB Control Number: 0572-0116.

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

    Abstract: The Rural Utilities Service makes mortgage loans and loan guarantees to electric systems to provide and improve electric service in rural areas pursuant to the Rural Electrification Act of 1936, as amended (7 U.S.C. 901 et seq.)(RE Act). This information collection requirement stems from passage of Public Law 104-127, on April 4, 1996, which amended section 331(b) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1921 et seq.) to extend to RUS the Secretary of Agriculture's authority to settle debts with respect to loans made or guaranteed by RUS. Only those electric borrowers that are unable to fully repay their debts to the Government and who apply to RUS for relief will be affected by this information collection. The collection will require only that information which is essential for determining: The need for debt settlement; the amount of relief that is needed; the amount of debt that can be repaid; the scheduling of debt repayment; and, the range of opportunities for enhancing the amount of debt that can be recovered. The information to be collected will be similar to that which any prudent lender would require to determine whether debt settlement is required and the amount of relief that is needed. Since the need for relief is expected to vary substantially from case to case, so will the required information collection.

    Estimate of Burden: Public reporting for this collection of information is estimated to average 1,000 hours per response.

    Respondents: Not-for-profit institutions and other businesses.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 1.

    Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 1.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 1,000 hours.

    Copies of this information collection can be obtained from Thomas P. Dickson, Program Development and Regulatory Analysis at (202) 690-4492.

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

    Dated: August 23, 2018. Christopher A. McLean, Acting Administrator, Rural Utilities Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18717 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Correction: Notice of Public Meeting of the Ohio Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights AGENCY:

    U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Correction; announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission on Civil Rights published a document August 16, 2018, announcing an upcoming Ohio Advisory Committee meeting. The document contained an incorrect address to the meeting.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Melissa Wojnaroski, DFO, at [email protected] or 312-353-8311.

    Correction

    In the Federal Register of August 16, 2018, in FR Doc. 2018-17706, on page 40745 in the first column, delete the “Address” and replace it with Cleveland State University, Fenn Tower, 1983 E 24th Street, Room 303, Cleveland, OH 44115.

    Dated: August 24, 2018. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18750 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 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: Economic Development Administration (EDA or Agency).

    Title: Application for Investment Assistance.

    OMB Control Number: 0610-0094.

    Form Number(s): ED-900, ED-900A, ED-900B, ED-900C, ED-900D, ED-900E, ED-900F, ED-900P.

    Type of Request: Regular submission; revision of a currently approved collection.

    Number of Respondents: 1672.

    Average Hours per Response: 13 hours, 28 minutes.

    Burden Hours: 22,552.2.

    Application type Estimated number of
  • responses
  • Average time estimate Total hours
    Proposal Submission for Non-Construction Applicants 448 4.8 2,150.4 Proposal Submission for Construction Applicants 263 4.2 1,104.6 Full Application Submission for Construction Applicants 99 43.0 4,257 Full Application Submission All Other EDA Programs 737 17.1 12,602.7 Full Application Submission for Non-Profit Applicants 125 19.5 2,437.5 TOTAL 1672 22,552.2

    Needs and Uses: In order for EDA to evaluate whether proposed projects satisfy eligibility and programmatic requirements contained in EDA's authorizing legislation, the Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965, as amended (42 U.S.C. 3121 et seq.) (PWEDA), Section 27 of the Stevenson-Wydler Act, EDA's accompanying regulations codified in 13 CFR Chapter III, and the applicable Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO), EDA must collect specific data from its grant applicants. EDA is requesting to revise and extend the currently approved suite of ED-900 application forms.

    Affected Public: Not-for-profit institutions; Federal government; State, local, or Tribal government; Business or other for-profit organizations.

    Frequency: During application for an EDA award.

    Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.

    This information collection request may be viewed at 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 faxed to (202) 395-5806.

    Sheleen Dumas, Departmental Lead PRA Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18633 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-34-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: Economic Development Administration (EDA or Agency).

    Title: Requirements for Approved Construction Investments.

    OMB Control Number: 0610-0096.

    Form Number(s): None.

    Type of Request: Regular submission (revision and extension of a currently approved information collection).

    Number of Respondents: 3,500.

    Average Hours per Response: 2 hours.

    Burden Hours: 7,000 hours.

    Type of submission Number of submissions Hours per submission Total estimated hours 500 open construction grants 7 submissions/year 2 7,000 hours/year.

    Needs and Uses: EDA may award assistance for construction projects through its Public Works and Economic Adjustment Assistance (EAA) Programs. Public Works Program investments help support the construction or rehabilitation of essential public infrastructure and facilities necessary to generate or retain private sector jobs and investments, attract private sector capital, and promote vibrant economic ecosystems, regional competitiveness, and innovation. The EAA Program provides a wide range of technical, planning, and infrastructure assistance in regions experiencing adverse economic changes that may occur suddenly or over time.

    EDA is seeking an extension of the series of checklists and templates (formerly referred to as the “bluebook”) that constitute EDA's post-approval construction tools and the Standard Terms and Conditions for Construction Projects. These checklists and templates, as well as any special conditions incorporated into the terms and conditions at the time of award, supplement the requirements that apply to EDA-funded construction projects.

    Affected Public: Current recipients of EDA construction (Public Works or Economic Assistance Adjustment) awards, to include (1) cities or other political subdivisions of a state, including a special purpose unit of state or local government engaged in economic or infrastructure development activities, or a consortium of political subdivisions; (2) states; (3) institutions of higher education or a consortium of institutions of higher education; (4) public or private non-profit organizations or associations; (5) District Organizations; and (6) Indian Tribes or a consortia of Indian Tribes.

    Frequency: Some are one time only and others are periodic.

    Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.

    This information collection request may be viewed at 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. 2018-18631 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-34-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: Economic Development Administration (EDA or Agency).

    Title: Request to Amend an Investment Award and Project Service Maps.

    OMB Control Number: 0610-0102.

    Form Number(s): None.

    Type of Request: Regular submission (extension of a currently approved information collection).

    Number of Respondents: 632 (600 requests for amendments to construction awards, 30 requests for amendments to non-construction awards, 2 project service maps).

    Average Hours per Response: 2 hours for an amendment to a construction award, 1 hour for an amendment to a non-construction award, 6 hours for a project service map.

    Burden Hours: 1,242 hours.

    Type of request Number of
  • requests
  • Estimated hours per request Estimated
  • burden hours
  • Requests for amendments to construction awards 600 2 hours/request preparation 1,200 Requests for amendment to non-construction awards 30 1 hour/request 30 Project service maps 2 6 hours/map 12 Total 1,242

    Needs and Uses: A recipient must submit a written request to EDA to amend an investment award and provide such information and documentation as EDA deems necessary to determine the merit of altering the terms of an award (see 13 CFR 302.7(a)). EDA may require a recipient to submit a project service map and information from which to determine whether services are provided to all segments of the region being assisted (see 13 CFR 302.16(c)).

    Affected Public: Current recipients of EDA construction (Public Works or Economic Adjustment) assistance, to include (1) cities or other political subdivisions of a state, including a special purpose unit of state or local government engaged in economic or infrastructure development activities, or a consortium of political subdivisions; (2) states; (3) institutions of higher education or a consortium of institutions of higher education; (4) public or private non-profit organizations or associations; (5) District Organizations; and (6) Indian Tribes or a consortia of Indian Tribes and (7) (for training, research, and technical assistance awards only) individuals and for-profit businesses.

    Frequency: Periodically, as needed.

    Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.

    This information collection request may be viewed at 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 faxed to (202) 395-5806.

    Sheleen Dumas, Departmental Lead PRA Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18634 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-34-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    The Department of Commerce (DOC) 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: Economic Development Administration (EDA or Agency).

    Title: Comprehensive Economic Development Strategies.

    OMB Control Number: 0610-0093.

    Form Number(s): None.

    Type of Request: Regular submission (extension of a currently approved information collection).

    Number of Respondents: 527.

    Average Hours per Response: 480 hours for the initial CEDS for a District organization or other planning organization funded by EDA; 160 hours for the CEDS revision required at least every 5 years from an EDA-funded District or other planning organization; 40 hours per applicant for EDA Public Works or Economic Adjustment Assistance with a project deemed by EDA to merit further consideration that is not located in an EDA-funded District.

    Burden Hours: 31,640.

    Type of response Number of
  • responses
  • Hours per
  • response
  • Total
  • estimated
  • time
  • (hours)
  • Initial CEDS 3 480 hours/initial CEDS 1,440 Revised CEDS 77 160 hours/revised CEDS 12,320 CEDS Updates/Performance Reports 385 40 hours/report 15,400 CEDS by applicants not in EDA-funded District 62 40 hours 2,480 hours. Total 31,640

    Needs and Uses: In order to effectively administer and monitor its economic development assistance programs, EDA collects certain information from applications for, and recipients of, EDA investment assistance. The collection of this information is required to ensure the recipient is complying with EDA's CEDS requirements. A CEDS is required for an eligible applicant to qualify for an EDA investment assistance under its Public Works, Economic Adjustment, and certain planning programs, and is a prerequisite for a region's designation by EDA as an Economic Development District (see 13 CFR 303, 305.2, and 307.2 of EDA's regulations).

    A CEDS emerges from a continuing planning process developed and driven by a public sector planning organization by engaging a broad-based and diverse set of stakeholders to address the economic problems and potential of a region. The CEDS should include information about how and to what extent stakeholder input and support was solicited. Information on how the planning organization collaborated with its diverse set of stakeholders (including the public sector, private interests, non-profits, educational institutions, and community organizations) in the development of the CEDS should be included. In accordance with the regulations governing the CEDS (see 13 CFR 303.7), a CEDS must contain a summary background, a SWOT Analysis, Strategic Direction/Action Plan, and an Evaluation Framework. In addition, the CEDS must incorporate the concept of economic resilience (i.e., the ability to avoid, withstand, and recover from economic shifts, natural disasters, etc.). EDA is not proposing any changes to the current information collection request.

    Affected Public: Not-for-profit institutions; State, local or Tribal government; Business or other for-profit organizations.

    Frequency: At least every 5 years, as explained above.

    Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.

    This information collection request may be viewed at 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 faxed to (202) 395-5806.

    Sheleen Dumas, Departmental Lead PRA Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18635 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-34-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: Economic Development Administration (EDA or Agency).

    Title: Property Management.

    OMB Control Number: 0610-0103.

    Form Number(s): None.

    Type of Request: Regular submission; Extension of a currently approved information collection.

    Number of Respondents: 150 (54 incidental use requests; 96 for requests to release EDA's Property interest).

    Average Hours per Response: 2 hours and 45 minutes.

    Burden Hours: 413.

    Type of request Number of
  • requests
  • (estimated)
  • Hours per
  • request
  • (estimated)
  • Total
  • estimated
  • burden
  • hours
  • Incidental use request 54 2.75 148.5 Release request 96 2.75 264 Total 412.5

    Needs and Uses: A recipient must request in writing EDA's approval to undertake an incidental use of property acquired or improved with EDA's investment assistance (see 13 CFR 314.3).

    If a recipient wishes EDA to release its real property or tangible personal property interests before the expiration of the property's estimated useful life, the recipient must submit a written request to EDA and disclose to EDA the intended future use of the real property or the tangible personal property for which the release is requested (see 13 CFR 314.10). This collection of information allows EDA to determine whether to release its real property or tangible personal property interests.

    Affected Public: Current recipients of EDA construction (Public Works or Economic Adjustment Assistance) awards, to include (1) cities or other political subdivisions of a state, including a special purpose unit of state or local government engaged in economic or infrastructure development activities, or a consortium of political subdivisions; (2) states; (3) institutions of higher education or a consortium of institutions of higher education; (4) public or private non-profit organizations or associations; (5) District Organizations; and (6) Indian Tribes or a consortia of Indian Tribes.

    Frequency: Ad hoc submission (only when a recipient makes a request).

    Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.

    This information collection request may be viewed at 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 faxed to (202) 395-5806.

    Sheleen Dumas, Departmental Lead PRA Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18632 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-34-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of Industry and Security Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Chemical Weapons Convention Provisions of the Export Administration Regulations AGENCY:

    Bureau of Industry and Security.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be submitted on or before October 29, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all written comments to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Room 6616, Washington, DC 20230 (or via the internet at [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to Mark Crace, BIS ICB Liaison, (202) 482-8093 or at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Abstract

    The Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) is a multilateral arms control treaty that seeks to achieve an international ban on chemical weapons (CW). The CWC prohibits, the use, development, production, acquisition, stockpiling, retention, and direct or indirect transfer of chemical weapons. This collection implements the following export provision of the treaty in the Export Administration Regulations:

    Schedule 1 notification and report: Under Part VI of the CWC Verification Annex, the United States is required to notify the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), the international organization created to implement the CWC, at least 30 days before any transfer (export/import) of Schedule 1 chemicals to another State Party. The United States is also required to submit annual reports to the OPCW on all transfers of Schedule 1 Chemicals.

    Schedule 3 End-Use Certificates: Under Part VIII of the CWC Verification Annex, the United States is required to obtain End-Use Certificates for exports of Schedule 3 chemicals to States that are not Party to the CWC to ensure the exported chemicals are only used for the purposes not prohibited under the Convention.

    II. Method of Collection

    Submitted electronically or on paper.

    III. Data

    OMB Control Number: 0694-0117.

    Form Number(s): Not applicable.

    Type of Review: Regular submission.

    Affected Public: Business or other for-profit organizations.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 70.

    Estimated Time per Response: 36 minutes.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 42 hours.

    Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $0.

    Legal Authority: CWC Implementation Act (Pub. L. 105-277, Division I), Executive Order 13128, DOC's CWC Regulation (15 CFR 710, et seq.)

    IV. Request for Comments

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

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

    Sheleen Dumas, Departmental Lead PRA Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18636 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-07-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [Application No. 14-4A004] Export Trade Certificate of Review ACTION:

    Notice of Issuance of an Amended Export Trade Certificate of Review to DFA of California, Application No. 14-4A004.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Department of Commerce issued an amended Export Trade Certificate of Review to DFA of California (“DFA”) on August 21, 2018.

    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. Sections 4001-21) authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to issue Export Trade Certificates of Review. The regulations implementing Title III are found at 15 CFR part 325 (2018). The U.S. Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration, Office of Trade and Economic Analysis (“OTEA”) is issuing this notice pursuant to 15 CFR 325.6(b), which requires the Secretary of Commerce to publish a summary of the issuance in the Federal Register. Under Section 305(a) of the Export Trading Company Act (15 U.S.C. 4012(b)(1)) and 15 CFR 325.11(a), any person aggrieved by the Secretary's determination may, within 30 days of the date of this notice, bring an action in any appropriate district court of the United States to set aside the determination on the grounds that the determination is erroneous.

    Description of Certified Conduct

    DFA's Export Trade Certificate of Review has been amended to:

    1. Add the following new Member of the Certificate within the meaning of section 325.2(1) of the Regulations (15 CFR 325.2(1)): John B. SanFilippo & Son, Inc.

    DFA's amendment of its Export Trade Certificate of Review results in the following membership list:

    1. Alpine Pacific Nut Company, Hughson, CA 2. Andersen & Sons Shelling, Vina, CA 3. Avanti Nut Company, Inc., Stockton, CA 4. Berberian Nut Company, LLC, Chico, CA 5. Carriere Family Farms, Inc., Glenn, CA 6. California Almond Packers and Exporters, Inc. (CAPEX), Corning CA 7. California Walnut Company, Inc., Los Molinos, CA 8. Chico Nut Company, Chico, CA 9. Continente Nut LLC, Oakley, CA 10. C. R. Crain & Sons, Inc., Los Molinos, CA 11. Crain Walnut Shelling, Inc., Los Molinos, CA 12. Diamond Foods, LLC, Stockton, CA 13. Empire Nut Company, Colusa, CA 14. Fig Garden Packing, Inc., Fresno, CA 15. Gold River Orchards, Inc., Escalon, CA 16. Grower Direct Nut Company, Hughson, CA 17. Guerra Nut Shelling Company, Hollister, CA 18. Hill View Packing Company Inc., Gustine, CA 19. John B. SanFilippo & Son, Inc. 20. Mariani Nut Company, Winters, CA 21. Mariani Packing Company, Inc., Vacaville, CA 22. Mid Valley Nut Company Inc., Hughson, CA 23. Morada Nut Company, LP, Stockton, CA 24. National Raisin Company, Fowler, CA 25. O-G Nut Company, Stockton, CA 26. Omega Walnut, Inc., Orland, CA 27. Pearl Crop, Inc., Stockton, CA 28. Poindexter Nut Company, Selma, CA 29. Prima Noce Packing, Linden, CA 30. RPC Packing Inc., Porterville, CA 31. Sacramento Packing, Inc., Yuba City, CA 32. Sacramento Valley Walnut Growers, Inc., Yuba City, CA 33. San Joaquin Figs, Inc., Fresno, CA 34. Shoei Foods USA Inc., Olivehurst, CA 35. Stapleton-Spence Packing, Gridley, CA 36. Sun-Maid Growers of California, Kingsburg, CA 37. Sunsweet Growers Inc., Yuba City, CA 38. Taylor Brothers Farms, Inc., Yuba City, CA 39. T.M. Duche Nut Company, Inc., Orland, CA 40. Wilbur Packing Company, Inc., Live Oak, CA 41. Valley Fig Growers, Fresno, CA Dated: August 22, 2018. Joseph Flynn, Office of Trade and Economic Analysis, International Trade Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18686 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DR-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [Docket No.: 180806732-8732-01] Trade Fair Certification (TFC) Program: Notice of Change of Application Deadline and Mailing Address AGENCY:

    International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of change of application deadline and mailing address.

    SUMMARY:

    The United States Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration, is updating the Trade Fair Certification (TFC) program established under 22 U.S.C. 2455(f) to revise the application mailing address and the deadline for application submission for the Program. The updated TFC program guidelines can be found at: https://2016.export.gov/tradefairs/eg_main_018560.asp.

    DATES:

    Applicable on August 29, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Applications for TFC consideration should be mailed via preferred courier method to: Vidya Desai, Trade Fair Certification, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Mailstop 52024, Washington, DC 20230, Phone: 202-482-2311.

    To ensure timely delivery of your application, please also email your application to: [email protected].

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Vidya Desai, Senior Advisor, Trade Events, Office of Trade Promotion Programs, U.S. Department of Commerce, [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    New Mailing Address: The Office of Trade Promotion Programs, which administers the TFC program for the U.S. Department of Commerce, has moved its physical office location from the Ronald Reagan Building to the main Herbert C. Hoover Commerce Building located at 1401 Constitution Ave. NW. This change is reflected on the website at: https://2016.export.gov/tradefairs/eg_main_018561.asp.

    Revised Application Deadline: The TFC program is revising the deadline for applying for certification from 270 days prior to the start date of the show to 180 days prior to the start date of the trade show for which the application is being submitted. In addition, should applications not be received at least 180 days prior to the start date of the show, the TFC program will allow for a grace period of 5 business days to receive the application.

    This change is reflected on the website at: https://2016.export.gov/tradefairs/eg_main_018559.asp and https://2016.export.gov/tradefairs/eg_main_018559.asp.

    William Ross, Supervisory International Trade Specialist/Team Leader, Office of Trade Promotion Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18617 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DR-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-970] Multilayered Wood Flooring From the People's Republic of China: Amendment to Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Second Amended Final Determination and Amendment to Notice of Third Amended Final Determination of the Antidumping Duty Investigation AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    On August 15, 2018, the United States Court of International Trade (CIT or Court) amended its July 3, 2018, final judgment in Changzhou Hawd Flooring Co., et al. v. United States, which sustained, in part, the final results of remand redetermination pursuant to court order by the Department of Commerce (Commerce) pertaining to the less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation on multilayered wood flooring (MLWF) from the People's Republic of China (China). On July 25, 2018, Commerce notified the public that the CIT's July 3, 2018, final judgment in the case was not in harmony with Commerce's final determination in the LTFV investigation of MLWF from China, and, pursuant to the CIT's July 3, 2018, final judgment, Commerce issued an amended final determination excluding Dunhua City Jisen Wood Industry Co., Ltd. (Dunhua City Jisen), Fine Furniture (Shanghai) Limited (Fine Furniture), and Armstrong Wood Products (Kunshan) Co., Ltd. (Armstrong Wood) from the antidumping duty (AD) order. Pursuant to the CIT's August 15, 2018, amendment to its July 3, 2018, final judgment, we are excluding Double F Limited from the AD order.

    DATES:

    Applicable July 13, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Aleksandras Nakutis, Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3147.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    As explained in further detail in the Notice of Court Decision and Notice of Third Amended Final Determination, 1 on July 3, 2018, the CIT sustained, in part, Commerce's fifth remand redetermination.2 In particular, the CIT sustained Commerce's determination not to terminate the AD order 3 because the order was imposed, in part, based on indirect evidence of dumping by the China-wide entity, a finding which was not challenged.4 With respect to the separate rate plaintiffs, the CIT ordered exclusion from the order for three separate respondents that sought voluntary examination in the investigation, but were denied: Dunhua City Jisen, Fine Furniture, and Armstrong Wood. The CIT held that Commerce's application of the exclusion regulation, 19 CFR 351.204(e)(1), was arbitrary with respect to these respondents.5 The CIT sustained Commerce's determination not to exclude the remaining separate rate plaintiffs that did not seek voluntary examination in the investigation.6

    1See Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony with the Second Amended Final Determination and Notice of Third Amended Final Determination of the Antidumping Duty Investigation, 83 FR 35217 (July 25, 2018) (Notice of Court Decision and Notice of Third Amended Final Determination). See also Baroque Timber Indus. (Zhongshan) Co. v. United States, 971 F. Supp. 2d 1333, 1336 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2014); Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Order, Baroque Timber Industries (Zhongshan) Company, Limited, et al. v. United States, dated November 14, 2013 (First Remand Redetermination); Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Order, Baroque Timber Industries (Zhongshan) Company, Limited, et al. v. United States, dated May 30, 2014 (Second Remand Redetermination); Changzhou Hawd Flooring Co. v. United States, 77 F. Supp. 3d 1351 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2015); Changzhou Hawd Flooring Co. v. United States, 848 F.3d 1006, 1008 (Fed. Cir. 2017); Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Order, Changzhou Hawd Flooring Co., Ltd., et al. v. United States, dated October 16, 2014 (Third Remand Redetermination); Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Order, Changzhou Hawd Flooring Co., Ltd., et al. v. United States, dated March 24, 2015 (Fourth Remand Redetermination); Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Order, Court No. 12-00020, dated February 25, 2017 (Fifth Remand Redetermination).

    2See Changzhou Hawd Flooring Co., et al. v. United States, Ct. No. 12-20, Slip Op. 18-82 (Ct. Int'l Trade July 3, 2018).

    3See Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of China: Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order, 76 FR 76690 (December 8, 2011) (First Amended Final Determination and Order).

    4See Slip Op. 18-82 at 11-12.

    5Id. at 16.

    6Id. at 15-16.

    Pursuant to the CIT's July 3, 2018, final judgment, on July 25, 2018, Commerce issued the Notice of Court Decision and Notice of Third Amended Final Determination, which explained that the CIT's July 3, 2018, final judgment was a final decision of that court that is not in harmony with the Second Amended Final Determination, and excluded Dunhua City Jisen, Fine Furniture, and Armstrong Wood from the AD order.7

    7See Notice of Court Decision and Notice of Third Amended Final Determination, 83 FR at 35219.

    On August 15, 2018, in response to an unopposed motion filed by Fine Furniture, the CIT amended its July 3, 2018, final judgment, and ordered the exclusion of Fine Furniture's affiliate, Double F Limited, a party previously collapsed with Fine Furniture into a single entity,8 from the AD order.9 This notice is published in accordance with the CIT's August 15, 2018, order, and amends Commerce's July 25, 2018, Notice of Court Decision and Notice of Third Amended Final Determination to exclude Double F Limited, along with Fine Furniture, Donghua City Jisen, and Armstrong Wood.

    8See Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2011-2012, 79 FR 26712 (May 9, 2014); unchanged in Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of China: Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty Review; 2011-2012, 79 FR 35314 (June 20, 2014).

    9See Changzhou Hawd Flooring Co., et al. v. United States, Ct. No. 12-20, Dkt. No. 199 (Ct. Int'l Trade Aug. 15 2018).

    Amendment to Timken Notice

    In its decision in Timken, 10 as clarified by Diamond Sawblades, 11 the United States Court for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) held that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), Commerce must publish a notice of a court decision that is not “in harmony” with Commerce's determination and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a “conclusive” court decision. The CIT's August 15, 2018, amendment to its July 3, 2018, final judgment ordering the exclusion of Double F Limited constitutes a final decision of that court that is not in harmony with the Second Amended Final Determination. This notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken.

    10See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken).

    11See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010).

    Amendment to Third Amended Final Determination

    Pursuant to the CIT's August 15, 2018, order, we are amending the Notice of Court Decision and Notice of Third Amended Final Determination to exclude Double F Limited from the AD order. Section 735(c)(2)(A)-(B) of the Act instructs Commerce to terminate suspension of liquidation and to release any bond or other security, and refund any cash deposit, in the event of a negative determination. Here, suspension of liquidation must continue during the pendency of the appeals process (in accordance with Timken and as discussed above), and, therefore, we will continue to instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) at this time to (A) continue suspension at a cash deposit rate of zero percent until instructed otherwise; and (B) release any bond or other security, and refund any cash deposit made pursuant to the order by Double F Limited. In the event that the CIT's ruling is not appealed, or appealed and upheld by the CAFC, Commerce will instruct CBP to terminate the suspension of liquidation and to liquidate those unliquidated entries of subject merchandise without regard to antidumping duties.

    This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 516A(e)(1), 735, and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: August 24, 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. 2018-18725 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Science Advisory Board; Solicitation for Members of the NOAA Science Advisory Board AGENCY:

    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR), Department of Commerce (DOC).

    ACTION:

    Notice of solicitation for members of the NOAA Science Advisory Board.

    SUMMARY:

    NOAA is soliciting nominations for members of the NOAA Science Advisory Board (SAB). The SAB is the only Federal Advisory Committee with the responsibility to advise the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans, Atmosphere, and NOAA Administrator on long- and short-range strategies for research, education, and application of science to resource management and environmental assessment and prediction. The SAB consists of approximately fifteen members reflecting the full breadth of NOAA's areas of responsibility and assists NOAA in maintaining a complete and accurate understanding of scientific issues critical to the agency's missions.

    DATES:

    Nominations should be sent to the web address specified below and must be received by October 15, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Applications should be submitted electronically to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. Cynthia Decker, Executive Director, Science Advisory Board, NOAA, Rm. 11230, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910. (Phone: 301-734-1156, Fax: 301-713-1459, Email: [email protected]); or visit the NOAA SAB website at http://www.sab.noaa.gov.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    At this time, individuals are sought with expertise in cloud computing, artificial intelligence and data management; weather modeling and data assimilation; remote/autonomous sensing technology; ocean exploration science and technology; and `omics science. Individuals with expertise in other NOAA mission areas are also welcome to apply.

    Composition and Points of View: The Board will consist of approximately fifteen members, including a Chair, designated by the Under Secretary in accordance with FACA requirements.

    Members will be appointed for three-year terms, renewable once, and serve at the discretion of the Under Secretary. If a member resigns before the end of his or her first term, the vacancy appointment shall be for the remainder of the unexpired term, and shall be renewable twice if the unexpired term is less than one year. Members will be appointed as special government employees (SGEs) and will be subject to the ethical standards applicable to SGEs. Members are reimbursed for actual and reasonable travel and per diem expenses incurred in performing such duties but will not be reimbursed for their time. As a Federal Advisory Committee, the Board's membership is required to be balanced in terms of viewpoints represented and the functions to be performed as well as the interests of geographic regions of the country and the diverse sectors of U.S. society.

    The SAB meets in person three times each year, exclusive of teleconferences or subcommittee, task force, and working group meetings. Board members must be willing to serve as liaisons to SAB working groups and/or participate in periodic reviews of the NOAA Cooperative Institutes and overarching reviews of NOAA's research enterprise.

    Nominations: Interested persons may nominate themselves or third parties.

    Applications: An application is required to be considered for Board membership, regardless of whether a person is nominated by a third party or self-nominated. The application package must include: (1) The nominee's full name, title, institutional affiliation, and contact information; (2) the nominee's area(s) of expertise; (3) a short description of his/her qualifications relative to the kinds of advice being solicited by NOAA in this Notice; and (4) a current resume (maximum length four [4] pages).

    Dated: August 23, 2018. David Holst, Chief Financial Officer/Administrative Officer, Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18663 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-KD-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office [Docket No. PTO-C-2018-0049] Performance Review Board (PRB) AGENCY:

    United States Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In conformance with the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, the United States Patent and Trademark Office announces the appointment of persons to serve as members of its Performance Review Board.

    ADDRESSES:

    Director, Human Capital Management, Office of Human Resources, United States Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Anne T. Mendez at (571) 272-6173.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The membership of the United States Patent and Trademark Office Performance Review Board is as follows:

    Anthony P. Scardino, Chair, Acting Deputy Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Acting Deputy Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office Frederick W. Steckler, Vice Chair, Chief Administrative Officer, United States Patent and Trademark Office Andrew H. Hirshfeld, Commissioner for Patents, United States Patent and Trademark Office Mary Boney Denison, Commissioner for Trademarks, United States Patent and Trademark Office Sean M. Mildrew, Acting Chief Financial Officer, United States Patent and Trademark Office David Chiles, Acting Chief Information Officer, United States Patent and Trademark Office Sarah T. Harris, General Counsel, United States Patent and Trademark Office Shira Perlmutter, Chief Policy Officer and Director for International Affairs, United States Patent and Trademark Office Alternates Meryl L. Hershkowitz, Deputy Commissioner for Trademark Operations, United States Patent and Trademark Office Andrew I. Faile, Deputy Commissioner for Patent Operations, United States Patent and Trademark Office Dated: August 21, 2018. Andrei Iancu, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18703 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-18-P
    COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION Agency Information Collection Activities Under OMB Review AGENCY:

    Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (“PRA”), this notice announces that the Information Collection Request (“ICR”) abstracted below has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) for review and comment. The ICR describes the nature of the information collection and its expected costs and burden.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before September 28, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of the information collection, including suggestions for reducing the burden, may be submitted directly to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (“OIRA”) in OMB, within 30 days of the publication of this notice, by either of the following methods. Please identify the comments by “OMB Control No 3038-0021.”

    By email addressed to: [email protected] or

    By mail addressed to: The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503.

    A copy of all comments submitted to OIRA should be sent to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC or Commission) by any of the following methods. The copies sent to the Commission also should refer to “OMB Control No. 3038-0021.”

    By mail addressed to: Christopher Kirkpatrick, Secretary of the Commission, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW, Washington, DC 20581;

    • By Hand Delivery/Courier to the same address; or

    • Through the Commission's website at http://comments.cftc.gov. Please follow the instructions for submitting comments through the website.

    A copy of the supporting statement for the collection of information discussed herein may be obtained by visiting http://RegInfo.gov.

    All comments must be submitted in English, or if not, accompanied by an English translation. Comments will be posted as received to http://www.cftc.gov. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. If you wish the Commission to consider information that you believe is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, a petition for confidential treatment of the exempt information may be submitted according to the procedures established in § 145.9 of the Commission's regulations.1 The Commission reserves the right, but shall have no obligation, to review, pre-screen, filter, redact, refuse or remove any or all of your submission from http://www.cftc.gov that it may deem to be inappropriate for publication, such as obscene language. All submissions that have been redacted or removed that contain comments on the merits of the ICR will be retained in the public comment file and will be considered as required under the Administrative Procedure Act and other applicable laws, and may be accessible under the Freedom of Information Act.

    1 17 CFR 145.9.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jocelyn Partridge, Special Counsel, Division of Clearing and Risk, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, (202) 418-5926; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Regulations Governing Bankruptcies of Commodity Brokers (OMB Control No. 3038-0021). This is a request for an extension of a currently approved information collection.2

    2 There are two information collections now associated with OMB Control No. 3038-0021. The first includes the reporting, recordkeeping, and third party disclosure requirements applicable to a single respondent in a commodity broker liquidation (e.g., a single commodity broker or a single trustee) within the relevant time period that are provided for in Commission regulations 190.02(a)(1), 190.02(a)(2), 190.02(b)(1), 190.02(b)(2),190.02(b)(4), 190.02(c), 190.03(a)(1), 190.03(a)(2), 190.04(b) and 190.06(b). The second information collection includes the third party disclosure requirements provided for in Commission regulations 190.06(d) and 190.10(c) which are applicable on a regular basis to multiple respondents (i.e., multiple futures commission merchants).

    Abstract: This collection of information involves the reporting, recordkeeping, and third party disclosure requirements set forth in the CFTC's bankruptcy regulations for commodity broker liquidations, 17 CFR part 190.3 These regulations apply to commodity broker liquidations under Chapter 7, Subchapter IV of the Bankruptcy Code.4

    3 These include the requirements contained in Commission regulations 190.02(a)(1), 190.02(a)(2), 190.02(b)(1), 190.02(b)(2),190.02(b)(4), 190.02(c), 190.03(a)(1), 190.03(a)(2), 190.04(b), 190.06(b), 190.06(d), and 190.10(c).

    4 11 U.S.C. 761 et seq.

    The reporting requirements include, for example, notices to the Commission regarding the filing of petitions for bankruptcy and notices to the Commission regarding the intention to transfer open commodity contracts in a commodity broker liquidation. The recordkeeping requirements include, for example, the statements of customer accounts that a trustee appointed for the purposes of a commodity broker liquidation (Trustee) must generate and adjust as set forth in the regulations. The third party disclosure requirements include, for example, the disclosure statement that a commodity broker must provide to its customers containing information regarding the manner in which customer property is treated under Part 190 of the Commission's regulations in the event of a bankruptcy and, in the event of a commodity broker liquidation, certain notices that a Trustee must provide to customers and to the persons to whom commodity contracts and specifically identifiable customer property have been or will be transferred. The information collection requirements are necessary, and will be used, to facilitate the effective, efficient, and fair conduct of liquidation proceedings for commodity brokers and to protect the interests of customers in these proceedings both directly and by facilitating the participation of the CFTC in such proceedings.

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB number. On June 25, 2018, the Commission published in the Federal Register notice of the proposed extension of this information collection and provided 60 days for public comment on the proposed extension, 83 FR 29547, June 25, 2018 (“60-Day Notice”). The Commission did not receive any relevant comments. Accordingly, it did not alter the burden estimates set forth in the 60-Day Notice in response to comments received.5

    5 As noted below, the Commission reduced the burden hours associated with the third party disclosures applicable to multiple respondents because the required documents are standardized and unchanged from the prior renewal. Accordingly, the time that the average respondent would spend drafting and sending the notice and disclosure is minimal. See infra fn.6.

    Burden Statement: The Commission notes that commodity broker liquidations occur at unpredictable and irregular intervals when particular commodity brokers become insolvent. While a commodity broker liquidation has not occurred in the past three years, the Commission took the conservative approach of maintaining the assumption contained in the previous renewal of this information collection that, on average, a commodity broker liquidation would occur every three years. The Commission generally has retained the burden hour estimates set forth in the previous information collection as there have been no interim experiences that would warrant altering those estimates. 6 The Commission further notes, however, that the information collection burden will vary in particular commodity broker liquidations depending on the size of the commodity broker, the extent to which accounts are able to be quickly transferred, and other factors specific to the circumstances of the liquidation.

    6 The Commission has retained the burden hour estimates for the applicable regulations with two limited exceptions. First, the Commission no longer assigns burden hours to the discretionary notice that a Trustee may provide to customers in an involuntary commodity broker liquidation pursuant to Commission regulation 190.02(b)(3). There have been no involuntary commodity broker liquidations and none are anticipated. Accordingly, continuing to assign burden hours to this voluntary requirement would inappropriately inflate the burden hours of this information collection. Second, the Commission has reduced the burden hours assigned to the third party disclosure requirements that are applicable to multiple respondents (as set forth in Commission regulations 190.06(d) and 190.10(c)). The notice and disclosure required by these regulations, respectively, are standardized and unchanged from the prior renewal. Accordingly, the time that the average respondent would spend drafting and sending the notice and disclosure is minimal.

    The respondent burden for this information collection is estimated to be as follows: 7

    7 Because a commodity broker liquidation is estimated to occur only once every three years, the previous information collection, in many cases, expressed the burden of the reporting, recordkeeping, and third party disclosure requirements in terms of the burden applicable to “.33” respondents. For clarity, this notice expresses such burdens in terms of those that would be imposed on one respondent during the three year period. While the applicable burden is expressed in a different way, as noted above, the burden hours generally remain unchanged.

    • Reporting: 8

    8 The reporting requirements are contained in Commission regulations 190.02(a)(1), 190.02(a)(2), and 190.06(b).

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 1.

    Estimated Annual Number of Responses per Respondent: 1.33.

    Estimated Total Annual Number of Responses: 1.33.

    Estimated Annual Number of Burden Hours per Respondent: 1.33.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 1.33.

    Type of Respondents: Commodity brokers, Trustees, and self-regulatory organizations.

    Frequency of Collection: On occasion.

    • Recordkeeping: 9

    9 The recordkeeping requirements are contained in Commission regulations 190.03(a)(1), 190.03(a)(2), and 190.04(b).

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 1.

    Estimated Annual Number of Responses per Respondent: 26,666.67.

    Estimated Total Annual Number of Responses: 26,666.67.

    Estimated Annual Number of Burden Hours per Respondent: 333.33.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 333.33.

    Type of Respondents: Trustees.

    Frequency of Collection: Daily and on occasion.

    • Third Party Disclosures Applicable to a Single Respondent: 10

    10 These third party disclosure requirements are contained in Commission regulations 190.02(b)(1), 190.02(b)(2), 190.02(b)(4), and 190.02(c).

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 1.

    Estimated Annual Number of Responses per Respondent: 6,671.32.

    Estimated Total Annual Number of Responses: 6,671.32.

    Estimated Annual Number of Burden Hours per Respondent: 1,034.63.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 1,034.63.

    Type of Respondents: Trustees.

    Frequency of Collection: On occasion.

    • Third Party Disclosures Applicable to Multiple Respondents: 11

    11See fn. 1. The Commission is setting forth a new information collection under OMB Control No. 3038-0021 to separately account for the third party disclosure requirements provided for in Commission regulations 190.06(d) and 190.06(c) that are applicable on a regular basis to multiple respondents (i.e., multiple futures commission merchants).

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 125.

    Estimated Annual Number of Responses per Respondent: 2,000.

    Estimated Total Annual Number of Responses: 250,000.

    Estimated Annual Number of Burden Hours per Respondent: 40.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 2,500.

    Type of Respondents: Futures commission merchants.

    Frequency of Collection: On occasion.

    There are no new capital or start-up or operations costs associated with this information collection, nor are there any maintenance costs associated with this information collection.

    (Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) Dated: August 24, 2018. Christopher Kirkpatrick, Secretary of the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18742 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
    CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE Privacy Act of 1974; Matching Program AGENCY:

    Corporation for National and Community Service.

    ACTION:

    Notice of computer matching program between the Corporation for National and Community Service and the Social Security Administration.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended by the Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 1988, OMB Final Guidance Interpreting the Provisions of the Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 1988, and the Serve America Act, the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) is issuing public notice of its renewal of its computer matching agreement with the Social Security Administration (SSA).

    DATES:

    You may submit comments until September 28, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments identified by the title of the information collection activity, by any of the following methods.

    (1) By mail send to: Corporation for National and Community Service, Attention: Amy Borgstrom, Associate Director for Policy, 250 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20525.

    (2) By email to: [email protected]

    (3) Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TTY-TDD) may call (202) 606-3472 between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Amy Borgstrom, Associate Director for Policy, (202) 606-6930 or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended by the Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 1988 (Pub. L. 100-503), regulates the use of computer matching agreements by federal agencies when records in a system of records are matched with other federal, state, or local government records. Among other things, it requires federal agencies involved in computer matching agreements to publish a notice in the Federal Register regarding the establishment of a computer matching agreement. The SSA will conduct a computer match with CNCS to verify Social Security numbers (SSN) and provide the citizenship status, as recorded in SSA records, of individuals applying to serve in approved national service positions and those designated to receive national service education awards under the National and Community Service Act of 1990 (NCSA). 42 U.S.C. 12501, et seq.

    Inclusive Dates of the Matching Program

    This renewed matching program will continue for 18 months after the effective date and may be extended for an additional 12 months thereafter, if the conditions specified in 5 U.S.C. 552a(o)(2)(A) and OMB Circular A-108 (December 23, 2016) have been met. In order to renew this agreement, both CNCS and SSA must certify to their respective Data Integrity Boards that: (1) The matching program will be conducted without change; and (2) the matching program has been conducted in compliance with the original agreement.

    Procedure

    CNCS will provide SSA with a data file including social security number, first and last names, and date of birth. SSA will conduct a match on the identifying information. If the match does not return a result verifying the individual's social security number and citizenship status, CNCS will notify the individual or the grant recipient program that selected the individual. The affected individual will have an opportunity to contest the accuracy of the information provided by SSA in accordance with the requirements of 5 U.S.C. 552a(p) and applicable OMB guidelines.

    The individual will have at least 30 days from the date of the notice to submit evidence demonstrating the accuracy of the social security number and/or proof that the individual is a citizen, national, or lawful permanent resident alien of the United States. CNCS will consider any timely submitted evidence to determine whether the record establishes the accuracy of the social security number and/or the United States citizenship, nationality or lawful permanent residency of the individual. If the individual fails to timely submit such evidence, CNCS will presume that the information provided by SSA is accurate. The notice will so advise the individual.

    Additional Notice

    Applicants and transferees will be informed that information provided on the application is subject to verification through a computer matching program. The application package will contain a privacy certification notice that the applicant must sign authorizing CNCS to verify the information provided. Individuals receiving a transferred Education Award will be informed at the time identifying information is requested from the transferee, that their data will be verified through this computer matching agreement. The form requesting this data will contain a privacy certification notice that the applicant must sign authorizing CNCS to verify the information provided.

    Participating Agencies: Participants in this computer matching program are the Social Security Administration (source agency) and the Corporation for National and Community Service (recipient agency).

    Authority for Conducting the Matching Program: The authority for creating this matching program is pursuant to section 1711 of the Serve America Act of 2009 (Pub. L. 111-13, April 21, 2009). The legal authority for the disclosure of SSA data under this agreement is pursuant to section 1106 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1306(b)), 5 U.S.C. 552a(b)(3) of the Privacy Act, and associated regulations and guidance.

    CNCS's legal authority to enter into this agreement is in section 146(b)(3) of the National and Community Service Act (NCSA) (42 U.S.C. 12602(a)), concerning an individual's eligibility to receive a Segal AmeriCorps Education Award from the National Service Trust upon successful completion of a term of service in an approved national service position. The authority is further articulated in section 1711 of the Serve America Act (Pub. L. 111-13), that directs CNCS to enter into a data matching agreement to verify statements made by an individual declaring that such individual is in compliance with section 146(b)(3) of the NCSA by comparing information provided by the individual with information relevant to such a declaration in the possession of another federal agency.

    Purpose(s): The computer matching agreement between CNCS and SSA enables CNCS to verify the social security numbers of most applicants for approved national service positions, and verify statements made by those applicants regarding their citizenship status according to the records that SSA has on file. SSA is not the custodian of U.S. citizenship records.

    Categories of Individuals: Each individual who applies to serve in an approved national service position, and will receive an Education Award pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 142(a) including positions in AmeriCorps State and National, AmeriCorps VISTA, AmeriCorps NCCC, Serve America Fellows, as well as individuals who are the recipient of a transferred Education Awards are subject to the matching program. At the time of application, CNCS must certify that the individual meets the citizenship eligibility criteria to serve in the position and/or receive an Education Award, i.e., is a citizen, national, or lawful permanent resident alien of the United States. Furthermore, these members must provide an accurate social security number.

    Categories of Records: The Master Files of Social Security Number Holders and SSN Applications SSA/OEEAS 60-0058, system of records last published at 74 FR 62866 (December 1, 2009) (Enumeration System) maintains records about each individual who has applied for and obtained an SSN. SSA uses information from the Enumeration System to assign SSNs. The information CNCS provides from the AmeriCorps Member Individual Account (Corporation 8) system of records will be matched against this system of records and verification results will be disclosed under the applicable routine use.

    Dated: August 13, 2018. Edward Davis, Acting Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18684 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6050-28-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Air Force Notice of Availability of Software and Documentation for Licensing AGENCY:

    Department of the Air Force, Department of Defense.

    ACTION:

    Availability of Memory Visualization software and documentation for licensing.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of the Air Force announces the availability of Memory Visualization software and related documentation, which aids digital forensics examinations of computing device memory captures for user and malware identification.

    ADDRESSES:

    Licensing interests should be sent to: Air Force Institute of Technology, Office of Research and Technology Applications, AFIT/ENR, 2950 Hobson Way, Building 641, Rm. 101c, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433; Facsimile: (937) 656-7139.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Air Force Institute of Technology, Office of Research and Technology Applications, AFIT/ENR, 2950 Hobson Way, Building 641, Rm. 101c, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433; Facsimile: (937) 656-7139, or Mr. Jeff Murray, (937) 255-3636, Ext. 4665.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    One major challenge facing digital forensics practitioners is the complicated task of acquiring an understanding of the digital data residing in electronic devices. Currently, this task requires significant experience and background to aggregate the data their tools provide from the digital artifacts. Most of the tools available present their results in text files or tree lists. It is up to the practitioner to mentally capture a global understanding of the state of the device at the time of seizure and find the items of evidentiary interest.

    The Memory Visualization software applies Information Visualization techniques to improve the analysis of digital forensic evidence from Operating System memory captures. This visualization tool presents both global and local views of the evidence based on user interactions with the graphics. The visualization also maintains connection to the data behind the visualization so that the practitioner can verify manually. The resulting visualizations provide the necessary details for verifying digital artifacts and assists in locating additional items of relevance.

    This notice is pursuant to the provisions of Section 801 of Public Law 113-66 (2014 National Defense Authorization Act).

    Henry Williams, Acting Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18731 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-10-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army Chief of Engineers Environmental Advisory Board; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Meeting AGENCY:

    Department of the Army, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Federal Advisory Committee meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Defense is publishing this notice to announce that the following Federal Advisory Committee meeting of the Chief of Engineers Environmental Advisory Board (EAB) will take place.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held from 8:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. on September 21, 2018. Public registration will begin at 8:00 a.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be conducted at the Alexander Hamilton U.S. Custom House; 1 Bowling Green; New York, NY 10004 (enter on lower level-group entrance).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Mindy M. Simmons, the Designated Federal Officer (DFO) for the committee, in writing at U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, ATTN: CECW-P, 441 G St. NW, Washington, DC 20314; by telephone at 202-761-4127; and by email at [email protected] Alternatively, contact Ms. Jeanette Gallihugh, the Alternate Designated Federal Officer (ADFO), in writing at the Institute for Water Resources, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, ATTN: CEIWR-GW, 7701 Telegraph Road, Casey Building, Alexandria, VA 22315-3868; by telephone at 703-428-64966; and by email at [email protected]The most up-to-date changes to the meeting agenda can be found on the following website: http://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/Environmental/EnvironmentalAdvisoryBoard.aspx.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This meeting is being held under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) of 1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and 41 CFR 102-3.140 and 102-3.150.

    Purpose of the Meeting: The EAB will advise the Chief of Engineers on environmental policy, identification and resolution of environmental issues and missions, and addressing challenges, problems, and opportunities in an environmentally responsible manner. The EAB is interested in written and verbal comments from the public relevant to these purposes.

    Agenda: At this meeting the agenda will include how the host USACE district is “Living the Environmental Operating Principles”; discussions on ongoing EAB work efforts, such as regional strategic planning, sustainability training, inland regional sediment management, and monitoring and adaptive management; and presentations and discussions about improving the environmental metrics used by the Army Corps of Engineers.

    Availability of Materials for the Meeting: A copy of the agenda or any updates to the agenda for the September 21, 2018 meeting will be available at the meeting. The final version will be provided at the meeting. All materials will be posted to the website after the meeting.

    Meeting Accessibility: Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended, and 41 CFR 102-3.140 through 102-3.165, and subject to the availability of space, this meeting is open to the public. Registration of members of the public who wish to attend the meeting will begin at 8:00 a.m. on the day of the meeting. Seating is limited and is on a first-to-arrive basis. Attendees will be asked to provide their name, title, affiliation, and contact information to include email address and daytime telephone number at registration. Any interested person may attend the meeting, file written comments or statements with the committee, or make verbal comments from the floor during the public meeting, at the times, and in the manner, permitted by the committee, as set forth below. Special Accommodations: The meeting venue is fully handicap accessible, with wheelchair access. Individuals requiring special accommodations to access the public meeting or seeking additional information about public access procedures, should contact Ms. Simmons, the committee DFO, or Ms. Gallihugh, the ADFO, at the email addresses or telephone numbers listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section, at least five (5) business days prior to the meeting so that appropriate arrangements can be made.

    Written Statements: Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.105(j) and 102-3.140 and section 10(a)(3) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the public or interested organizations may submit written comments or statements to the EAB about its mission and/or the topics to be addressed in this public meeting. Written comments or statements should be submitted to Ms. Simmons, the committee DFO, or Ms. Gallihugh, the committee ADFO, via electronic mail, the preferred mode of submission, at the addresses listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section in the following formats: Adobe Acrobat or Microsoft Word. The comment or statement must include the author's name, title, affiliation, address, and daytime telephone number. Written comments or statements being submitted in response to the agenda set forth in this notice must be received by the committee DFO or ADFO at least five (5) business days prior to the meeting so that they may be made available to the EAB for its consideration prior to the meeting. Written comments or statements received after this date may not be provided to the EAB until its next meeting. Please note that because the EAB operates under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, all written comments will be treated as public documents and will be made available for public inspection.

    Verbal Comments: Members of the public will be permitted to make verbal comments during the meeting only at the time and in the manner allowed herein. If a member of the public is interested in making a verbal comment at the open meeting, that individual must submit a request, with a brief statement of the subject matter to be addressed by the comment, at least three (3) business days in advance to the committee DFO or ADFO, via electronic mail, the preferred mode of submission, at the addresses listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. The committee DFO and ADFO will log each request to make a comment, in the order received, and determine whether the subject matter of each comment is relevant to the EAB's mission and/or the topics to be addressed in this public meeting. A 15-minute period near the end of meeting will be available for verbal public comments. Members of the public who have requested to make a verbal comment and whose comments have been deemed relevant under the process described above, will be allotted no more than three (3) minutes during this period, and will be invited to speak in the order in which their requests were received by the DFO and ADFO.

    Brenda S. Bowen, Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18718 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3720-58-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary [Docket ID: DOD-2018-HA-0038] Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, DoD.

    ACTION:

    30-Day information collection notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Defense has submitted to OMB for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act.

    DATES:

    Consideration will be given to all comments received by September 28, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Fred Licari, 571-372-0493, or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: TriCare DoD/CHAMPUS Medical Claim Patient's Request for Medical Payment; DD Form 2642; OMB Control Number 0720-0006.

    Type of Request: Extension.

    Number of Respondents: 830,000.

    Responses per Respondent: 1.

    Annual Responses: 830,000.

    Average Burden per Response: 15 minutes.

    Annual Burden Hours: 207,500.

    Needs and Uses: The DD-2642, “TRICARE DoD/CHAMPUS Medical Claim Patient's Request for Medical Payment” form is used by TRICARE beneficiaries to claim reimbursement for medical expenses under the TRICARE Program (formerly the Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS)). The information collected will be used by TRICARE to determine beneficiary eligibility, other health insurance liability, certification that the beneficiary has the received care, and reimbursement for medical services received.

    Affected Public: Individuals or households.

    Frequency: As required.

    Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

    OMB Desk Officer: Ms. Cortney Higgins.

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

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

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name, Docket ID number, and title for this Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.

    DoD Clearance Officer: Mr. Frederick Licari.

    Requests for copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Mr. Licari at [email protected]

    Dated: August 24, 2018. Aaron T. Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register, Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18747 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary [Docket ID: DOD-2018-OS-0037] Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, DoD.

    ACTION:

    30-Day information collection notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Defense has submitted to OMB for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act.

    DATES:

    Consideration will be given to all comments received by September 28, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Fred Licari, 571-372-0493, or [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Defense Materiel Disposition Procedures for the Sale of DoD Materiel; DRMS 1645, DRMS 2006, and SF 114-A; OMB Control Number 0704-0534.

    Type of Request: Extension.

    Number of Respondents: 72.

    Responses per Respondent: 2.63.

    Annual Responses: 189.

    Average Burden per Response: 1.23 hours.

    Annual Burden Hours: 231.75.

    Needs and Uses: This collection allows the Department of Defense (DoD) and its representatives to assess the ability of prospective purchasers to comply with applicable laws and regulations before the sale of materiel. Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service (DRMS) Form 1645, “Statement of Intent,” and Standard Form (SF) 114A, “Sale of Government Property—Item Bid Page—Sealed Bid,” are used to identify the nature of the purchaser's business, where the materials will be stored, and what the buyer's intentions are with the materiel (i.e., use the materiel as intended, re-sell to others, scrap the materiel for recovery of contents, or re-refine or re-process the materiel). These forms are used to determine if DRMS Form 2006, “Pre-Award/Post-Award On-Site Review,” will also be needed; DRMS Form 2006 allows DoD components to determine if the purchaser is capable of meeting environmental and hazardous material handling responsibilities, in compliance with CFR part 102 of Title 41. Compliance with this regulation must be ascertained before DoD components may make an award of hazardous and dangerous property.

    Affected Public: Business or other for-profit.

    Frequency: On occasion.

    Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

    OMB Desk Officer: Ms. Jasmeet Seehra.

    You may also submit comments and recommendations, identified by Docket ID number and title, by the following method: Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name, Docket ID number, and title for this Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.

    DOD Clearance Officer: Mr. Frederick Licari.

    Requests for copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Mr. Licari at [email protected]

    Aaron T. Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18746 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers Notice of Intent To Prepare Supplement II to the Final Environmental Impact Statement, Mississippi River and Tributaries (MR&T) Project, Mississippi River Mainline Levees and Channel Improvement AGENCY:

    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Intent; extension of public comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    USACE is announcing the public scoping meeting dates, times, and locations and extending the scoping comment period for the Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare Supplement II (SEIS II) to the Final Environmental Impact Statement, Mississippi River and Tributaries (MR&T) Project, Mississippi River Mainline Levees and Channel Improvement of 1976 (1976 EIS), as updated and supplemented by Supplement No. 1, Mississippi River and Tributaries Project, Mississippi River Mainline Levee Enlargement and Seepage Control of 1998 (SEIS I) to the 1976 EIS. The NOI was published in the Federal Register on July 13, 2018. The public comment period on the NOI was scheduled to end on October 1, 2018. USACE is extending the comment period by 14 days and will now consider comments received through October 15, 2018.

    DATES:

    The deadline for receipt of scoping comments is extended to October 15, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be submitted: (1) To USACE at public scoping meetings; (2) by regular U.S. Mail mailed to: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, ATTN: CEMVN-PDC-UDC, 167 North Main Street, Room B-202, Memphis, Tennessee 38103-1894; or (3) by email to: [email protected]. Please include your name and return address on the first page of your written comments. All personally identifiable information voluntarily submitted by a commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit confidential business information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For direct questions about the NEPA process and upcoming scoping meetings please contact: Mr. Mike Thron, by mail at U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, ATTN: CEMVN-PDC-UDC, 167 North Main Street, Room B-202, Memphis, Tennessee 38103-1894; by telephone at (901) 544-0708; or by email at [email protected]. Additional project and meeting information is also available at the Project website at: http://www.mvk.usace.army.mil/MRLSEIS/.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The dates, locations, and times of the public scoping meetings are:

    1. September 10, 2018 at the Holiday Inn Blytheville, 1121 East Main Street, Blytheville, Arkansas 72315 from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m.

    2. September 11, 2018 at the Vicksburg Convention Center, 1600 Mulberry Street, Vicksburg, Mississippi, 39180 from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m.

    3. September 12, 2018 at the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, Room C111, 602 North 5th Street, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, 70802 from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m.

    4. September 13, 2018 at United States Army Corps of Engineers, New Orleans District Headquarters District Assembly Room, 7400 Leake Avenue, New Orleans, Louisiana, 70118 from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m.

    Dated: August 22, 2018. Edward P. Lambert, Chief, Environmental Compliance Branch, Regional Planning and Environmental Division South.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18723 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3720-58-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY [FE Docket No. 13-147-LNG] Change in Control; Delfin LNG, LLC AGENCY:

    Office of Fossil Energy, DOE.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Office of Fossil Energy (FE) of the Department of Energy (DOE) gives notice of receipt of a Notice of Change in Control Through Indirect Equity Ownership Changes (Notice), filed July 10, 2018 by Delfin LNG, LLC (Delfin LNG) in FE Docket No. 13-147-LNG. The Notice describes changes to the corporate structure and ownership of Delfin LNG. The Notice was filed under section 3 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA).

    DATES:

    Protests, motions to intervene or notices of intervention, as applicable, and written comments are to be filed using procedures detailed in the Public Comment Procedures section no later than 4:30 p.m., Eastern time, September 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Electronic Filing by email: [email protected]

    Regular Mail: U.S. Department of Energy (FE-34), Office of Regulation and International Engagement, Office of Fossil Energy, P.O. Box 44375, Washington, DC 20026-4375.

    Hand Delivery or Private Delivery Services (e.g., FedEx, UPS, etc.): U.S. Department of Energy (FE-34), Office of Regulation and International Engagement, Office of Fossil Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 3E-042, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Larine Moore or Amy Sweeney, U.S. Department of Energy (FE-34), Office of Regulation and International Engagement, Office of Fossil Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 3E-042, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-9478; (202) 586-7893. Cassandra Bernstein or Ronald (R.J.) Colwell, U.S. Department of Energy (GC-76), Office of the Assistant General Counsel for Electricity and Fossil Energy, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-9793; (202) 586-8499. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Summary of Change in Control

    On July 10, 2018, Delfin LNG filed a Notice of Change in Control Through Indirect Equity Ownership Changes in the above-referenced docket.1 In the Notice, Delfin LNG states that it has recently undergone changes in its corporate structure and ownership. Specifically, Delfin LNG was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Fairwood Peninsula Energy (Fairwood Peninsula). An intermediary holding company, Delfin Midstream, LLC (Delfin Midstream) was subsequently established, with Fairwood Peninsula owning 100% of Delfin Midstream and Delfin Midstream owning 100% of Delfin LNG. Thereafter, Delfin Midstream was converted from a limited liability company to a corporation. In June 2018, equity shares in Delfin Midstream were sold to a variety of investors to raise additional capital. Effective June 12, 2018, Fairwood Peninsula's ownership of Delfin Midstream had been reduced from 100% to 30.7%. Two other entities (Talisman Global Alternative Master, L.P. and Talisman Global Capital Master, L.P.) also own or control 10% or more of the voting securities of Delfin Midstream. Delfin Midstream continues to own 100% of Delfin LNG.2

    1 Delfin LNG, LLC, FE Docket Nos. 13-129-LNG and 13-147-LNG, Notice of Change of Control Through Indirect Equity Ownership Changes (July 10, 2018) [hereinafter Delfin LNG Notice].

    2See id. at 2-3.

    Additional details can be found in Delfin LNG's Notice, posted on the DOE/FE website at: https://fossil.energy.gov/ng_regulation/sites/default/files/programs/Delfin_CIC_07_11_18.pdf.

    DOE/FE Evaluation

    DOE/FE will review Delfin LNG's Notice in accordance with its Procedures for Changes in Control Affecting Applications and Authorizations to Import or Export Natural Gas (CIC Procedures).3 Consistent with the CIC Procedures, this Notice addresses only the authorization granted to Delfin LNG to export liquefied natural gas (LNG) to non-free trade agreement (non-FTA) countries in DOE/FE Order No. 4028 (FE Docket No. 13-147-LNG).4 If no interested person protests the change in control and DOE takes no action on its own motion, the change in control will be deemed granted 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. If one or more protests are submitted, DOE will review any motions to intervene, protests, and answers, and will issue a determination as to whether the proposed changes in control have been demonstrated to render the underlying authorization inconsistent with the public interest.

    3 79 FR 65541 (Nov. 5, 2014).

    4 Delfin LNG's Notice also applies to its FTA authorization in FE Docket No. 13-129-LNG, but DOE/FE will respond to that portion of the Notice separately pursuant to its CIC Procedures, 79 FR 65542.

    Public Comment Procedures

    Interested persons will be provided 15 days from the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register in order to move to intervene, protest, and answer Delfin LNG's Notice. Protests, motions to intervene, notices of intervention, and written comments are invited in response to this notice only as to the change in control described in Delfin LNG's Notice, and only with respect to Delfin LNG's non-FTA authorization in DOE/FE Order No. 4028. All protests, comments, motions to intervene, or notices of intervention must meet the requirements specified by DOE's regulations in 10 CFR part 590.

    Filings may be submitted using one of the following methods: (1) Preferred method: Emailing the filing to [email protected], with the individual FE Docket Number in the title line, or Delfin LNG Change in Control in the title line to include the applicable docket in this notice; (2) mailing an original and three paper copies of the filing to the Office of Regulation and International Engagement at the address listed in ADDRESSES; or (3) hand delivering an original and three paper copies of the filing to the Office of Regulation and International Engagement at the address listed in ADDRESSES. All filings must include a reference to the individual FE Docket Number(s) in the title line, or Delfin LNG Change in Control in the title line to include all applicable docket in this notice. Please Note: If submitting a filing via email, please include all related documents and attachments (e.g., exhibits) in the original email correspondence. Please do not include any active hyperlinks or password protection in any of the documents or attachments related to the filing. All electronic filings submitted to DOE must follow these guidelines to ensure that all documents are filed in a timely manner. Any hardcopy filing submitted greater in length than 50 pages must also include, at the time of the filing, a digital copy on disk of the entire submission.

    Delfin LNG's Notice and any filed protests, motions to intervene, notices of intervention, and comments are available for inspection and copying in the Office of Regulation and International Engagement docket room, Room 3E-042, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585. The docket room is open between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    The Notice and any filed protests, motions to intervene, notices of interventions, and comments will also be available electronically by going to the following DOE/FE Web address: http://www.fe.doe.gov/programs/gasregulation/index.html.

    Signed in Washington, DC, on August 23, 2018. Amy Sweeney, Director, Division of Natural Gas Regulation, Office of Fossil Energy. [FR Doc. 2018-18728 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Orders Granting Import/Export Authority Under the Natural Gas Act During July, 2018 FE Docket Nos. Southern LNG Company, L.L.C 18-15-LNG Jordan Cove Energy Project L.P 11-127-LNG Corpus Christi Liquefaction, LLC 15-97-LNG Uniper Global Commodities North America LLC 18-73-NG; 17-83-NG Chevron U.S.A. Inc 18-74-LNG ETC Marketing, Ltd 18-75-NG Sacramento Municipal Utility District 18-76-NG J. Aron & Company LLC 18-77-NG S.D. Sunnyland Enterprises, Inc 18-47-NG Twin Eagle Resource Management, LLC 18-79-NG Vista Energy Marketing, L.P 18-81-NG Vitol Inc 18-80-NG Atlantic Power Energy Services (US) LLC 18-83-NG Gunvor USA LLC 18-84-NG;
  • 17-139-NG
  • Sabine Pass Liquefaction, LLC 18-85-LNG LYZ Solutions LLC 18-40-LNG Union Gas Limited 18-71-NG Certarus (USA) Ltd 18-88-NG Energia Azteca X, S.A. de C.V 18-86-NG
    AGENCY:

    Office of Fossil Energy, Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Notice of orders.

    SUMMARY:

    The Office of Fossil Energy (FE) of the Department of Energy gives notice that during July 2018, it issued orders granting or vacating authority to import and export natural gas, and to import and export liquefied natural gas (LNG). These orders are summarized in the attached appendix and may be found on the FE website at https://www.energy.gov/fe/listing-doefe-authorizationsorders-issued-2018-0.

    They are also available for inspection and copying in the U.S. Department of Energy (FE-34), Division of Natural Gas Regulation, Office of Regulation and International Engagement, Office of Fossil Energy, Docket Room 3E-033, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-9478. The Docket Room is open between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 23, 2018. Amy Sweeney, Director, Division of Natural Gas Regulation. Appendix

    DOE/FE Orders Granting Import/Export Authorizations 4206 07/6/18 18-15-LNG Southern LNG Company, L.L.C Order 4206 granting blanket authorization to export LNG by vessel from the Elba Island Terminal located in Chatham County, Georgia, to Free Trade Agreement and Non-free Trade Agreement Nations. 3041-A 07/20/18 11-127-LNG Jordan Cove Energy Project L.P Order 3041-A amending long-term Multi-Contract Authority to export LNG by vessel from the Proposed Jordan Cove LNG Terminal to Free Trade Agreement Nations. 3699-A 07/20/18 15-97-LNG Corpus Christi Liquefaction, LLC Order 3699-A granting Request to Vacate long-term Multi-Contract Authority to export LNG by vessel to Free Trade Agreement Nations and to Withdraw Application to export LNG by vessel to Non-free Trade Agreement Nations. 4207; 4064-A 07/20/18 18-73-NG;

  • 17-83-NG
  • Uniper Global Commodities North America LLC Order 4207 granting blanket authority to import/export natural gas from/to Canada and Vacating prior authority Order 4064. 4208 07/20/18 18-74-LNG Chevron U.S.A. Inc Order 4208 granting blanket authority to import LNG from various international sources by vessel. 4209 07/20/18 18-75-NG ETC Marketing, Ltd Order 4209 granting blanket authority to import/export natural gas from/to Mexico. 4210 07/20/18 18-76-NG Sacramento Municipal Utility District Order 4210 granting blanket authority to import natural gas from Canada. 4211 07/20/18 18-77-NG J. Aron & Company LLC Order 4211 granting blanket authority to import/export natural gas from/to Canada/Mexico. 4212 07/24/18 18-47-NG S.D. Sunnyland Enterprises, Inc Order 4212 granting blanket authority to import LNG from various international sources by vessel and to export LNG to Canada by vessel. 4213 07/24/18 18-79-NG Twin Eagle Resource Management, LLC Order 4213 granting blanket authority to import/export natural gas from/to Canada/Mexico. 4214 07/24/18 18-81-NG Vista Energy Marketing, L.P Order 4214 granting blanket authority to import natural gas from Canada. 4215 07/24/18 18-80-NG Vitol Inc Order 4215 granting blanket authority to import/export natural gas from/to Mexico. 4216 07/24/18 18-83-NG Atlantic Power Energy Services (US) LLC Order 4216 granting blanket authority to import/export natural gas from/to Canada. 4217; 4119-A 07/24/18 18-84-NG;
  • 17-139-NG
  • Gunvor US LLC Order 4217 granting blanket authority to import/export natural gas from/to Canada/Mexico and vacating prior authority Order 4119.
    4218 07/24/18 18-85-NG Sabine Pass Liquefaction, LLC Order 4218 granting blanket authority to import LNG from various international sources by vessel. 4219 07/24/18 18-40-LNG LYZ Solutions LLC Order 4219 granting blanket authority to import LNG from various international sources by vessel and to export LNG to Canada/Mexico by vessel. 4220 07/31/18 18-71-NG Union Gas Limited Order 4220 granting blanket authority to import/export natural gas from/to Canada. 4221 07/31/18 18-88-NG Certarus (USA) Ltd Order 4221 granting blanket authority to import/export natural gas from/to Canada/Mexico. 4222 07/31/18 18-86-NG Energia Azteca X, S.A. de C.V Order 4222 granting blanket authority to export natural gas to Mexico.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18729 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY [OE Docket No. EA-460] Application to Export Electric Energy; Enel Trading North America, LLC AGENCY:

    Office of Electricity, DOE.

    ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    SUMMARY:

    Enel Trading North America, LLC (ETNA or Applicant) has applied for authority to transmit electric energy from the United States to Mexico pursuant to the Federal Power Act.

    DATES:

    Comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be submitted on or before September 28, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments, protests, motions to intervene, or requests for more information should be addressed to: Office of Electricity, Mail Code: OE-20, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0350. Because of delays in handling conventional mail, it is recommended that documents be transmitted by overnight mail, by electronic mail to [email protected], or by facsimile to 202-586-8008.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Exports of electricity from the United States to a foreign country are regulated by the United States Department of Energy (DOE) pursuant to sections 301(b) and 402(f) of the Department of Energy Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7151(b) and 7172(f)) and require authorization under section 202(e) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 824a(e)).

    On August 3, 2018, DOE received an application from ETNA for authority to transmit electric energy from the United States to Mexico as a power marketer for a five-year term using existing international transmission facilities.

    In its application, the Applicant states that it “is not a franchised public utility with a transmission or distribution system, and does not have captive customers.” The electric energy that ETNA proposes to export to Mexico would be surplus energy purchased from third parties such as electric utilities and Federal power marketing agencies pursuant to voluntary agreements. The existing international transmission facilities to be utilized by the Applicant have previously been authorized by Presidential Permits issued pursuant to Executive Order 10485, as amended, and are appropriate for open access transmission by third parties.

    Procedural Matters: Any person desiring to be heard in this proceeding should file a comment or protest to the application at the address provided above. Protests should be filed in accordance with Rule 211 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (FERC's) Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211). Any person desiring to become a party to these proceedings should file a motion to intervene at the above address in accordance with FERC Rule 214 (18 CFR 385.214). Five (5) copies of such comments, protests, or motions to intervene should be sent to the address provided above on or before the date listed above.

    Comments and other filings concerning ETNA's application to export electric energy to Mexico should be clearly marked with OE Docket No. EA-460. An additional copy is to be provided to Margaret M. Bateman, Esq., Enel Green Power North America, Inc., 100 Brickstone Square, Suite 300, Andover, MA 01810.

    A final decision will be made on this application after the environmental impacts have been evaluated pursuant to DOE's National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Procedures (10 CFR part 1021) and after a determination is made by DOE that the proposed action will not have an adverse impact on the sufficiency of supply or reliability of the U.S. electric power supply system.

    Copies of this application will be made available, upon request, for public inspection and copying at the address provided above, by accessing the program website at http://energy.gov/node/11845, or by emailing Angela Troy at [email protected]

    Signed in Washington, DC, on August 23, 2018. Christopher Lawrence, Electricity Policy Analyst, Office of Electricity.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18744 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Certification Notice—254; Notice of Filing of Self-Certification of Coal Capability Under the Powerplant and Industrial Fuel Use Act AGENCY:

    Office of Electricity Delivery, DOE.

    ACTION:

    Notice of filing.

    SUMMARY:

    On July 27, 2018, Panda Hummel Station LLC, as owner and operator of a new baseload electric generating powerplant, submitted a coal capability self-certification to the Department of Energy (DOE). The FUA and regulations thereunder require DOE to publish a notice of filing of self-certification in the Federal Register.

    ADDRESSES:

    Copies of coal capability self-certification filings are available for public inspection, upon request, in the Office of Electricity, Mail Code OE-20, Room 8G-024, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Christopher Lawrence at (202) 586-5260.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On July 27, 2018, Panda Hummel Station LLC, as owner and operator of a new baseload electric generating powerplant, submitted a coal capability self-certification to the Department of Energy (DOE) pursuant to § 201(d) of the Powerplant and Industrial Fuel Use Act of 1978 (FUA), as amended, and DOE regulations in 10 CFR 501.60, 61. The FUA and regulations thereunder require DOE to publish a notice of filing of self-certification in the Federal Register. 42 U.S.C. 8311(d)(1) and 10 CFR 501.61(c). Title II of FUA, as amended (42 U.S.C. 8301 et seq.), provides that no new baseload powerplant may be constructed or operated without the capability to use coal or another alternate fuel as a primary energy source. Pursuant to the FUA, in order to meet the requirement of coal capability, the owner or operator of such a facility proposing to use natural gas or petroleum as its primary energy source shall certify to the Secretary of Energy (Secretary), prior to construction or prior to operation as a baseload powerplant, that such powerplant has the capability to use coal or another alternate fuel. Such certification establishes compliance with FUA section 201(a) as of the date it is filed with the Secretary. 42 U.S.C. 8311.

    The following owner of a proposed new baseload electric generating powerplant has filed a self-certification of coal-capability with DOE pursuant to FUA section 201(d) and in accordance with DOE regulations in 10 CFR 501.60, 61:

    Owner: Panda Hummel Station LLC. Capacity: 1,124 megawatts (MW). Plant Location: Shamokin Dam, PA 17876. In-Service Date: June 2018. Signed in Washington, DC, on August 23, 2018. Christopher Lawrence, Program Management Analyst, Office of Electricity.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18745 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Agency Information Collection Extension AGENCY:

    National Nuclear Security Administration, U.S. Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Submission for Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review; comment request.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Energy (DOE) has submitted an information collection request to the OMB for extension under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The information collection requests a three-year extension of Assistance to Foreign Atomic Energy Activities, OMB Control Number 1901-0263. The proposed collection will implement the regulatory requirements for U.S. persons engaged in the export of unclassified nuclear technology and assistance to submit reports and applications to DOE. This information collection is necessary for the Secretary of Energy to execute his legal and regulatory responsibilities pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (AEA).

    DATES:

    Comments regarding this collection must be received on or before September 28, 2018. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, please advise the OMB Desk Officer of your intention to make a submission as soon as possible. The Desk Officer may be telephoned at (202) 395-4718.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to the DOE Desk Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Room 10102, 735 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503; and

    Katie Strangis, Policy Advisor, Office of Nonproliferation and Arms Control, NA-24, National Nuclear Security Administration, Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Room 7F-075, Washington, DC 20585, Fax: (202) 586-6789, Email: [email protected] (Include “Paperwork Reduction Act” in the subject line).

    Due to potential delays in DOE's receipt and processing of mail sent through the U.S. Postal Service, DOE encourages responders to submit comments electronically to ensure timely receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Katie Strangis, Policy Advisor, Office of Nonproliferation and Arms Control, NA-24, National Nuclear Security Administration, Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Room 7F-075, Washington, DC 20585, Fax: (202) 586-6789, Email: [email protected] (Include “Paperwork Reduction Act” in the subject line).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This information collection request contains: (1) OMB No.: 1901-0263; (2) Information Collection Request Title: Assistance to Foreign Atomic Energy Activities; (3) Type of Review: Extension; (4) Purpose: This collection of information is necessary in order to provide the Secretary of Energy with the appropriate information needed to make informed determinations regarding requests to directly or indirectly engage or participate in the development or production of special nuclear material outside the United States; (5) Annual Estimated Number of Respondents: 89; (6) Annual Estimated Number of Total Responses: 596; (7) Annual Estimated Number of Burden Hours: 1,788; (8) Annual Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Burden: $178,600.

    Statutory Authority:

    Sections 57 b.(2) and 161(c) of the AEA.

    Signed in Washington, DC, on August 23, 2018. Sean Oehlbert, (Acting) Policy Director, Office of Nonproliferation and Arms Control, Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18741 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY [OE Docket No. EA-459] Application To Export Electric Energy; Mercuria Energy America, Inc. AGENCY:

    Office of Electricity, DOE.

    ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    SUMMARY:

    Mercuria Energy America, Inc. (MEAI or Applicant) has applied for authority to transmit electric energy from the United States to Mexico pursuant to the Federal Power Act.

    DATES:

    Comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be submitted on or before September 28, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments, protests, motions to intervene, or requests for more information should be addressed to: Office of Electricity, Mail Code: OE-20, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0350. Because of delays in handling conventional mail, it is recommended that documents be transmitted by overnight mail, by electronic mail to [email protected].doe.gov, or by facsimile to 202-586-8008.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Exports of electricity from the United States to a foreign country are regulated by the United States Department of Energy (DOE) pursuant to sections 301(b) and 402(f) of the Department of Energy Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7151(b) and 7172(f)) and require authorization under section 202(e) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 824a(e)).

    On July 30, 2018, DOE received an application from MEAI for authority to transmit electric energy from the United States to Mexico as a power marketer for a five-year term using existing international transmission facilities. MEAI is also registered as a Purchasing and Selling Entity, as defined by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC).

    In its application, MEAI states that it “does not currently own or control electric generation or transmission facilities of its own in the United States over which the export of wholesale electricity could have a reliability, fuel use, or system stability impact,” and that it does not have a franchised service area. The electric energy that MEAI proposes to export to Mexico would be surplus energy purchased from third parties such as electric utilities and Federal power marketing agencies pursuant to voluntary agreements. The existing international transmission facilities to be utilized by the Applicant have previously been authorized by Presidential Permits issued pursuant to Executive Order 10485, as amended, and are appropriate for open access transmission by third parties.

    Procedural Matters: Any person desiring to be heard in this proceeding should file a comment or protest to the application at the address provided above. Protests should be filed in accordance with Rule 211 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (FERC's) Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211). Any person desiring to become a party to these proceedings should file a motion to intervene at the above address in accordance with FERC Rule 214 (18 CFR 385.214). Five (5) copies of such comments, protests, or motions to intervene should be sent to the address provided above on or before the date listed above.

    Comments and other filings concerning MEAI's application to export electric energy to Mexico should be clearly marked with OE Docket No. EA-459. An additional copy is to be provided to both Chloe Cromarty and Mark Greenberg, 20 E. Greenway Plaza, Suite 650, Houston, TX 77046.

    A final decision will be made on this application after the environmental impacts have been evaluated pursuant to DOE's National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Procedures (10 CFR part 1021) and after a determination is made by DOE that the proposed action will not have an adverse impact on the sufficiency of supply or reliability of the U.S. electric power supply system.

    Copies of this application will be made available, upon request, for public inspection and copying at the address provided above, by accessing the program website at http://energy.gov/node/11845, or by emailing Angela Troy at [email protected]

    Signed in Washington, DC, on August 23, 2018. Christopher Lawrence, Electricity Policy Analyst, Office of Electricity.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18743 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Number: PR18-80-000.

    Applicants: Caprock Permian Natural Gas Transmission LLC.

    Description: Tariff filing per 284.224/.123: Caprock Permian SOC to be effective 8/15/2018; Filing Type: 1340.

    Filed Date: 8/16/18.

    Accession Number: 20180816-5058.

    Comments/Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/6/18.

    Docket Number: PR18-57-001.

    Applicants: Targa Midland Gas Pipeline LLC.

    Description: Tariff filing per 284.123(b),(e)/: Amendment to Petition for NGPA Section 311 Rate Approval to be effective 5/2/2018; Filing Type: 1000.

    Filed Date: 8/22/18.

    Accession Number: 20180822-5028.

    Comments/Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/29/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1071-000.

    Applicants: Southern Natural Gas Company, L.L.C.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: MGAG Negotiated Rate to be effective 10/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 8/22/18.

    Accession Number: 20180822-5000.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/4/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1072-000.

    Applicants: Southern Natural Gas Company, L.L.C.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Fuel Retention Rates—Winter 2018 to be effective 10/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 8/22/18.

    Accession Number: 20180822-5046.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/4/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1074-000.

    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: EPC AUGUST 2018 FILING CORRECTION—RP18-912-000 to be effective 9/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 8/22/18.

    Accession Number: 20180822-5066.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/4/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-75-004.

    Applicants: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC.

    Description: Compliance filing FRQ Settlement Compliance Filing re Docket No. RP18-75 to be effective 10/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 8/22/18.

    Accession Number: 20180822-5060.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/4/18.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: August 23, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis Sr. Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18713 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER18-2264-000] Macquarie Energy Trading LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of Macquarie Energy Trading LLC`s application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant.

    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability, is September 12, 2018.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.

    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. 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.

    Dated: August 23, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18714 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 2804-035] Goose River Hydro, Inc.; Notice of Scoping Meetings and Environmental Site Review and Soliciting Scoping Comments

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric applications have been filed with the Commission and are available for public inspection:

    a. Type of Application: New Minor License.

    b. Project No.: 2804-035.

    c. Date filed: February 2, 2018.

    d. Applicant: Goose River Hydro, Inc.

    e. Name of Project: Goose River Hydroelectric Project.

    f. Location: On the Goose River, in Waldo County, Maine. No federal lands are occupied by the project works or located within the project boundary.

    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).

    h. Applicant Contact: Nicholas Cabral, Goose River Hydro, Inc., 41 Sedgewood Drive, Kennebunk, ME 04043; (207) 604-4394; email—[email protected]

    i. FERC Contact: Julia Kolberg at (202) 502-8261; or email at [email protected]

    j. Deadline for filing scoping comments: October 26, 2018.

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file motions to intervene and protests using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected], (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY). 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-2804-035.

    The Commission's Rules of Practice require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person on the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency.

    k. This application has been accepted, but is not ready for environmental analysis at this time.

    l. The project consists of the following existing facilities:

    Swan Lake Dam

    (1) a 14-foot-high, 250-foot-long rock masonry gravity dam impounding Swan Lake with a surface area of approximately 1,364 acres at an elevation of 201 feet above sea level; (2) a concrete inlet structure; (3) three 3.5-foot-high, 4-foot-wide manually operated butterfly gates that regulate flow through the inlet structure; (4) two culverts that convey flow under Route 141; and (5) appurtenant facilities.

    Mason's Dam

    (1) a 15-foot-high, 86-foot-long rock masonry dam impounding a reservoir with a storage capacity of approximately 1,621 acre-feet at an elevation of 188 feet above sea level; (2) a concrete inlet structure; (3) a manually operated butterfly gate regulating flow from the inlet structure to the penstock; (4) a 3-foot-diameter, 350-foot-long steel penstock; (5) a 266-square-foot concrete powerhouse containing two Kaplan turbines and generating units with a licensed capacity of 100 kW; (6) a 300-foot-long, 12-kilovolt (kV) transmission line; and (7) appurtenant facilities. Mason's Development generates when flows in excess of 5 cfs are available and when an operator is present.

    Kelly Dam

    (1) a 15-foot-high, 135-foot-long masonry gravity dam impounding a reservoir with a storage capacity of approximately 200 acre-feet at an elevation of approximately 159 feet above sea level; and (2) three 3-foot-high, 2.5-foot-wide manually operated butterfly gates.

    Mill Dam

    (1) a 6-foot-tall, 70-foot-wide masonry dam impounding a reservoir with a storage capacity of approximately 7 acre-feet at an elevation of approximately 128 feet above sea level; (2) a concrete inlet structure; (3) a trash sluice with wooden stop logs; (4) a powerhouse containing a Francis-type turbine and generator unit with a licensed capacity of 75 kW; (5) a 60-foot-wide concrete spillway; and (6) an approximately 100-foot-long, 12-kV transmission line. The penstock used to deliver water to the powerhouse has been removed due to deterioration and subsequent leakage; thus, the powerhouse is not operating.

    CMP Dam

    (1) a 21-foot-high, 231-foot-long buttress dam impounding a reservoir with a storage capacity of approximately 72 acre-feet at an elevation of approximately 109 feet above sea level; (2) a manually operated low-level water release lift gate; (3) a manually operated lift gate regulating flow to the penstock; (4) a 5-foot-diameter, 1,200-foot-long steel penstock; (5) a 300-square-foot concrete and timber powerhouse with a Kaplan-type turbine and generator unit with a licensed capacity of 200 kW; (6) a 42-foot-long spillway; and (7) an approximately 500-foot-long, 12-kV transmission line. The penstock used to deliver water to the powerhouse is currently out of service due to damage, deterioration, and subsequent leakage; thus, the powerhouse is not operating.

    m. A copy of the application 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 Online Support. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above.

    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.

    n. Scoping Process.

    The Commission intends to prepare an Environmental assessment (EA) on the project in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act. The EA will consider both site-specific and cumulative environmental impacts and reasonable alternatives to the proposed action. Although our current intent is to prepare an EA, there is a possibility that an environmental impact statement (EIS) may be required. The scoping process will satisfy the NEPA scoping requirements, irrespective of whether the Commission issues an EA or an EIS.

    Scoping Meetings

    FERC staff will conduct one agency scoping meeting and one public meeting. The agency scoping meeting will focus on resource agency and non-governmental organization (NGO) concerns, while the public scoping meeting is primarily for public input. All interested individuals, organizations, and agencies are invited to attend one or both of the meetings, and to assist the staff in identifying the scope of the environmental issues that should be analyzed in the EA. The times and locations of these meetings are as follows:

    Agency Scoping Meeting

    Date: Wednesday, September 26, 2018.

    Time: 9:30 a.m. (EDT).

    Place: Fireside Inn & Suites.

    Address: 159 Searsport Avenue, Belfast, ME 04915.

    Public Scoping Meeting

    Date: Tuesday, September 25, 2018.

    Time: 7:00 p.m. (EDT).

    Place: Fireside Inn & Suites.

    Address: 159 Searsport Avenue, Belfast, ME 04915.

    Copies of the Scoping Document (SD1) outlining the subject areas to be addressed in the EIS were distributed to the parties on the Commission's mailing list. Copies of the SD1 will be available at the scoping meeting or may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov using the “eLibrary” link (see item m above).

    Environmental Site Review

    The Applicant and FERC staff will conduct a project Environmental Site Review beginning at 10:00 a.m. on September 25, 2018. All interested individuals, organizations, and agencies are invited to attend. All participants should meet at the southeast corner of Swan Lake, across the street from Swan Lake Grocery at 979 Swan Lake Avenue, Swanville, ME 04915. All participants are responsible for their own transportation to the site. Anyone with questions about the environmental site review (or needing directions) should contact Nicholas Cabral at [email protected] or at (207) 604-4394.

    Objectives

    At the scoping meetings, the staff will: (1) Summarize the environmental issues tentatively identified for analysis in the EA; (2) solicit from the meeting participants all available information, especially quantifiable data, on the resources at issue; (3) encourage statements from experts and the public on issues that should be analyzed in the EA, including viewpoints in opposition to, or in support of, the staff's preliminary views; (4) determine the resource issues to be addressed in the EA; and (5) identify those issues that require a detailed analysis, as well as those issues that do not require a detailed analysis.

    Procedures

    The meetings are recorded by a stenographer and become part of the formal record of the Commission proceeding on the project.

    Individuals, organizations, and agencies with environmental expertise and concerns are encouraged to attend the meeting and to assist the staff in defining and clarifying the issues to be addressed in the EA.

    Dated: August 23, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18708 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3193-013.

    Applicants: Brooklyn Navy Yard Cogeneration Partners, L.P.

    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Brooklyn Navy Yard Cogeneration Partners, L.P.

    Filed Date: 8/23/18.

    Accession Number: 20180823-5080.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1818-016.

    Applicants: Boston Energy Trading and Marketing LLC.

    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Boston Energy Trading and Marketing LLC.

    Filed Date: 8/22/18.

    Accession Number: 20180822-5114.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/12/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1445-001.

    Applicants: Idaho Power Company.

    Description: Compliance filing: Amendment to LGIA, LGIP, SGIA, and SGIP Modifications (Per Order No. 842) Filing to be effective 6/25/2018.

    Filed Date: 8/23/18.

    Accession Number: 20180823-5053.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2158-000; ER18-2159-000.

    Applicants: Stillwater Wind, LLC, Crazy Mountain Wind LLC.

    Description: Supplement to August 3, 2018 Stillwater Wind, LLC, et al. tariff filings (revised Appendix B-1).

    Filed Date: 8/21/18.

    Accession Number: 20180821-5090.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/31/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2281-000.

    Applicants: BFE Scheduling, LLC.

    Description: Notice of cancellation of MBR Tariff of BFE Scheduling, LLC.

    Filed Date: 8/22/18.

    Accession Number: 20180822-5125.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/12/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2282-000.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2018-08-23_SA 2426 Montana Dakota-Montana Dakota 3rd Rev GIA (G752) to be effective 8/9/2018.

    Filed Date: 8/23/18.

    Accession Number: 20180823-5060.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2283-000.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2018-08-23_SA 3161 ATC-WPL Project Commitment Agreement (Edgerton) to be effective 10/23/2018.

    Filed Date: 8/23/18.

    Accession Number: 20180823-5072.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2284-000.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2018-08-23_SA 3162 ATC-WPL Project Commitment Agreement (EPIC) to be effective 10/23/2018.

    Filed Date: 8/23/18.

    Accession Number: 20180823-5074.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2285-000.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2018-08-23_SA 3163 ATC-WPS Project Commitment Agreement (Plover) to be effective 10/23/2018.

    Filed Date: 8/23/18.

    Accession Number: 20180823-5079.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2286-000.

    Applicants: The United Illuminating Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Schedule 20A Service Agreement with H.Q. Energy Services (U.S.) Inc. to be effective 1/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 8/23/18.

    Accession Number: 20180823-5085.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2287-000.

    Applicants: Mid-Atlantic Interstate Transmission, LLC, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: MAIT submits four ECSAs, Service Agreement Nos. 5013, 5014, 5015, and 5016 to be effective 10/23/2018.

    Filed Date: 8/23/18.

    Accession Number: 20180823-5086.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/18.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric securities filings:

    Docket Numbers: ES18-59-000.

    Applicants: South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, South Carolina Generating Company, Inc.

    Description: Application for Authorization Under Federal Power Act Section 204 of South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, et al.

    Filed Date: 8/22/18.

    Accession Number: 20180822-5117.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/12/18.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: August 23, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18710 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP18-539-000] Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, L.L.C.; Notice of Application

    Take notice that on August 10, 2018, Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, L.L.C. (Maritimes), 5400 Westheimer Court, Houston, Texas 77056-5310, filed an application under section 7(b) and 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Subpart A of Part 157 of the Commission's rules and regulations to reacquire 7,214 Dth/d of firm capacity on its jointly-owned system from Westbrook, Maine to Dracut, Massachusetts upon the in-service date of Phase III of Portland Natural Gas Transmission System's (Portland) Portland Xpress Project (PXP Project Phase III) and the termination of the Capacity Lease Agreement (Lease Agreement) between Maritimes and Portland, as described in Docket No. CP18-516-000, filed June 29, 2018. Upon the in-service date of the PXP Project Phase III, Maritimes seeks to abandon a portion of its ownership interest in a compressor unit at the Westbrook Compressor Station to Portland, all as more fully described 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 Lisa A. Connolly, Director, Rates and Certificates, Maritimes & Northeast Management Company, LLC, 5400 Westheimer Court, Houston, Texas 77056-5310, or call (713) 627-4102, or email: [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 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 7 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 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.

    Comment Date: September 13, 2018.

    Dated: August 23, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18711 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RP18-923-000] Enable Mississippi River Transmission, LLC; Notice of Technical Conference

    Take notice that a technical conference will be held on Wednesday, September 19, 2018 at 10:00 a.m. (Eastern Daylight Time), in Hearing Room 7, at the offices of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.

    At the technical conference, the Commission Staff and the parties to the proceeding should be prepared to discuss all issues set for technical conference as established in the July 31, 2018 Order, Enable Mississippi River Transmission, LLC, 164 FERC ¶ 61,075. All interested persons are permitted to attend.

    Commission conferences are accessible under section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations please send an email to [email protected] or call toll free 1-866-208-3372 (voice) or 202-502-8659 (TTY); or send a fax to 202-208-2106 with the required accommodations.

    For more information about this technical conference please contact Brandon Henke at (202) 502-8386 or [email protected]

    Dated: August 23, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18709 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. AC18-59-000] Edison Electric Institute; Notice of Amendment Filing

    Take notice that on August 14, 2018, Edison Electric Institute filed an amendment to its March 19, 2018 filed request for approval for electric companies to use Account 439, recently authorized by the Financial Accounting Standards Board.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.

    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the 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.

    Comments: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on August 28, 2018.

    Dated: August 23, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18707 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0563; FRL-9982-36] General Dynamics Information Technology; Transfer of Data AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces that pesticide related information submitted to EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) pursuant to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), including information that may have been claimed as Confidential Business Information (CBI) by the submitter, will be transferred to General Dynamics Information Technology in accordance with the CBI regulations. General Dynamics Information Technology has been awarded multiple contracts to perform work for OPP, and access to this information will enable General Dynamics Information Technology to fulfill the obligations of the contract.

    DATES:

    General Dynamics Information Technology will be given access to this information on or before September 4, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    William Northern, Information Technology and Resources Management Division (7502P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (703) 305-6478 email address: [email protected]

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

    This action applies to the public in general. As such, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action.

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

    The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0563, 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.

    II. Contractor Requirements

    The Contractor shall provide progress reporting monitoring performance and finances associated with this task order. The Technical and Quality Assurance Progress Report shall provide a general outline of the effort, state the percentage of work completed for the Task Order during the reporting period, and relate it to the overall effort.

    This performance work statement (PWS) does not provide specific details on the types of solutions to be offered or the comprehensiveness of any specific solutions. However, the government requires the contractor to offer comprehensive solutions that (1) are based on an understanding of the current EPA IT infrastructure and the systems engineering, remote sensing and GIS environments, (2) provide the scope and breadth of remote sensing and Geographic Information System (GIS) services responsive to present and future needs of EPA, ORD, and partner user communities, (3) ensure an appropriate level of security based on government regulations, agency requirements, and industry best practices, and (4) meet performance levels or metrics associated with specific areas.

    The Contractor shall prepare a Quality Management Plan (QMP) describing the technical approach, organizational resources and management controls to be employed to meet the cost, performance and schedule requirements throughout task order execution. The contractor shall employ a program management structure to ensure the efficient execution of all tasks and subtasks, and the capability to report on the status of work performed. The contractor shall use a single point of contact (POC) for all matters regarding project administration and reporting.

    This contract will involve no subcontractors.

    OPP has determined that the contracts described in this document involve work that is being conducted in connection with FIFRA, in that pesticide chemicals will be the subject of certain evaluations to be made under this contract. These evaluations may be used in subsequent regulatory decisions under FIFRA.

    Some of this information may be entitled to confidential treatment. The information has been submitted to EPA under FIFRA sections 3, 4, 6, and 7 and under FFDCA sections 408 and 409.

    In accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR 2.307(h)(3), the contracts with General Dynamics Information Technology prohibits use of the information for any purpose not specified in these contracts; prohibits disclosure of the information to a third party without prior written approval from the Agency; and requires that each official and employee of the contractor sign an agreement to protect the information from unauthorized release and to handle it in accordance with the FIFRA Information Security Manual. In addition, General Dynamics Information Technology is required to submit for EPA approval a security plan under which any CBI will be secured and protected against unauthorized release or compromise. No information will be provided to General Dynamics Information Technology until the requirements in this document have been fully satisfied. Records of information provided to General Dynamics Information Technology will be maintained by EPA Project Officers for these contracts. All information supplied to General Dynamics Information Technology by EPA for use in connection with these contracts will be returned to EPA when General Dynamics Information Technology has completed its work.

    Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.; 21 U.S.C. 301 et seq.

    Dated: August 14, 2018. Delores Barber, Director, Information Technology and Resources Management Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18753 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPPT-2018-0516; FRL-9981-64] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Extension of an Existing Collection (EPA ICR No. 0586.14); Comment Request AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), this document announces that EPA is planning to submit an Information Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The ICR, entitled: “TSCA Section 8(a) Preliminary Assessment Information Rule (PAIR)” and identified by EPA ICR No. 0586.14 and OMB Control No. 2070-0054, represents the renewal of an existing ICR that is scheduled to expire on April 30, 2019. Before submitting the ICR to OMB for review and approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collection that is summarized in this document. The ICR and accompanying material are available in the docket for public review and comment.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before October 29, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2018-0516, 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: Andrea Mojica, Chemical Control Division (7405M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (202) 564-0599; 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:

    I. What information is EPA particularly interested in?

    Pursuant to PRA section 3506(c)(2)(A) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), EPA specifically solicits comments and information to enable it to:

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

    2. Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimates of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used.

    3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected.

    4. Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from very small businesses (those that employ less than 25) on examples of specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce the paperwork burden for very small businesses affected by this collection.

    II. What information collection activity or ICR does this action apply to?

    Title: TSCA Section 8(a) Preliminary Assessment Information Rule (PAIR).

    ICR number: EPA ICR No. 0586.14.

    OMB control number: OMB Control No. 2070-0054.

    ICR status: This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on April 30, 2019. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), after appearing in the Federal Register when approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers for certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.

    Abstract: On June 22, 1982, EPA promulgated the generic section 8(a) PAIR (40 CFR part 712) under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). EPA uses PAIR to collect information to help identify, assess, and manage human health and environmental risks from chemical substances, mixtures and categories of chemical substances and mixtures. PAIR requires chemical manufacturers (including importers) to complete and submit standardized information about production, use, or exposure-related data to help evaluate the potential for human health and environmental risks caused by the manufacture of identified chemical substances or mixtures. The Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act amending TSCA was enacted on June 22, 2016; however, the underlying authority for a Section 8(a) PAIR rule was not modified. While the Agency has not issued a Section 8(a) PAIR rule since 2006, given the new requirement under amended TSCA Section 6(b)(1) to prioritize chemicals for risk evaluation, it is possible that the Agency may start requesting section 8(a) reporting more frequently.

    EPA or other federal agencies (e.g., the agencies that are part of the Interagency Testing Committee (ITC) as authorized under TSCA section 4(e)) can identify chemicals for a TSCA section 8(a) PAIR expediated rulemaking that have a justifiable need for production, use, or exposure-related data. In instances, such as when EPA must reach a decision on whether testing of a chemical is necessary, the information that EPA receives from a PAIR report may contribute to satisfying EPA's information needs.

    This information collection activity also covers certain specific chemical testing and reporting requirements under Subpart B of 40 CFR part 766 that are in part very similar to the PAIR requirements. The Agency rarely receives submissions of the information required by 40 CFR 766. EPA received less than five submissions over the course of the last OMB approval for this aspect of the information collection.

    The dibenzo-para-dioxin/dibenzofuran regulations at 40 CFR part 766 require that any person who manufactures, imports, or processes a chemical substance listed at 40 CFR 766.25 test that chemical substance and submit appropriate information to EPA according to the schedules described at 40 CFR 766.35. Persons who commence manufacture, import, or processing of a chemical substance listed at 40 CFR 766.25 must submit a letter of intent to test or an exemption application within 60-days of starting any of those activities. Each person who is manufacturing or processing a chemical listed in 40 CFR 766.25 must submit a protocol for testing according to the schedule at 40 CFR 766.35(a)(2). Persons who manufacture or import a chemical substance listed under 40 CFR 766.25 must report positive test results, using the Dioxin/Furan Report Form (EPA Form 7710-51), of all existing test data that show that chemical substance has been tested for the presence of halogenated dibenzodioxins/halogenated dibenzofurans (HDDs/HDFs), as well as any health and safety studies for the chemical substance, as defined in the regulation, no later than 90 days after the date of submission of the positive test result. Additionally, any manufacturer or importer of a chemical substance listed in 40 CFR 766.25 in possession of unpublished health and safety studies on HDDs/HDFs is required to submit copies of such studies to EPA, in accordance with certain provisions of 40 CFR 716, no later than 90 days after the person first manufactures or imports the chemical substance.

    Burden statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 31 hours per response. Burden is defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

    The ICR, which is available in the docket along with other related materials, provides a detailed explanation of the collection activities and the burden estimate that is only briefly summarized here:

    Respondents/Affected Entities: Entities potentially affected by this ICR are companies that manufacture, import, or process chemical substances or mixtures.

    Estimated total annual number of potential respondents: 1.

    Frequency of response: On occasion.

    Estimated total annual average number of responses for each respondent: 1.

    Estimated total annual burden hours: 31 hours.

    Estimated total annual costs: $2,364. This includes an estimated burden cost of $2,364 and an estimated cost of $0 for capital investment or maintenance and operational costs.

    III. Are there changes in the estimates from the last approval?

    There is a decrease of 1 hour in the total estimated respondent burden compared with that identified in the ICR currently approved by OMB. This decrease reflects a correction in the ICR renewal which eliminates the burden from trade name notification by processors (included previously in error) and the increased CBI substantiation requirements in the 2016 Lautenberg Act amendments to TSCA. This change is an adjustment.

    IV. What is the next step in the process for this ICR?

    EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. EPA will issue another Federal Register document pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Authority:

    44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

    Dated: August 20, 2018. Charlotte Bertrand, Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18752 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    EXPORT-IMPORT BANK [Public Notice: 2018-3015] Agency Information Collection Activities: Final Collection; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Export-Import Bank of the United States.

    ACTION:

    Submission for OMB review and comments request.

    SUMMARY:

    The Export-Import Bank of the United States (EXIM), as a part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal Agencies to comment on the proposed information collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    This form is to be completed by EXIM borrowers as required under EXIM Credit Guarantee Facility (CGF) transactions in conjunction with a borrower's request for disbursement for U.S. goods and services. It is used to summarize disbursement documents submitted with a borrower's request and to calculate the requested financing amount. It will enable EXIM lenders to identify the specific details of the amount of disbursement requested for approval to ensure that the financing request is complete and in compliance with EXIM's disbursement requirements.

    DATES:

    Comments should be received on or before September 28, 2018 to be assured of consideration.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments may be submitted electronically on WWW.REGULATIONS.GOV (EIB 18-02) or by mail to Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20038 Attn: EXIM form (EIB 18-02). The information collection tool can be reviewed at: https://www.exim.gov/sites/default/files/pub/pending/eib18-02_itemized_statement_of_payments-us_costs_for_exim_cgf_-_final.xlsx.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Titles and Form Number: EIB 18-02 Itemized Statement of Payments—US Costs for EXIM Credit Guarantee Facility.

    OMB Number: XXXX-XXXX.

    Type of Review: NEW.

    Need and Use: The information collected will assist in determining compliance of disbursement requests for U.S. goods and services submitted to EXIM lenders under CGF transactions.

    Affected Public: This form affects EXIM borrowers involved in financing U.S. goods and services under CGF transactions.

    Annual Number of Respondents: 12.

    Estimated Time per Respondent: 150 minutes.

    Annual Burden Hours: 30 hours.

    Frequency of Reporting or Use: As needed.

    Government Expenses: None.

    This form is submitted by the borrower to the CGF lender for review. The lender reports information regarding the disbursement electronically to EXIM using OMB Number 3048-0046 CGF (EIB 12-02) Disbursement Approval Request Report.

    Bassam Doughman, IT Specialist.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18698 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6690-01-P
    EXPORT-IMPORT BANK [Public Notice: 2018-3016] Agency Information Collection Activities: Final Collection; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Export-Import Bank of the United States.

    ACTION:

    Submission for OMB review and comments request.

    SUMMARY:

    The Export-Import Bank of the United States (EXIM), as a part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal Agencies to comment on the proposed information collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    This form is to be completed by EXIM borrowers as required under EXIM Credit Guarantee Facility (CGF) transactions in conjunction with a borrower's request for disbursement for local cost goods and services. It is used to summarize disbursement documents submitted with a borrower's request and to calculate the requested financing amount. It will enable EXIM lenders to identify the specific details of the amount of disbursement requested for approval to ensure that the financing request is complete and in compliance with EXIM's disbursement requirements.

    DATES:

    Comments should be received on or before September 28, 2018 to be assured of consideration.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments may be submitted electronically on WWW.REGULATIONS.GOV (EIB 18-03) or by mail to Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20038, Attn: EXIM form (EIB 18-03). The information collection tool can be reviewed at: https://www.exim.gov/sites/default/files/pub/pending/eib18-03_itemized_statement_of_payments-local_costs_for_exim_cgf_-_final.xlsx.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Titles and Form Number: EIB 18-03 Itemized Statement of Payments—Local Costs for EXIM Credit Guarantee Facility.

    OMB Number: XXXX-XXXX.

    Type of Review: NEW.

    Need and Use: The information collected will assist in determining compliance of disbursement requests for local cost goods and services submitted to EXIM lenders under CGF transactions.

    Affected Public: This form affects EXIM borrowers involved in financing local cost goods and services under CGF transactions.

    Annual Number of Respondents: 6.

    Estimated Time per Respondent: 75 minutes.

    Annual Burden Hours: 7.5 hours.

    Frequency of Reporting or Use: As needed.

    Government Expenses: None.

    This form is submitted by the borrower to the CGF lender for review. The lender reports information regarding the disbursement electronically to EXIM using OMB Number 3048-0046 CGF (EIB 12-02) Disbursement Approval Request Report.

    Bassam Doughman, IT Specialist.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18688 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6690-01-P
    EXPORT-IMPORT BANK [Public Notice: 2018-3017] Agency Information Collection Activities: Final Collection; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Export-Import Bank of the United States.

    ACTION:

    Submission for OMB review and comments request.

    SUMMARY:

    The Export-Import Bank of the United States (EXIM), as a part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal Agencies to comment on the proposed information collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    This form is to be completed by EXIM borrowers as required under certain EXIM long-term guarantee and direct loan transactions in conjunction with a borrower's request for disbursement for local cost goods and services. It is used to summarize disbursement documents submitted with a borrower's request and to calculate the requested financing amount. It will enable EXIM to identify the specific details of the amount of disbursement requested for approval to ensure that the financing request is complete and in compliance with EXIM's disbursement requirements. This form will be uploaded into an electronic disbursement portal.

    DATES:

    Comments should be received on or before September 28, 2018 to be assured of consideration.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments may be submitted electronically on WWW.REGULATIONS.GOV (EIB 18-05) or by mail to Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20038 Attn: EXIM form (EIB 18-05). The information collection tool can be reviewed at: https://www.exim.gov/sites/default/files/pub/pending/eib18-05_itemized_statement_of_payments-local_cost_form_-_final.xlsx.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Titles and Form Number: EIB 18-05 Itemized Statement of Payments Long-term Guarantee and Direct Loan—Local Costs.

    OMB Number: XXXX-XXXX.

    Type of Review: NEW.

    Need and Use: The information collected will assist in determining compliance of disbursement requests for local cost goods and services submitted to EXIM through an electronic disbursement portal under certain long-term guarantee and direct loan transactions.

    Affected Public: This form affects EXIM borrowers involved in financing local cost goods and services under certain long-term guarantee and direct loan transactions.

    Annual Number of Respondents: 25.

    Estimated Time per Respondent: 30 minutes.

    Annual Burden Hours: 12.5 hours.

    Frequency of Reporting or Use: As needed.

    Government Expenses:

    Reviewing Time per Year: 12.5 hours.

    Average Wages per Hour: $42.50.

    Average Cost per Year: $531.25 (time*wages).

    Benefits and Overhead: 20%.

    Total Government Cost: $637.50.

    Bassam Doughman, IT Specialist.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18697 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6690-01-P
    EXPORT-IMPORT BANK [Public Notice: 2018-3016] Agency Information Collection Activities: Final Collection; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Export-Import Bank of the United States.

    ACTION:

    Submission for OMB review and comments request.

    SUMMARY:

    The Export-Import Bank of the United States (EXIM), as a part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal Agencies to comment on the proposed information collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    This form is to be completed by EXIM borrowers as required under certain EXIM long-term guarantee and direct loan transactions in conjunction with a borrower's request for disbursement for U.S. goods and services. It is used to summarize disbursement documents submitted with a borrower's request and to calculate the requested financing amount. It will enable EXIM to identify the specific details of the amount of disbursement requested for approval to ensure that the financing request is complete and in compliance with EXIM's disbursement requirements. This form will be uploaded into an electronic disbursement portal.

    DATES:

    Comments should be received on or before September 28, 2018 to be assured of consideration.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments may be submitted electronically on WWW.REGULATIONS.GOV (EIB 18-04) or by mail to Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20038 Attn: EXIM form (EIB 18-04). The information collection tool can be reviewed at: https://www.exim.gov/sites/default/files/pub/pending/eib18-04_itemized_statement_of_payments-us_costs_form_-_final.xlsx.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Titles and Form Number: EIB 18-04 Itemized Statement of Payments—Long-term Guarantees and Direct Loans—US Costs.

    OMB Number: XXXX-XXXX.

    Type of Review: NEW.

    Need and Use: The information collected will assist in determining compliance of disbursement requests for U.S. goods and services submitted to EXIM through an electronic disbursement portal under certain long-term guarantee and direct loan transactions.

    Affected Public: This form affects EXIM borrowers involved in financing U.S. goods and services under certain long-term guarantee and direct loan transactions.

    Annual Number of Respondents: 75.

    Estimated Time per Respondent: 150 minutes.

    Annual Burden Hours: 187.5 hours.

    Frequency of Reporting or Use: As needed.

    Government Expenses:

    Reviewing Time per Year: 187.5 hours.

    Average Wages per Hour: $42.50.

    Average Cost per Year: $7,968.75 (time*wages).

    Benefits and Overhead: 20%.

    Total Government Cost: $9,562.50.

    Bassam Doughman, IT Specialist.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18696 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6690-01-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [OMB 3060-0281] Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission Under Delegated Authority AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.

    The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Written comments should be submitted on or before October 29, 2018. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contacts below as soon as possible.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all PRA comments to Cathy Williams, FCC, via email: [email protected] and to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For additional information about the information collection, contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    OMB Control Number: 3060-0281.

    Title: Section 90.651, Supplemental Reports Required of Licensees Authorized Under this Subpart.

    Form Number: N/A.

    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection. Business or other for-profit entities, not-for-profit institutions and state, local or tribal government.

    Number of Respondents and Responses: 190 respondents; 346 responses.

    Estimated Time per Response: .166 hours (10 minutes).

    Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement.

    Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. Statutory authority for this information collection is contained in 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 161, 303(g), 303(r), 332(c)(7).

    Total Annual Burden: 57 hours.

    Total Annual Cost: No cost.

    Privacy Impact Assessment: No impact(s).

    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: There is no need for confidentiality with this collection of information.

    Needs and Uses: In a Report and Order (FCC 99-9, released February 19, 1999) in WT Docket 97-153, the Commission, under section 90.651, adopted a revised time frame for reporting the number of mobile units placed in operation from eight months to 12 months of the grant date of their license. The radio facilities addressed in this subpart of the rules are allocated on and governed by regulations designed to award facilities on a need basis determined by the number of mobile units served by each base station. This is necessary to avoid frequency hoarding by applicants. This rule section requires licensees to report the number of mobile units served via FCC Form 601. The Commission is extending this reporting requirement for a period of three years in the Office of the Management and Budget's (OMB) inventory.

    Federal Communications Commission. Marlene Dortch, Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18694 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [OMB 3060-0270] Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.

    The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Written comments should be submitted on or before October 29, 2018. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contacts below as soon as possible.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all PRA comments to Cathy Williams, FCC, via email: [email protected] and to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For additional information about the information collection, contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    OMB Control No.: 3060-0270.

    Title: Section 90.443, Content of Station Records.

    Form No.: N/A.

    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents: Business or other for-profit, not-for-profit institutions, and state, local or tribal government.

    Number of Respondents: 52,383 respondents; 52,383 responses.

    Estimated Time per Response: .25 hours.

    Frequency of Response: Recordkeeping requirement.

    Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. Statutory authority for this collection of information is contained in 47 U.S.C. Section 303(j), as amended.

    Total Annual Burden: 13,096 hours.

    Annual Cost Burden: No cost.

    Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No impact(s).

    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: There is no need for confidentiality with this collection of information.

    Needs and Uses: The information collection requirements contained under Section 90.443(b) require that each licensee of a station shall maintain records for all stations by providing the dates and pertinent details of any maintenance performed on station equipment, along with the name and address of the service technician who did the work. If all maintenance is performed by the same technician or service company, the name and address need be entered only once in the station records.

    The information collection requirements under Section 90.443(c) require that at least one licensee participating in the cost arrangement must maintain cost sharing records.

    Federal Communications Commission. Marlene Dortch, Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18695 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [OMB 3060-0463] Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Written comments should be submitted on or before October 29, 2018. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contacts below as soon as possible.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all PRA comments to Cathy Williams, FCC, via email: [email protected] and to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For additional information about the information collection, contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    OMB Control Number: 3060-0463.

    Title: Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals With Hearing and Speech Disabilities, CG Docket No. 03-123.

    Form Number: N/A.

    Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents: Business or other for-profit; Individuals or household; State, Local and Tribal Government.

    Number of Respondents and Responses: 5,072 respondents; 7,314 responses.

    Estimated Time per Response: 0.5 hours (30 minutes) to 80 hours.

    Frequency of Response: Annually, monthly, on occasion, and one-time reporting requirements; Recordkeeping and Third-Party Disclosure requirements.

    Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefit. The statutory authority for the information collection requirements is found at section 225 of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. 225. The law was enacted on July 26, 1990, as Title IV of the ADA, Public Law 101-336, 104 Stat. 327, 366-69.

    Total Annual Burden: 12,342 hours.

    Total Annual Cost: $10,800.

    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: Confidentiality is an issue to the extent that individuals and households provide personally identifiable information, which is covered under the FCC's updated system of records notice (SORN), FCC/CGB-1, “Informal Complaints, Inquiries, and Requests for Dispute Assistance.” As required by the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 552a, the Commission also published a SORN, FCC/CGB-1 “Informal Complaints, Inquiries, and Requests for Dispute Assistance,” in the Federal Register on August 15, 2014 (79 FR 48152) which became effective on September 24, 2014.

    Privacy Impact Assessment: The FCC completed a Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) on June 28, 2007. It may be reviewed at https://www.fcc.gov/general/privacy-act-information#pia. The Commission is in the process of updating the PIA to incorporate various revisions to it as a result of revisions to the SORN.

    Needs and Uses

    On December 21, 2001, the Commission released the 2001 TRS Cost Recovery Order, document FCC 01-371, published at 67 FR 4203, January 29, 2002, in which the Commission:

    (1) Directed the Interstate Telecommunications Relay Services (TRS) Fund (TRS Fund) administrator to continue to use the average cost per minute compensation methodology for the traditional TRS compensation rate;

    (2) required TRS providers to submit certain projected TRS-related cost and demand data to the TRS Fund administrator to be used to calculate the rate; and

    (3) directed the TRS Fund administrator to expand its form for providers to itemize their actual and projected costs and demand data, and to include specific sections to capture speech-to-speech (STS) and video relay service (VRS) costs and minutes of use.

    In 2003, the Commission released the 2003 Second Improved TRS Order, published at 68 FR 50973, August 25, 2003, which among other things required that TRS providers offer certain local exchange carrier (LEC)-based improved services and features where technologically feasible, including a speed dialing requirement which may entail voluntary recordkeeping for TRS providers to maintain a list of telephone numbers. See also 47 CFR 64.604(a)(3)(vi)(B).

    In 2007, the Commission released the Section 225/255 VoIP Report and Order, published at 72 FR 43546, August 6, 2007, extending the disability access requirements that apply to telecommunications service providers and equipment manufacturers under 47 U.S.C. 225, 255 to interconnected voice over internet protocol (VoIP) service providers and equipment manufacturers. As a result, under rules implementing section 225 of the Act, interconnected VoIP service providers are required to publicize information about telecommunications relay services (TRS) and 711 abbreviated dialing access to TRS. See also 47 CFR 64.604(c)(3).

    In 2007, the Commission also released the 2007 Cost Recovery Report and Order and Declaratory Ruling, published at 73 FR 3197, January 17, 2008, in which the Commission:

    (1) Adopted a new cost recovery methodology for interstate traditional TRS and interstate STS based on the Multi-state Average Rate Structure (MARS) plan, under which interstate TRS compensation rates are determined by weighted average of the states' intrastate compensation rates, and which includes for STS additional compensation approved by the Commission for STS outreach;

    (2) requires STS providers to file a report annually with the TRS Fund administrator and the Commission on their specific outreach efforts directly attributable to the additional compensation approved by the Commission for STS outreach.

    (3) adopted a new cost recovery methodology for interstate captioned telephone service (CTS), as well as internet Protocol captioned telephone service (IP CTS), based on the MARS plan;

    (4) adopted a cost recovery methodology for internet Protocol (IP) Relay based on price caps;

    (5) adopted a cost recovery methodology for VRS that adopted tiered rates based on call volume;

    (6) clarified the nature and extent that certain categories of costs are compensable from the Fund; and

    (7) addressed certain issues concerning the management and oversight of the Fund, including prohibiting financial incentives offered to consumers to make relay calls.

    In 2018, the Commission released the IP CTS Modernization Order, published at 83 FR 30082, June 27, 2018, in which the Commission:

    (1) Determined that it would transition the methodology for IP CTS cost recovery from the MARS plan to cost-based rates and adopted interim rates; and

    (2) added two cost reporting requirements for IP CTS providers: (i) In annual cost data filings and supplementary information provided to the TRS Fund administrator, IP CTS providers that contract for the supply of services used in the provision of TRS, shall include information about payments under such contracts, classified according to the substantive cost categories specified by the TRS Fund administrator; and (ii) in the course of an audit or otherwise upon demand, IP CTS providers must make available any relevant documentation. 47 CFR 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(D)(1), (6).

    Federal Communications Commission. Marlene Dortch, Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18690 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [OMB 3060-0233] Information Collection Being Submitted for Review and Approval to the Office of Management and Budget AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or the Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.

    The Commission may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Written comments should be submitted on or before September 28, 2018. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contacts listed below as soon as possible.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all PRA comments to Nicholas A. Fraser, OMB, via email [email protected]; and to Nicole Ongele, FCC, via email [email protected] and to [email protected] Include in the comments the OMB control number as shown in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION below.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For additional information or copies of the information collection, contact Nicole Ongele at (202) 418-2991. To view a copy of this information collection request (ICR) submitted to OMB: (1) Go to the web page http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain>, (2) look for the section of the web page called “Currently Under Review,” (3) click on the downward-pointing arrow in the “Select Agency” box below the “Currently Under Review” heading, (4) select “Federal Communications Commission” from the list of agencies presented in the “Select Agency” box, (5) click the “Submit” button to the right of the “Select Agency” box, (6) when the list of FCC ICRs currently under review appears, look for the OMB control number of this ICR and then click on the ICR Reference Number. A copy of the FCC submission to OMB will be displayed.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or the Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. Comments are requested concerning: whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.

    OMB Control Number: 3060-0233.

    Title: Part 54—High-Cost Loop Support Reporting to National Exchange Carrier Association (NECA).

    Form Number(s): FCC Form 507, FCC Form 508 and FCC Form 509.

    Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents: Business or other for-profit.

    Number of Respondents and Responses: 1,095 respondents; 3,616 responses.

    Estimated Time per Response: 1-22 hours.

    Frequency of Response: On occasion and annual reporting requirements, recordkeeping requirement.

    Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. Statutory authority for this information collection is contained in 47 U.S.C. 151-154, 214, 218-220, 221(c), 254, and 303(r).

    Total Annual Burden: 41,070 hours. Total Annual Cost: No Cost. Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No impact(s).

    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: No assurance of confidentiality has been given regarding the information. However, respondents may request materials or information submitted to the Commission be withheld from public inspection under 47 CFR 0.459 of the FCC's rules.

    Needs and Uses: In order to determine which carriers are entitled to universal service support, all rate-of-return regulated (rate-of-return) incumbent local exchange carriers (LECs) must provide the National Exchange Carrier Association (NECA) with the loop cost and loop count data required by section 54.1305 for each of its study areas and, if applicable, for each wire center as that term is defined in 47 CFR part 54. See 47 CFR 54.1305 and 54.5. The loop cost and loop count information is to be filed annually with NECA by July 31st of each year, and may be updated occasionally pursuant to section 54.1306. See 47 CFR 54.1306. Pursuant to section 54.1307, the information filed on July 31st of each year will be used to calculate universal service support for each study area and is filed by NECA with the Commission on October 1 of each year. See 47 CFR 54.1307. An incumbent LEC is defined as a carrier that meets the definition of “incumbent local exchange carrier” in section 51.5 of the Commission's rules. See 47 CFR 51.5.

    In March 2016, the Commission adopted the Rate-of-Return Reform Order to continue modernizing the universal service support mechanisms for rate-of-return carriers. Connect America Fund et al., WC Docket No. 10-90 et al., Report and Order, Order and Order on Reconsideration and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 31 FCC Rcd 3087 (2016) (Rate-of-Return Reform Order and Further Notice). The Rate-of-Return Reform Order replaces the Interstate Common Line Support (ICLS) mechanism with the Connect America Fund—Broadband Loop Support (CAF-BLS) mechanism. While ICLS supported only lines used to provide traditional voice service (including voice service bundled with broadband service), CAF-BLS also supports consumer broadband-only loops. FCC Forms 507, 508, and 509 include additional line counts, forecasted cost and revenues, and actual cost and revenue data associated with consumer broadband-only loops necessary for the calculation of CAF-BLS. We propose to move the requirements associated with FCC Form 507, FCC Form 508, FCC Form 509 under OMB Control Number 3060-0986 into this collection.

    The Commission therefore proposes to revise this information collection. Any increased burdens are associated with the moving of these requirements and forms into this information collection.

    Federal Communications Commission. Marlene Dortch, Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18693 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION Notice of Agreements Filed

    The Commission hereby gives notice of the filing of the following agreements under the Shipping Act of 1984. Interested parties may submit comments on the agreements to the Secretary by email at [email protected], or by mail, Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, DC 20573, within twelve days of the date this notice appears in the Federal Register. Copies of the agreements are available through the Commission's website (www.fmc.gov) or by contacting the Office of Agreements at (202)-523-5793 or [email protected]

    Agreement No.: 001941-004.

    Agreement Name: Baltimore Marine Terminal Association.

    Parties: Balterm LLC; Ceres Marine Terminals Inc.; Mid-Atlantic Terminal, LLC; and Ports America Chesapeake, LLC.

    Filing Party: JoAnne Zawitoski; Baltimore Marine Terminal Association.

    Synopsis: The amendment updates the membership of the Agreement and restates the Agreement.

    Proposed Effective Date: 10/6/2018.

    Location: https://www2.fmc.gov/FMC.Agreements.Web/Public/AgreementHistory/16271.

    Agreement No.: 201267.

    Agreement Name: CMA CGM/COSCO Shipping Slot Exchange Agreement China—U.S. West Coast.

    Parties: CMA CGM S.A. and COSCO Shipping Lines Co., Ltd.

    Filing Party: Eric Jeffrey; Nixon Peabody.

    Synopsis: The Agreement authorizes the parties to exchange slots on their respective services between ports in China (including Hong Kong) and ports on the U.S. West Coast.

    Proposed Effective Date: 8/20/2018.

    Location: https://www2.fmc.gov/FMC.Agreements.Web/Public/AgreementHistory/15267.

    Agreement No.: 201268.

    Agreement Name: Kyowa Shipping Company (Kyowa)/China Navigation Company (CNCo) Pacific—Asia Slot Charter Agreement.

    Parties: The China Navigation Company Pte Ltd. and Kyowa Shipping Company, Ltd.

    Filing Party: Conte Cicala; Clyde & Co. US LLP.

    Synopsis: The Agreement authorizes the parties to charter slots to each other in other services between Asia and ports in the South Pacific.

    Proposed Effective Date: 10/5/2018.

    Location: https://www2.fmc.gov/FMC.Agreements.Web/Public/AgreementHistory/15268.

    Agreement No.: 201269.

    Agreement Name: Seaboard/Crowley Miami & Kingston Space Charter Agreement.

    Parties: Seaboard Marine, Ltd. and Crowley Caribbean Services, LLC.

    Filing Party: Wayne Rohde; Cozen O'Connor.

    Synopsis: The Agreement authorizes Seaboard to charter space to Crowley in the trade between Miami, FL and Kingston, Jamaica.

    Proposed Effective Date: 10/6/2018.

    Location: https://www2.fmc.gov/FMC.Agreements.Web/Public/AgreementHistory/15289.

    Dated: August 24, 2018. Rachel Dickon, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18748 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6731-AA-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Notice of Proposals To Engage in or To Acquire Companies Engaged in Permissible Nonbanking Activities

    The companies listed in this notice have given notice under section 10 of the Home Owners' Loan Act (12 U.S.C. 1467a) (HOLA) and Regulation LL, (12 CFR part 238) to engage de novo, or to acquire or control voting securities or assets of a company, including the companies listed below, that engages either directly or through a subsidiary or other company, in a nonbanking activity that is listed in § 238.53 or § 238.54 of Regulation LL (12 CFR 225.53 or 238.54). Unless otherwise noted, these activities will be conducted throughout the United States.

    Each notice is available for inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notice also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the question whether the proposal complies with the standards of section 10(c)(4)(B) of the HOLA 12 U.S.C. 1467a(c)(4)(B).

    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding the notices must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than September 14, 2018.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis (Mark A. Rauzi, Vice President), 90 Hennepin Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55480-0291:

    1. Farrar Beresford Bancorporation Inc. Irrevocable Trust and Beresford Bancorporation, Inc., both of Britton, South Dakota; to acquire voting shares of Lloyd's Plan SD, Inc., Britton, South Dakota, and thereby act as a broker or agent for the sale of credit-related insurance and engage in consumer lending activities pursuant to section 238.53(b)(5) and 238.54(a) of Regulation LL.

    Additionally, Farrar Beresford Bancorporation, Inc. Irrevocable Trust and Beresford Bancorporation, Inc. have applied for retroactive approval to engage in general lending activities, including small business and agricultural loans, pursuant to section 238.54(a) of Regulation LL.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, August 23, 2018. Ann E. Misback, Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18630 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION [OMB Control No. 9000-0035; Docket No. 2018-0003; Sequence No. 7] Information Collection; Claims and Appeals AGENCY:

    Department of Defense (DOD), General Services Administration (GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of request for public comments regarding an extension to an existing OMB clearance.

    SUMMARY:

    Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Regulatory Secretariat Division will be submitting to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request to review and approve an extension of a previously approved information collection requirement concerning claims and appeals.

    DATES:

    Submit comments on or before October 29, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments identified by Information Collection 9000-0035, Claims and Appeals, by any of the following methods:

    Regulations.gov: http://www.regulations.gov. Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by searching the OMB control number. Select the link “Submit a Comment” that corresponds with “Information Collection 9000-0035, Claims and Appeals”. Follow the instructions provided at the “Submit a Comment” screen. Please include your name, company name (if any), and “Information Collection 9000-0035, Claims and Appeals” on your attached document.

    Mail: General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW, Washington, DC 20405. ATTN: Ms. Mandell/IC 9000-0035, Claims and Appeals.

    Instructions: Please submit comments only and cite Information Collection 9000-0035, Claims and Appeals, in all correspondence related to this collection. Comments received generally will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal and/or business confidential information provided. To confirm receipt of your comment(s), please check http://www.regulations.gov, approximately two to three days after submission to verify posting (except allow 30 days for posting of comments submitted by mail).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Charles Gray, Procurement Analyst, Federal Acquisition Policy Division, GSA, 703-795-6328 or via email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    A. Purpose

    It is the Government's policy to try to resolve all contractual issues by mutual agreement at the contracting officer's level without litigation. Reasonable efforts should be made to resolve controversies prior to submission of a contractor's claim. The Contract Disputes Act of 1978 (41 U.S.C. 7103) requires that claims exceeding $100,000 must be accompanied by a certification that (1) the claim is made in good faith; (2) supporting data are accurate and complete; and (3) the amount requested accurately reflects the contract adjustment for which the contractor believes the Government is liable. The information, as required by FAR clause 52.233-1, Disputes, is used by a contracting officer to decide or resolve the claim. Contractors may appeal the contracting officer's decision by submitting written appeals to the appropriate officials.

    B. Annual Reporting Burden

    Respondents: 4,500.

    Responses per Respondent: 3.

    Annual Responses: 13,500.

    Hours per Response: 1.

    Total Burden Hours: 13,500.

    C. Public Comments

    A 60-day notice published in the Federal Register at 83 FR 22687, on May 16, 2018. No comments were received. Public comments are particularly invited on: Whether this collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of functions of the FAR, and whether it will have practical utility; whether our estimate of the public burden of this collection of information is accurate, and based on valid assumptions and methodology; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways in which we can minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, through the use of appropriate technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Obtaining Copies of Proposals: Requesters may obtain a copy of the information collection documents from the General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW, Washington, DC 20405, telephone 202-501-4755. Please cite OMB Control No. 9000-0035, Claims and Appeals, in all correspondence.

    Dated: August 22, 2018. William F. Clark, Director, Office of Governmentwide Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of Governmentwide Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18751 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-EP-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [60Day-18-0960; Docket No. CDC-2018-0074] Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and Recommendations AGENCY:

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

    ACTION:

    Notice with comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as part of its continuing effort to reduce public burden and maximize the utility of government information, invites the general public and other Federal agencies the opportunity to comment on a proposed and/or continuing information collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This notice invites comment on a proposed information collection project titled Epidemiologic Study of Health Effects Associated With Low Pressure Events in Drinking Water Distribution Systems.

    DATES:

    CDC must receive written comments on or before October 29, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CDC-2018-0074 by any of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    Mail: Jeffrey M. Zirger, Information Collection Review Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE, MS-D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket Number. CDC will post, without change, all relevant comments to Regulations.gov.

    Please note: Submit all comments through the Federal eRulemaking portal (regulations.gov) or by U.S. mail to the address listed above.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request more information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the information collection plan and instruments, contact Jeffrey M. Zirger, Information Collection Review Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE, MS-D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329; phone: 404-639-7570; Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. In addition, the PRA also requires Federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each new proposed collection, each proposed extension of existing collection of information, and each reinstatement of previously approved information collection before submitting the collection to the OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, we are publishing this notice of a proposed data collection as described below.

    The OMB is particularly interested in comments that will help:

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

    2. Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

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

    4. Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submissions of responses.

    5. Assess information collection costs.

    Proposed Project

    Epidemiologic Study of Health Effects Associated With Low Pressure Events in Drinking Water Distribution Systems—Reinstatement With Change—National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases (NCEZID), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    Background and Brief Description

    In the United States (U.S.), drinking water distribution systems are designed to deliver safe, pressurized drinking water to our homes, hospitals, schools and businesses. However, the water distribution infrastructure is 50-100 years old in much of the U.S. and an estimated 240,000 water main breaks occur each year. Failures in the distribution system such as water main breaks, cross-connections, back-flow, and pressure fluctuations can result in potential intrusion of microbes and other contaminants that can cause health effects, including acute gastrointestinal and respiratory illness.

    Approximately 200 million cases of acute gastrointestinal illness occur in the U.S. each year, but we lack reliable data to assess how many of these cases are associated with drinking water. Further, data are even more limited on the human health risks associated with exposure to drinking water during and after the occurrence of low pressure events (such as water main breaks) in drinking water distribution systems. Studies in both Norway and Sweden found that people exposed to low pressure events in the water distribution system had a higher risk for gastrointestinal illness. A similar study is needed in the United States.

    The purpose of this data collection is to conduct an epidemiologic study in the U.S. to assess whether individuals exposed to low pressure events in the water distribution system are at an increased risk for acute gastrointestinal or respiratory illness. This study would be, to our knowledge, the first U.S. study to systematically examine the association between low pressure events and acute gastrointestinal and respiratory illnesses. Study findings will inform the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), CDC, and other drinking water stakeholders of the potential health risks associated with low pressure events in drinking water distribution systems and whether additional measures (e.g., new standards, additional research, or policy development) are needed to reduce the risk for health effects associated with low pressure events in the drinking water distribution system.

    We will conduct a cohort study among households that receive water from seven water utilities across the U.S.

    The water systems will be geographically diverse and will include both chlorinated and chloraminated systems. These water utilities will provide information about low pressure events that occur during the study period using a standardized form (approximately 13 events per utility). Utilities will provide address listings of households in areas exposed to the low pressure event and comparable households in an unexposed area to CDC staff, who will randomly select participants and send them an introductory letter and questionnaire. Consenting household respondents will be asked about symptoms and duration of any recent gastrointestinal or respiratory illness, tap water consumption, and other exposures including international travel, daycare attendance or employment, animal contacts, and recreational water exposures. Study participants may choose between two methods of survey response: A mail-in paper survey and a web-based survey.

    Participation in this study will be voluntary. No financial compensation will be provided to study participants. The study duration is anticipated to last 78 months. An estimated 7,900 individuals will be contacted and we anticipate 6,320 utility customers (18 years of age or older) will consent to participate in this study. The total estimated annualized hours associated with this study reinstatement is expected to be 199 hours per year. There are no costs to respondents other than their time.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of respondents Form name Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • Total burden
  • (in hours)
  • Water Utility customer Paper-based questionnaire 240 1 (12/60) 48 Web-based questionnaire 160 1 (12/60) 32 Water utility maintenance worker LPE form, ultrafilter and grab samples 5 3 (145/60) 36 LPE form, grab samples 5 2 (45/60) 8 Water Utility Environmental Engineer Line listings 5 5 2 50 Water Utility Billing clerk Line listings 5 5 1 25 Total 199
    Jeffrey M. Zirger, Acting Chief, Information Collection Review Office, Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the Associate Director for Science, Office of the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18699 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families Proposed Information Collection Activity; Comment Request Proposed Projects

    Title: Request for Certification for Adult Victims of Human Trafficking.

    OMB No.: 0970-0454.

    Description: The Trafficking Victims Protection Act, Public Law 106-386 (TVPA) requires the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to certify adult alien (“foreign”) victims of severe forms of trafficking in persons (“human trafficking”) who are willing to assist law enforcement in the investigation and prosecution of human trafficking, unless unable to cooperate due to physical or psychological trauma, and who have either made a bona fide application for T nonimmigrant status that has not been denied or been granted Continued Presence (CP) from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The Office on Trafficking in Persons (OTIP) within the HHS Administration for Children and Families issues HHS Certification Letters that grant adult foreign victims of human trafficking eligibility for federal and state benefits and services to the same extent as refugees.

    In general, OTIP initiates the certification process when it receives a notice from DHS that DHS has granted a foreign victim of trafficking CP or T nonimmigrant status, or has determined an application for T nonimmigrant status is bona fide. To issue HHS Certification Letters, it is necessary for OTIP to collect information from a victim, or a victim's representative, such as an attorney, case manager, or law enforcement victim specialist, including an address to send the HHS Certification Letter.

    OTIP will ask if the victim is in need of a case management services and the current location (city, state) of the victim, and refer the victim to an appropriate service provider in his or her area, if requested. OTIP will also ask about the victim's primary language and urgent concerns, such as medical care or housing, and transmit this information to the service provider with the victim's consent.

    Finally, OTIP collects information, such as the victim's sex and the type of human trafficking the victim experienced, to provide to Congress in an annual report on U.S. Government activities to combat trafficking that is prepared by the U.S. Department of Justice. Congress requires HHS and other appropriate Federal agencies to report, at a minimum, information on the number of persons who received benefits or other services under subsections (b) and (f) of section 7105 of Title 22 of the U.S. Code in connection with programs or activities funded or administered by HHS. HHS includes in these annual reports additional aggregate information that it collects about the victims when assisting each victim to obtain certification or eligibility.

    Previously, OTIP collected HHS Certification information via email. However, as email is not a secure means of transfer, OTIP developed the form to facilitate the submission of consistent information and improve program reporting. The provider will fill out the form, and return the form via password protected email or encryption. OTIP will store this information and any other details regarding the victim's case in OTIP's secure database. Other details maintained in the victim's file may include OTIP staff actions, referrals, and notes regarding the victim's interest in receiving services. Maintaining victim records within OTIP's database will ensure efficient service delivery for victims, allow OTIP staff to track victims' progress toward certification, verify their eligibility for benefits, and organize information for reporting aggregate data to Congress.

    Respondents: Nongovernmental entities providing social or legal services, or victim/survivors of trafficking may use this form to submit a request for certification. The use of this form is optional; the victim or his/her representative has the option to make a request for certification via telephone.

    Annual Burden Estimates Instrument Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden
  • hours per
  • response
  • Total burden
  • hours
  • Trafficking Victims Tracking System form 800 1 .25 200

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 200.

    In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, 44 U.S.C. Chap 35), the Administration for Children and Families is soliciting public comment on the specific aspects of the information collection described above. Copies of the proposed collection of information can be obtained and comments may be forwarded by writing to the Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, 33 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20201. Attn: ACF Reports Clearance Officer. Email address: [email protected]. All requests should be identified by the title of the information collection.

    The Department specifically requests comments on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted within 60 days of this publication.

    Robert Sargis, Reports Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18760 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184-47-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2018-N-3208] DHL Laboratories Inc.; Proposal To Withdraw Approval of a New Drug Application for Dextrose 5% Injection in Plastic Container; Opportunity for a Hearing AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA or Agency) Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) is proposing to withdraw approval of a new drug application (NDA) for Dextrose 5% Injection in Plastic Container, 5 grams (g)/100 milliliters (mL), held by DHL Laboratories Inc., 155 Medical Science Dr., Union, SC 23979, and is announcing an opportunity for the holder of the NDA to request a hearing on this proposal. The basis for the proposal is that the holder of the NDA has repeatedly failed to file required annual reports for the NDA.

    DATES:

    DHL Laboratories Inc. may submit a request for a hearing by September 28, 2018. Submit all data, information, and analyses upon which the request for a hearing relies by October 29, 2018. Submit electronic or written comments by October 29, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    The request for a hearing may be submitted by DHL Laboratories Inc. by either of the following methods:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments to submit your request for a hearing. Comments submitted electronically to https://www.regulations.gov, including any attachments to the request for a hearing, will be posted to the docket unchanged.

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

    Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    • Because your request for a hearing will be made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your request does not include any confidential information that you or a third part may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social Security number, or confidential business information, such as a manufacturing process. The request for a hearing must include the Docket No. FDA-2018-N-3208 for “DHL Laboratories Inc.; Proposal to Withdraw Approval of a New Drug Application for Dextrose 5% Injection in Plastic Container; Opportunity for a Hearing.” The request for a hearing will be placed in the docket and publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    DHL Laboratories Inc. may submit all data and analyses upon which the request for a hearing relies in the same manner as the request for a hearing except as follows:

    • Confidential Submissions—To submit any data analyses with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your data and analyses only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total of all data and analyses. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of any decisions on this matter. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov or available at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. Any information marked as “confidential” will not be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law.

    Comments Submitted by Other Interested Parties: For all comments submitted by other interested parties, submit comments as follows:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social Security number, or confidential business information, such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.

    • If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

    Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    • For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. FDA-2018-N-3208 for “DHL Laboratories Inc.; Proposal to Withdraw Approval of a New Drug Application for Dextrose 5% Injection in Plastic Container; Opportunity for a Hearing.” Received comments, those filed in a timely manner (see ADDRESSES), will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    • Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of your comments and you must identify this information as “confidential.” Any information marked as “confidential” will not be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access the information at: https://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Florine P. Purdie, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 6248, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-3601.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The holder of an approved application to market a new drug for human use is required to submit annual reports to FDA concerning its approved application in accordance with § 314.81 (21 CFR 314.81). DHL Laboratories Inc. has failed to submit the required annual reports and has not responded to the Agency's request for submission of the reports.

    Therefore, notice is given to DHL Laboratories Inc. and to all other interested persons that the Director of CDER proposes to issue an order, under section 505(e) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 355(e)), withdrawing approval of NDA 019971, Dextrose 5% in Plastic Container, 5 g/100 mL, and all amendments and supplements to it on the grounds that DHL Laboratories Inc. has failed to submit reports required under § 314.81.

    In accordance with section 505 of the FD&C Act and part 314 (21 CFR part 314), DHL Laboratories Inc. is hereby provided an opportunity for a hearing to show why approval of NDA 019971 should not be withdrawn and an opportunity to raise, for administrative determination, all issues relating to the legal status of the drug product covered by this application.

    An applicant who decides to seek a hearing must file the following: (1) A written notice of participation and request for a hearing (see DATES and ADDRESSES) and (2) the data, information, and analyses relied on to demonstrate that there is a genuine and substantial issue of fact that requires a hearing (see DATES and ADDRESSES). Any other interested person may also submit comments on this notice. The procedures and requirements governing this notice of opportunity for a hearing, notice of participation and request for a hearing, the information and analyses to justify a hearing, other comments, and a grant or denial of a hearing are contained in § 314.200 and in 21 CFR part 12.

    The failure of an applicant to file a timely written notice of participation and request for a hearing, as required by § 314.200, constitutes an election by that applicant not to avail itself of the opportunity for a hearing concerning CDER's proposal to withdraw approval of the application and constitutes a waiver of any contentions concerning the legal status of the drug product. FDA will then withdraw approval of the application, and the drug product may not thereafter be lawfully introduced or delivered for introduction into interstate commerce. Any new drug product introduced or delivered for introduction into interstate commerce without an approved application is subject to regulatory action at any time.

    A request for a hearing may not rest upon mere allegations or denials, but must present specific facts showing that there is a genuine and substantial issue of fact that requires a hearing. If a request for a hearing is not complete or is not supported, the Commissioner of Food and Drugs will enter summary judgment against the person who requests the hearing, making findings and conclusions, and denying a hearing.

    All submissions under this notice of opportunity for a hearing must be filed in four copies. Except for data and information prohibited from public disclosure under 21 U.S.C. 331(j) or 18 U.S.C. 1905, the submissions may be seen at the Dockets Management Staff (see ADDRESSES) between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, and will be posted to the docket at https://www.regulations.gov.

    This notice is issued under section 505(e) of the FD&C Act and under authority delegated to the Director of CDER by the Commissioner of Food and Drugs.

    Dated: August 24, 2018. Janet Woodcock, Director, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18749 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel PAR Panel: Mechanisms and Consequences of Sleep Disparities.

    Date: September 25-26, 2018.

    Time: 7:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Jane A Doussard-Roosevelt, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3184, MSC 7848, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-4445, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: August 22, 2018. Natasha M. Copeland, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18652 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Special Emphasis Panel; REDS IV—Domestic Hubs.

    Date: September 12, 2018.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.

    Place: Courtyard by Marriott, 5520 Wisconsin Avenue, Chevy Chase, MD 20815.

    Contact Person: Charles Joyce, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review/DERA, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 7196, Bethesda, MD 20892-7924, 301-827-7939, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Special Emphasis Panel; REDS IV—International Hub.

    Date: September 12, 2018.

    Time: 11:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.

    Place: Courtyard by Marriott, 5520 Wisconsin Avenue, Chevy Chase, MD 20815.

    Contact Person: Charles Joyce, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review/DERA, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 7196, Bethesda, MD 20892-7924, 301-827-7939, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Special Emphasis Panel; REDS IV—Center for Transfusion Lab Studies.

    Date: September 12, 2018.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 1:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.

    Place: Courtyard by Marriott, 5520 Wisconsin Avenue, Chevy Chase, MD 20815.

    Contact Person: Charles Joyce, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review/DERA, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 7196, Bethesda, MD 20892-7924, 301-827-7939, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Special Emphasis Panel; REDS IV—Data Coordinating Center.

    Date: September 12, 2018.

    Time: 1:30 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.

    Place: Courtyard by Marriott, 5520 Wisconsin Avenue, Chevy Chase, MD 20815.

    Contact Person: Charles Joyce, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review/DERA, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 7196, Bethesda, MD 20892-7924, 301-827-7939, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Special Emphasis Panel; PRIDE Research Education Centers.

    Date: September 13, 2018.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Crowne Plaza Washington National Airport, 1489 Jefferson Davis Hwy, Arlington, VA 22202.

    Contact Person: William J. Johnson, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review/DERA, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 7178, Bethesda, MD 20892-7924, 301-827-7938, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Special Emphasis Panel; PRIDE Coordinating Center.

    Date: September 13, 2018.

    Time: 2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Crowne Plaza Washington National Airport, 1480 Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA 22202.

    Contact Person: William J. Johnson, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review/DERA, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 7178, Bethesda, MD 20892-7924, 301-827-7938, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Special Emphasis Panel; Multi-Site Clinical Trial AIDS Special Emphasis Panel.

    Date: September 14, 2018.

    Time: 3:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Keary A. Cope, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review/DERA, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 7190, Bethesda, MD 20892-7924, 301-827-7912, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.233, National Center for Sleep Disorders Research; 93.837, Heart and Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases Research; 93.839, Blood Diseases and Resources Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: August 23, 2018. Ronald J. Livingston, Jr., Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18653 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of a meeting of the Center for Scientific Review Advisory Council.

    The meeting will be open to the public, with attendance limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting.

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Advisory Council.

    Date: September 24, 2018

    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: Provide advice to the Director, Center for Scientific Review (CSR), on matters related to planning, execution, conduct, support, review, evaluation and receipt and referral of grant applications at CSR.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Third Floor Conference Center, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Christine L Melchior, Ph.D., Senior Advisor to the Director, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3030, MSC 7776, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-1111, [email protected]

    Any interested person may file written comments with the committee by forwarding the statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person.

    In the interest of security, NIH has instituted stringent procedures for entrance into NIH buildings. Visitors will be asked to show one form of identification (for example, a government-issued photo ID, driver's license, or passport) and to state the purpose of their visit. Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page: http://public.csr.nih.gov/aboutcsr/CSROrganization/Pages/CSRAC.aspx, where an agenda and any additional information for the meeting will be posted when available.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: August 22, 2018. Natasha M. Copeland, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18654 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection [CBP Dec. 18-10] Tuna-Tariff Rate Quota for Calendar Year 2018 Tuna Classifiable Under Subheading 1604.14.22, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States AGENCY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of the quota quantity of tuna in airtight containers for Calendar Year 2018.

    SUMMARY:

    Each year, the tariff-rate quota for tuna described in subheading 1604.14.22, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), is calculated as a percentage of the tuna in airtight containers entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the preceding Calendar Year. This document sets forth the tariff-rate quota for Calendar Year 2018.

    DATES:

    The 2018 tariff-rate quota is applicable to tuna in airtight containers entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the period January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Melba Hubbard, Headquarters Quota Branch, Interagency Collaboration Division, Trade Policy and Programs, Office of Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Washington, DC 20229-1155, (202) 863-6560.

    Background

    It has been determined that 13,951,961 kilograms of tuna in airtight containers may be entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the Calendar Year 2018, at the rate of 6.0 percent ad valorem under subheading 1604.14.22, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Any such tuna which is entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the current calendar year in excess of this quota will be dutiable at the rate of 12.5 percent ad valorem under subheading 1604.14.30, HTSUS.

    Dated: August 23, 2018. Brenda B. Smith, Executive Assistant Commissioner, Office of Trade.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18687 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-HQ-MB-2018-N104; FF09M13200/189/FXMB12330900000; OMB Control Number 1018—New] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Federal Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp (Duck Stamp) and Junior Duck Stamp Contests AGENCY:

    Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of information collection; request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service, we), are proposing a new information collection.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before September 28, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send written comments on this information collection request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget's Desk Officer for the Department of the Interior by email at [email protected]; or via facsimile to (202) 395-5806. Please provide a copy of your comments to the Service Information Collection Clearance Officer, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, MS: BPHC, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803 (mail); or by email to [email protected] Please reference OMB Control Number 1018—New in the subject line of your comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request additional information about this ICR, contact Madonna L. Baucum, Service Information Collection Clearance Officer, by email at [email protected], or by telephone at (703) 358-2503. You may also view the ICR at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we provide the general public and other Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand our information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format.

    We published a Federal Register notice with a 60-day public comment period soliciting comments on this collection of information on February 1, 2018 (83 FR 4671). We received one comment in response to that Notice, but it did not address the information collection. We took no action in response to the comment.

    We are again soliciting comments on the proposed ICR that is described below. We are especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is the collection necessary to the proper functions of the Service; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Service enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Service minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology.

    Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of public record. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be 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.

    Abstract History of the Federal Duck Stamp

    On March 16, 1934, Congress passed, and President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed, the Migratory Bird Hunting Stamp Act (16 U.S.C. 718-718k). Popularly known as the Duck Stamp Act, it required all waterfowl hunters 16 years or older to buy a stamp annually. The revenue generated was originally earmarked for the Department of Agriculture, but 5 years later was transferred to the Department of the Interior and the Service.

    In the years since its enactment, the Federal Duck Stamp Program has become one of the most popular and successful conservation programs ever initiated. Today, some 1.5 million stamps are sold each year, and as of 2017, Federal Duck Stamps have generated more than $1 billion for the preservation of more than 6 million acres of waterfowl habitat in the United States. Numerous other birds, mammals, fish, reptiles, and amphibians have similarly prospered because of habitat protection made possible by the program. An estimated one-third of the Nation's endangered and threatened species find food or shelter in refuges preserved by Duck Stamp funds. Moreover, the protected wetlands help dissipate storms, purify water supplies, store flood water, and nourish fish hatchlings important for sport and commercial fishermen.

    History of the Duck Stamp Contest

    Jay N. “Ding” Darling, a nationally known political cartoonist for the Des Moines Register and a noted hunter and wildlife conservationist, designed the first Federal Duck Stamp at President Roosevelt's request. In subsequent years, noted wildlife artists submitted designs. The first Federal Duck Stamp Contest was opened in 1949 to any U.S. artist who wished to enter, and 65 artists submitted a total of 88 design entries. Since then, the contest has been known as the Federal Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp Art (Duck Stamp) Contest and has attracted large numbers of entrants.

    The Duck Stamp Contest (50 CFR part 91) remains the only art competition of its kind sponsored by the U.S. Government. The Secretary of the Interior appoints a panel of noted art, waterfowl, and philatelic authorities to select each year's winning design. Winners receive no compensation for the work, except a pane of their stamps, but winners may sell prints of their designs, which are sought by hunters, conservationists, and art collectors.

    The Service selects five or fewer species of waterfowl each year; each entry must employ one of the Service-designated species as the dominant feature (defined as being in the foreground and clearly the focus of attention). Designs may also include hunting dogs, hunting scenes, waterfowl decoys, national wildlife refuges as the background of habitat scenes, non-eligible species, or other scenes that depict uses of the stamp for sporting, conservation, and collecting purposes. Entries may be in any media EXCEPT photography or computer-generated art. Designs must be the contestants' original hand-drawn creation and may not be copied or duplicated from previously published art, including photographs, or from images in any format published on the internet.

    History of the Junior Duck Stamp Contest

    The Federal Junior Duck Stamp Conservation and Design Program (Junior Duck Stamp Program) began in 1989 as an extension of the Migratory Bird Conservation and Hunting Stamp. The national Junior Duck Stamp art contest started in 1993, and the first stamp design was selected from entries from eight participating states. The program was recognized by Congress with the 1994 enactment of the Junior Duck Stamp Conservation and Design Program Act (16 U.S.C. 719). All 50 states, Washington DC, and 2 of the U.S. Territories currently participate in the annual contest.

    The Junior Duck Stamp Program introduces wetland and waterfowl conservation to students in kindergarten through high school. It crosses cultural, ethnic, social, and geographic boundaries to teach greater awareness and guide students in exploring our nation's natural resources. It is the Service's premier conservation education initiative.

    The Junior Duck Stamp Program includes a dynamic art- and science-based curriculum. This non-traditional pairing of subjects brings new interest to both the sciences and the arts. The program teaches students across the nation conservation through the arts, using scientific and wildlife observation principles to encourage visual communication about what they learn. Four curriculum guides, with activities and resources, were developed for use as a year-round study plan to assist students in exploring science in real-life situations.

    Modeled after the Federal Duck Stamp Contest, the annual Junior Duck Stamp Art and Conservation Message Contest (Junior Duck Stamp Contest) was developed as a visual assessment of a student's learning and progression. The Junior Duck Stamp Contest encourages partnerships among Federal and State government agencies, nongovernment organizations, businesses, and volunteers to help recognize and honor thousands of teachers and students throughout the United States for their participation in conservation-related activities. Since 2000, the contest has received more than 478,000 entries.

    The winning artwork from the national art contest serves as the design for the Junior Duck Stamp, which the Service produces annually. This $5 stamp has become a much sought after collector's item. One hundred percent of the revenue from the sale of Junior Duck stamps goes to support recognition and environmental education activities for students who participate in the program. More than $1.25 million in Junior Duck Stamp proceeds have been used to provide recognition, incentives, and scholarships to participating students, teachers, and schools. The Program continues to educate youth about land stewardship and the importance of connecting to their natural worlds. Several students who have participated in the Junior Duck Stamp Program have gone on to become full-time wildlife artists and conservation professionals; many attribute their interest and success to their early exposure to the Junior Duck Stamp Program.

    Who Can Enter the Federal Duck Stamp and Junior Duck Stamp Contests

    The Duck Stamp Contest is open to all U.S. citizens, nationals, and resident aliens who are at least 18 years of age by June 1. Individuals enrolled in kindergarten through grade 12 may participate in the Junior Duck Stamp Contest. All eligible students are encouraged to participate in the Junior Duck Stamp Conservation and Design Program annual art and conservation message contest as part of the program curriculum through public, private, and homeschools, as well as through informal educational experiences such as those found in scouting, art studios, and nature centers.

    Entry Requirements

    Each entry in the Duck Stamp Contest requires a completed entry form and an entry fee. Information required on the entry form includes:

    • “Display, Participation & Reproduction Rights Agreement” certification form;

    • Basic contact information (name, address, phone numbers, and email address);

    • Date of birth (to verify eligibility);

    • Species portrayed and medium used; and

    • Name of hometown newspaper (for press coverage).

    Each entry in the Junior Duck Stamp Contest requires a completed entry form that requests:

    • Basic contact information (name, address, phone numbers, and email address);

    • Age (to verify eligibility);

    • Parent's name and contact information;

    • Whether the student has a Social Security or VISA immigration number (to verify eligibility to receive prizes);

    • Whether the student is a foreign exchange student;

    • Grade of student (so they may be judged with their peers);

    • The title, species, medium used, and conservation message associated with the drawing;

    • Basic contact information for their teacher and school (name, address, phone numbers, and email address); and

    • Certification of authenticity.

    Students in Grades 7-12 and all national level students are also required to include citations for any resources they used to develop their designs. We use this information to verify that the student has not plagiarized or copied someone else's work. The Service also translates entry forms into other appropriate languages to increase the understanding of the rules and what the parents and students are signing.

    Title of Collection: Federal Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp (Duck Stamp) and Junior Duck Stamp Contests.

    OMB Control Number: 1018—New.

    Form Number: None.

    Type of Review: Existing collection in use without an OMB Control Number.

    Respondents/Affected Public: Individuals.

    Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

    Frequency of Collection: Annually.

    Activity Total
  • number of
  • annual
  • respondents
  • Average
  • number of
  • submissions
  • each
  • Total
  • number of
  • annual
  • responses
  • Average
  • completion
  • time per
  • response
  • (min)
  • Total
  • annual
  • burden
  • hours *
  • Duck Stamp Program Contest Entry Form Individuals 200 1 200 7 23 Junior Duck Stamp Program Contest Entry Form Individuals 25,000 1 25,000 ** 20 8,333 Totals: 25,200 1 25,200 8,356 * Rounded. ** Burden for Junior Duck Stamp Program entry form is longer since both the parents and teacher must sign the form, and the student must provide references.

    Total Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden Cost: $53,000.00 annually (entry fees of $125 plus an average of $15 for mailing costs for submissions the estimated 200 annual submissions to the Federal Duck Stamp Contest). There are no fees associated with the Junior Duck Stamp Contest submissions. We estimate the mailing costs associated with entering submissions to the Junior Duck Stamp contest to be approximately $25,000 annually. Most of the 25,000 entries are mailed directly by schools who utilize the bulk mail option reducing the amount of postage and packages received.

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    The authority for this action is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

    Dated: August 23, 2018. Madonna Baucum, Information Collection Clearance Officer, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18671 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Indian Affairs [189A2100DD/AAKC001030/A0A501010.999900 253G; OMB Control Number 1076-0112] Agency Information Collection Activities; Tribal Reassumption of Jurisdiction Over Child Custody Proceedings AGENCY:

    Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of information collection; request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) are proposing to renew an information collection.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before October 29, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send your comments on this information collection request (ICR) by mail to Evangeline M. Campbell, Chief, Division of Human Services, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1849 C Street NW, MIC-3645, Washington, DC 20240; or by email to [email protected] Please reference OMB Control Number 1076-0112 in the subject line of your comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request additional information about this ICR, contact Evangeline M. Campbell by email at [email protected], or by telephone at 202-513-7621.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we provide the general public and other Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand our information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format.

    We are soliciting comments on the proposed ICR that is described below. We are especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is the collection necessary to the proper functions of the BIA; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the BIA enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the BIA minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology.

    Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of public record. We will include or summarize each comment in our request to OMB to approve this ICR. 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.

    Abstract: The BIA is seeking to renew the information collection conducted under 25 CFR 13, Tribal Reassumption of Jurisdiction over Child Custody Proceedings, which prescribes procedures by which an Indian tribe that occupies a reservation over which a state asserts any jurisdiction pursuant to federal law may reassume jurisdiction over Indian child proceedings as authorized by the Indian Child Welfare Act, Public Law 95-608, 92 Stat. 3069, 25 U.S.C. 1918.

    The collection of information will ensure that the provisions of Public Law 95-608 are met. Any Indian Tribe that became subject to State jurisdiction pursuant to the provisions of the Act of August 15, 1953 (67 Stat. 588), as amended by title IV of the Act of April 11, 1968 (82 Stat. 73,78), or pursuant to any other Federal law, may reassume jurisdiction over child custody proceedings. The collection of information provides data that will be used in considering the petition and feasibility of the plan of the Tribe for reassumption of jurisdiction over Indian child custody proceedings. We collect the following information: Full name, address, and telephone number of petitioning Tribe or Tribes; a Tribal resolution; estimated total number of members in the petitioning Tribe of Tribes with an explanation of how the number was estimated; current criteria for Tribal membership; citation to provision in Tribal constitution authorizing the Tribal governing body to exercise jurisdiction over Indian child custody matters; description of Tribal court; copy of any Tribal ordinances or Tribal court rules establishing procedures or rules for exercise of jurisdiction over child custody matters; and all other information required by 25 CFR 13.11.

    Title of Collection: Tribal Reassumption of Jurisdiction over Child Custody Proceedings.

    OMB Control Number: 1076-0112.

    Form Number: None.

    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: Federally recognized Tribes who submit Tribal reassumption petitions for review and approval by the Secretary of the Interior.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: 1.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 1.

    Estimated Completion Time per Response: 8 hours.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 8 hours.

    Respondent's Obligation: Required to Obtain or Retain a Benefit.

    Frequency of Collection: On occasion.

    Total Estimated Annual Non-hour Burden Cost: None.

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    The authority for this action is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq).

    Elizabeth K. Appel, Director, Office of Regulatory Affairs and Collaborative Action—Indian Affairs.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18724 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4337-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Office of the Secretary [Docket No. ONRR-2012-0003, DS63600000 DR2000000.PMN000 189D0102R2] Royalty Policy Committee; Public Meeting; Correction AGENCY:

    Office of Natural Resources Revenue, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice; correction.

    SUMMARY:

    The Office of Natural Resources Revenue (ONRR) published a document in the Federal Register of August 13, 2018, announcing the fourth meeting of the Royalty Policy Committee (Committee). The document contained an incorrect meeting location.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Chris Mentasti, Office of Natural Resources Revenue at (202) 513-0614 or email to [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Correction

    In the Federal Register of August 13, 2018, in FR Doc. 2018-17346, on page 40081, in the third column, correct the ADDRESSES caption to read:

    ADDRESSES:

    The Committee meeting will be held at the Sheraton Denver West Hotel, 360 Union Boulevard, Lakewood, CO 80228. Members of the public may attend in person or view documents and presentation under discussion via WebEx at https://onrr.webex.com/onrr/j.php?MTID=m8b07b197593ce80917ef1715ae9f262a and listen to the proceedings at telephone number 1-888-469-0854 or International Toll number 517-319-9462 (passcode: 9724702).

    Authority:

    5 U.S.C. Appendix 2.

    Gregory J. Gould, Director for Office of Natural Resources Revenue.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18680 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4335-30-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives [OMB Number 1140-0071] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection of eComments Requested; Notification to Fire Safety Authority of Storage of Explosive Materials 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. The proposed collection OMB 1140-0071 (Notification to Fire Safety Authority of Storage of Explosive Materials) is being revised due to a change in burden, since there is a reduction in both the total responses and total burden hours due to less respondents, although there is a slight increase in the cost burden due to higher postage costs since 2015.

    DATES:

    The comment period for the proposed information collection published on June 28, 2018 (83 FR 30458) is reopened. Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for an additional 30 days until September 28, 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 Anita Scheddel, Program Analyst, Explosives Industry Programs Branch, either by mail 99 New York Ave. NE, Washington, DC 20226, or by email at [email protected], or by telephone at 202-648-7158. 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:

    The proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register, on June 28, 2018 (83 FR 30458), allowing for a 60-day comment period. 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: Revision of a currently approved collection.

    (2) The title of the form/collection: Notification to Fire Safety Authority of Storage of Explosive Materials.

    (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, Farms, and State, Local, or Tribal Government.

    Abstract: The collection of information is necessary for the safety of emergency response personnel responding to fires at sites where explosives are stored. The information is provided both orally and in writing to the authority having jurisdiction for fire safety in the locality in which explosives are stored.

    (5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: An estimated 975 respondents will respond once to this information collection, and it will take each respondent approximately 30 minutes to complete their responses on the template provided by ATF.

    (6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The estimated annual public burden associated with this collection is 488 hours, which is equal to 975 (# of respondents) * 1 (# of responses per respondents) * .5 (30 minutes).

    (7) An explanation of the change in estimate: The total responses and burden hours associated with this IC were reduced by 50 and 25 respectively, due to less respondents since the previous renewal in 2015. However, the total costs for this IC have increased by $27, due to an increase in mailing costs from 45 cents in 2015 to 50 cents in 2018.

    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: August 24, 2018. Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18733 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives [OMB Number 1140-0070] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection of eComments Requested; Application for Explosives License or Permit—ATF F 5400.13/5400.16 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.

    DATES:

    The comment period for the proposed information collection published on June 28, 2018 (83 FR 30457) is reopened. Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for an additional 30 days until September 28, 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 Shawn Stevens, Federal Explosives Licensing Center, either by mail at 244 Needy Road, Martinsburg, WV 25405, by email at [email protected], or by telephone at 304-616-4400. 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:

    The proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register, on June 28, 2018 (83 FR 30457), allowing for a 60-day comment period. 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, without change, of a currently approved collection.

    (2) The Title of the Form/Collection: Application for Explosives License or Permit.

    (3) The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection:

    Form number: ATF F 5400.13/5400.16.

    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, Not-for-profit institution, and Farms.

    Abstract: Chapter 40, Title 18, U.S.C., provides that any person engaged in the business of explosive materials as a dealer, manufacturer, or importer shall be licensed (18 U.S.C. 842(a)(1)). In addition, provisions are made for the issuance of permits for those who wish to use explosive materials that are shipped in interstate or foreign commerce.

    (5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: An estimated 10,200 respondents will utilize the form associated with this information collection, and it will take each respondent approximately 1 hour and 30 minutes to respond once to this form.

    (6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The estimated annual public burden associated with this collection is 15,300 hours, which is equal to 10,200 (total hours) * 1 (# of responses) * 1.5 hours (total time taken to complete each response).

    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: August 24, 2018. Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18732 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1140-0101] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; New Collection: Death in Custody Reporting Act Collection AGENCY:

    Bureau of Justice Assistance, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    30-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), Bureau of Justice Assistance will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The Death in Custody Reporting Act (DCRA) requires states and federal law enforcement agencies to report certain information to the Attorney General regarding the death of any person occurring during interactions with law enforcement officers or while in custody. It further requires the Attorney General and the Department of Justice (Department) to collect the information, establish guidelines on how it should be reported, annually determine whether each state has complied with the reporting requirements, and address any state's noncompliance.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 30 days until September 28, 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 Chris Casto, Bureau of Justice Assistance, 810 Seventh Street NW, Washington, DC 20531 (email: [email protected]); telephone: 202-616-6500.

    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 (check justification or form 83): New Collection.

    The Title of the Form/Collection: Death in Custody Reporting Act Collection.

    (2) The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection: Form number (if applicable): DCR-1.

    Quarterly Summary. This summary form requires States to either (1) identify all reportable deaths that occurred in their jurisdiction during the corresponding quarter and provide basic information about the circumstances of the death, or (2) affirm that no reportable death occurred in the State during the reporting period.

    For each quarter in a fiscal year, a State must complete the Quarterly Summary (Form DCR-1) and submit it by the reporting deadline. The Quarterly Summary is a list of all reportable deaths that occurred in the State during the corresponding quarter with basic information about the circumstances of each death. If a State did not have a reportable death during the quarter, the State must so indicate on the Quarterly Summary. The reporting deadline to submit the Quarterly Summary is the last day of the month following the close of the quarter. For each quarter, BJA will send two reminders prior to the reporting deadline.

    Example. The second quarter of a fiscal year is January 1—March 31. The deadline to submit the second quarter Quarterly Summary is April 30. BJA will send a reminder to States on March 31 and April 15.

    Component: Bureau Justice Assistance, U.S. Department of Justice.

    Form number (if applicable): DCR-1A

    Incident Report. This incident report form requires States to provide additional information for each reportable death identified in the Quarterly Summary that occurred during interactions with law enforcement personnel or while in their custody.

    For each reportable death identified in the Quarterly Summary, a State must complete and submit by the same reporting deadline an Incident Report (Form DCR-1A), which contains specific information on the circumstances of the death and additional characteristics of the decedent. These include:

    • The decedent's name, date of birth, gender, race, and ethnicity.

    • The date, time, and location of the death.

    • The law enforcement or correctional agency involved.

    • Manner of death.

    States must answer all questions on the Incident Report before they can submit the form. If the State does not have sufficient information to complete one of the questions, then the State may select the “unknown” answer, if available, and then identify when the information is anticipated to be obtained.

    Component: Bureau Justice Assistance, U.S. Department of Justice.

    Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: State, Local, or Tribal Government.

    Abstract: In order to comply with the mandate of the DCRA, the Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance, is proposing a new data collection for State Administering Agencies to collect and submit information regarding the death of any person who is detained, under arrest, or is in the process of being arrested, is en route to be incarcerated, or is incarcerated at a municipal or county jail, State prison, State-run boot camp prison, boot camp prison that is contracted out by the State, any State or local contract facility, or other local or State correctional facility (including any juvenile facility).

    (3) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: For purposes of this collection, the term “State” includes any State of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands. Thus, the affected public that will be asked to respond on a quarterly basis each federal fiscal year includes 56 State and Territorial actors. These States will be requesting information from approximately 19,450 State and local law enforcement agencies (LEAs), 56 State and Territorial departments of corrections, and 2,800 local adult jail jurisdictions.

    (4) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: For purposes of this burden calculation, it is estimated that for each fiscal year there will be a total of 1900 reportable deaths by 1,060 LEAs, 1,053 reportable deaths by 600 jails, and 3,483 reportable deaths by prisons.

    For FY 2020 and beyond, the total projected respondent burden is 13,756.49 hours. States will need an estimated 4.00 hours to complete each Quarterly Summary for a total of 4,480.00 hours, 0.25 hours to complete each corresponding Incident Reports (DCR-1A) for a total of 1,713.49 hours. For LEAs, the estimated burden to assist States in completing the Quarterly Summaries is 0.40 hours per Report for a total of 1,696.00 hours, and a total of 1,425.00 hours, at 0.75 hours for each corresponding Incident Report. The estimated burden for jails is a total of 960.00 hours to assist States in completing the Quarterly Summaries and 789.75 hours in completing Incident Reports. Finally, the estimated burden for prisons to assist States in completing the Quarterly Summaries is a total of 80.00 hours, and a total of 2,612.25 hours to assist States in completing Incident Reports.

    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: August 24, 2018. Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18700 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-FY-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Notice of Lodging of Proposed Consent Decree Under the Clean Water Act

    On August 20, 2018, the Department of Justice lodged a proposed Consent Decree with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa in the lawsuit entitled United States v. AG Processing Inc., Civil Action No. 3:18-cv-03052-LRR.

    The United States filed this lawsuit under Section 311(j) of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1321(j). The United States' complaint seeks injunctive relief and civil penalties for violations of the Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure regulations and the Facility Response Plan regulations at defendant's facilities in Iowa, Nebraska, and Minnesota. The consent decree requires the defendant to perform injunctive relief and pay a $500,000 civil penalty.

    The publication of this notice opens a period for public comment on the Consent Decree. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division, and should refer to United States v. AG Processing Inc., D.J. Ref. No. 90-5-1-1-11716. All comments must be submitted no later than thirty (30) days after the publication date of this notice. Comments may be submitted either by email or by mail:

    To submit comments: Send them to: By email [email protected] By mail Assistant Attorney General, U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044-7611.

    During the public comment period, the Consent Decree may be examined and downloaded at this Justice Department website: https://www.justice.gov/enrd/consent-decrees. We will provide a paper copy of the Consent Decree upon written request and payment of reproduction costs. Please mail your request and payment to: Consent Decree Library, US DOJ—ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044-7611.

    Please enclose a check or money order for $12.75 (25 cents per page reproduction cost) payable to the United States Treasury.

    Susan M. Akers, Assistant Section Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and Natural Resources Division.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18651 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Notice of Lodging of Proposed Settlement Agreement Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act

    On August 23, 2018, the Department of Justice lodged a proposed Settlement Agreement with the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Utah in the matter entitled In re: Federal Resources Corporation and Camp Bird Colorado, Inc. Bankruptcy Case No. 14-33427 KRA. This Settlement Agreement resolves disputes with the Trustee for Debtors Federal Resources Corporation (“FRC”) and Camp Bird Colorado, Inc. (“CBCI”) as well as their former principal Bentley Blum. The proposed settlement will (1) Establish the amounts of the United States claims at the four Sites at issue in the bankruptcies; (2) Provide an allowed preferred claim at the Camp Bird Site; (3) Establish United States' recoveries from FRC's insurance policies; (4) Grant a CNTS from the United States to Mr. Blum, and (5) Resolve all claims the Debtors have for and against Mr. Blum. The claims arise from the Debtors' liabilities under Section 107(a) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9607(a), for costs incurred and to be incurred relating to four Superfund Sites: The Conjecture Mine Site in Bonner County, Idaho; the Minnie Moore Mine Site in Blaine County, Idaho; the Haystack Mines Site in McKinley County, New Mexico; and the Camp Bird Colorado Mine Site near Ouray, Colorado.

    The publication of this notice opens a period for public comment on the Settlement Agreement. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division, and should refer to In re: Federal Resources Corporation and Camp Bird Colorado, Inc. Bankruptcy Case No. 14-33427, D.J. Ref. No. 90-11-3-09515/5. All comments must be submitted no later than twenty (20) days after the publication date of this notice. Comments may be submitted either by email or by mail:

    To submit comments: Send them to: By email [email protected] By mail Assistant Attorney General, U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044-7611.

    During the public comment period, the Settlement Agreement may be examined and downloaded at this Justice Department website: https://www.justice.gov/enrd/consent-decrees. We will provide a paper copy of the Settlement Agreement upon written request and payment of reproduction costs. Please mail your request and payment to: Consent Decree Library, U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044-7611.

    Please enclose a check or money order for $5.00 (25 cents per page reproduction cost) payable to the United States Treasury. For a paper copy without the exhibits, the cost is $4.00.

    Susan M. Akers, Assistant Section Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and Natural Resources Division.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18659 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1123-0010] Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comments Requested; Request for Registration Under the Gambling Devices Act of 1962 ACTION:

    30-day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), Criminal Division, will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register allowing for a 60 day comment period.

    DATES:

    The proposed information collection is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 30 days until September 28, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Michelle Hill, Counsel to the Director, U.S. Department of Justice, 950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Criminal Division, Office of Enforcement Operations, Gambling Device Registration Program, JCK Building, Washington, DC 20530-0001. (telephone: 202-514-7049)

    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 agencies estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; —Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and —Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. Overview of This Information Collection

    (1) Type of Information Collection: Revision of a currently approved collection.

    (2) Title of the Form/Collection: Request for Registration Under the Gambling Devices Act of 1962.

    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department of Justice sponsoring the collection: Form Number: DOJ\CRM\OEO\GDR-1. Sponsoring component: Criminal Division, 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: Not-for-profit institutions, individuals or households, and State, Local or Tribal Government. The form can be used by any entity required to register under the Gambling Devices Act of 1962 (15 U.S.C. 1171-1178).

    (5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: It is estimated that 7,800 respondents will complete each form within approximately 5 minutes.

    (6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: There are an estimated 650 total annual burden hours associated with this collection.

    If additional information is required contact: Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE, 3E.405A, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: August 24, 2018. Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18701 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE U.S. Marshals Service [OMB Number 1105-0096] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Extension With Change, of a Previously Approved Collection; Sequestered Juror Information Form AGENCY:

    U.S. Marshals Service, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    60-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), U.S. Marshals Service (USMS), 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.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until October 29, 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 additional information, please contact Nicole Timmons either by mail at CG-3, 10th Floor, Washington, DC 20530-0001, by email at [email protected], or by telephone at 202-236-2646.

    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 (check justification or form 83): Extension of a currently approved collection.

    (2) The Title of the Form/Collection: Sequestered Juror Information Form.

    (3) The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection:

    Form number (if applicable): Form USM-523A.

    Component: United States Marshals Service, U.S. Department of Justice.

    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

    Primary: Households/individuals.

    Abstract: The United States Marshals Service is responsible for ensuring the security of federal courthouses, courtrooms, and federal jurist. This information assists Marshals Service personnel in the planning of, and response to, potential security needs of the court and jurors during the course of proceedings. The authority for collecting the information on this form is 28 U.S.C. 509, 510 and 561 et seq.

    (5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: An estimated 14 respondents will utilize the form, and it will take each respondent approximately 4 minutes to complete the form.

    (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 hour, which is equal to (14 (total # of annual responses) * 4 minutes = 56 minutes or 1 hour).

    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: August 24, 2018. Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18702 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-04-P
    NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION [Notice: (18-065)] Planetary Science Advisory Committee; Meeting AGENCY:

    National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) announces a meeting of the Planetary Science Advisory Committee (PAC). This Committee functions in an advisory capacity to the Director, Planetary Science Division, in the NASA Science Mission Directorate. The meeting will be held for the purpose of soliciting, from the planetary science community and other persons, scientific and technical information relevant to program planning.

    DATES:

    Wednesday, September 26, 2018, 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m., Eastern Time.

    ADDRESSES:

    This meeting will be virtual and will be available telephonically and by WebEx. You must use a touch-tone phone to participate in this meeting. Any interested person may dial the USA toll free conference call number 1-800-779-9966 or the toll number 1-517-645-6359, passcode 5255996. The WebEx link is https://nasa.webex.com/; the meeting number is 999 932 505, password is [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. KarShelia Henderson, Science Mission Directorate, NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC 20546, (202) 358-2355, fax (202) 358-2779, or [email protected]

    The agenda for the meeting includes the following topics:

    —Planetary Science Division Update —Planetary Science Division Research and Analysis Program Update

    It is imperative that the meeting be held on these dates to accommodate the scheduling priorities of the key participants.

    Patricia Rausch, Advisory Committee Management Officer, National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18629 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7510-13-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 50-0609; NRC-2018-0184] Target Fabrication Portion of the Northwest Medical Isotopes Radioisotope Production Facility AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact; issuance.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuing an exemption to Northwest Medical Isotopes, LLC (NWMI) from its regulations, to waive the requirement that NWMI submit an application to the NRC for a license to possess and use special nuclear material for processing and fuel fabrication, scrap recovery or conversion of uranium hexafluoride, or for the conduct of any other activity which the NRC has determined will significantly affect the quality of the environment, at least 9 months prior to commencement of construction of the plant or facility in which the activity will be conducted. The NRC has prepared an environmental assessment (EA) and finding of no significant impact (FONSI) for this exemption request.

    DATES:

    The EA and FONSI referenced in this document are available on the 24th day of August, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0184 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You may access 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-2018-0184. 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 “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:

    David Tiktinsky, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-8740, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    The NRC is considering issuing an exemption to NWMI from section 70.21(f) in title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), which requires the submission of an application to the NRC under 10 CFR part 70, “Domestic Licensing of Special Nuclear Material,” for a license to possess and use special nuclear material for processing and fuel fabrication, scrap recovery or conversion of uranium hexafluoride, or for the conduct of any other activity which the NRC has determined pursuant to subpart A of 10 CFR part 51 will significantly affect the quality of the environment, at least 9 months prior to commencement of construction of the plant or facility in which the activity will be conducted. The exemption would allow NWMI to commence construction of the entire NWMI medical radioisotope production facility (RPF) based upon the environmental review conducted for the 10 CFR part 50 construction permit issued to NWMI on May 9, 2018. The exemption was requested by NWMI in a letter dated December 18, 2017 (ADAMS Accession No. ML17362A040), as supplemented on March 12, 2018 (ADAMS Accession No. ML18088A175).

    The NWMI 10 CFR part 50 construction permit application, which included an environmental report, discussed processes that would fall under 10 CFR 70.21(f). The NRC staff environmental review of the 10 CFR part 50 construction permit application discussed, as a connected action, the environmental impacts of this process, consistent with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and the NRC's environmental protection regulations that implement NEPA in 10 CFR part 51. The NRC staff documented the evaluation and conclusions of its environmental review of the NWMI 10 CFR part 50 construction permit application in an environmental impact statement (EIS), NUREG-2209, “Environmental Impact Statement for the Construction Permit for the Northwest Medical Isotopes Radioisotope Production Facility,” issued in May 2017 (ADAMS Accession No. ML17130A862).

    As required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC staff prepared an EA that analyzes the environmental impacts of the proposed exemption in accordance with NEPA. Based on the EA that follows, the NRC has determined not to prepare an EIS for the proposed exemption, and is issuing a FONSI.

    II. Environmental Assessment Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action is the issuance of an exemption in response to a request dated December 18, 2017 (ADAMS Accession No. ML17362A040), as supplemented by a letter dated March 12, 2018 (ADAMS Accession No. ML18088A175), from NWMI. The purpose of the proposed action is to exempt NWMI from the requirement that NWMI submit an application to the NRC for a license under 10 CFR part 70 at least 9 months prior to commencement of construction of the plant or facility in which the 10 CFR part 70 activities will be conducted. The activities that will be subject to the 10 CFR part 70 license application are described in the construction permit application that NWMI previously submitted to the NRC under 10 CFR part 50 for an RPF to be constructed in Columbia, Missouri. (NWMI Preliminary Safety Analyses Report, Chapter 19, “Environmental Report.” Corvallis, OR, revision OA dated June 2015, (ADAMS Accession Nos. ML15210A123, ML15210A128, ML15210A129, and ML15210A131)).

    The NWMI exemption request asks the NRC to exempt NWMI from the timing requirement in order to allow NWMI to begin construction of the 10 CFR part 70 components of the RPF upon the issuance of the 10 CFR part 50 construction permit.

    Need for the Proposed Action

    NWMI received a construction permit under 10 CFR part 50 to construct the RPF, which would fabricate low-enriched uranium (LEU) targets and ship them to a network of U.S. research reactors for irradiation, receive irradiated LEU targets, disassemble and dissolve irradiated LEU targets, and recover and purify Molybdenum-99 (Mo-99). These processes would take place in a single RPF building divided into two separate areas where processes subject to different regulatory regimes would take place. The processes involved in receipt of irradiated LEU targets, LEU target disassembly and dissolution, and Mo-99 recovery and purification are subject to the licensing requirements of 10 CFR part 50. The processes involved in target fabrication that NWMI plans to perform in a separate area of the RPF and would be subject to the separate licensing requirements of 10 CFR part 70.

    NWMI submitted a 10 CFR part 50 construction permit application seeking authorization to construct the portion of the RPF where the processes subject to the 10 CFR part 50 regulations would occur. NWMI submitted an environmental report with its construction permit application, providing environmental information about all of the processes that would occur in both portions of the RPF. In accordance with Section 102(2)(C) of NEPA and the NRC's regulations in 10 CFR part 51, the NRC staff prepared an EIS (NUREG-2209) assessing the potential impacts of the construction, operation, and decommissioning of the proposed RPF on the quality of the human environment and reasonable alternatives. The construction and operation impacts from the portion of the RPF in which 10 CFR part 70 target fabrication activities would occur were evaluated as a connected action to the 10 CFR part 50 construction permit.

    Because the NRC has evaluated the environmental impacts from the 10 CFR part 70 target fabrication activities in the RPF, as part of its EIS supporting NWMI's 10 CFR part 50 construction permit application, NWMI is requesting an exemption from the requirement that the application for these 10 CFR part 70 activities must be submitted at least 9 months prior to commencement of construction of the 10 CFR part 70 components of the RPF. The exemption would allow NWMI to initiate construction of the 10 CFR part 70 components of the RPF upon the issuance of the 10 CFR part 50 construction permit for the RPF even if the 10 CFR 70.21(f) timing requirement has not been met.

    Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The environmental impacts associated with the construction of the target fabrication portion of the RPF were evaluated and discussed in the EIS issued for the construction permit application for the 10 CFR part 50 portion of the RPF (see NUREG-2209, Section 6-4). The EIS concluded that “[a]fter weighing the environmental, economic, technical, and other benefits against environmental and other costs, and considering reasonable alternatives, the NRC staff's recommendation, unless safety issues mandate otherwise, is the issuance of the construction permit under 10 CFR part 50 to NWMI.”

    The purpose of the timing requirement in 10 CFR 70.21(f) is to allow the NRC sufficient time to conduct its environmental review of certain 10 CFR part 70 activities before commencement of construction of the facility in which they will occur. As explained above, the NRC considered the environmental impacts of the processes that will take place in 10 CFR part 70 portion of the RPF, where target fabrication processes will occur, as part of its review of the 10 CFR part 50 construction permit application. Because the exemption request concerns only the timing of when construction of the 10 CFR part 70 portion of the RPF begins, the proposed exemption would not: (a) Affect the probabilities of evaluated accidents; (b) impact margins of safety; (c) reduce the effectiveness of programs contained in licensing documents; (d) increase effluents; (e) increase occupational radiological exposures; or (f) impact operations or decommissioning activities of the RPF. The staff's safety review performed for issuance of the 10 CFR part 50 construction permit is documented in the staff's Safety Evaluation Report dated November 2017 (ADAMS Accession No. ML17310A368).

    The requested exemption does not impact the scope of the proposed action or the connected actions at the RPF that were evaluated in the EIS. Accordingly, it does not involve any additional impacts or represent a significant change to those impacts described and analyzed in the environmental information submitted as part of the 10 CFR part 50 construction permit application. Based on the foregoing, the NRC staff has concluded that the proposed action would have no significant environmental impact.

    Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    A possible alternative to the proposed action would be to deny the exemption request (i.e., the “no-action” alternative). If the NRC denies the exemption request, then NWMI may need to defer the initiation of construction of the 10 CFR part 70 components of the RPF to meet the timing requirements in 10 CFR 70.21(f). Since the exemption request relates to the timing of the initiation of construction and not to the scope of construction, then the impacts of this alternative would not be significantly different than if the NRC approved the exemption request.

    Alternative Use of Resources

    Since NWMI has no plans to perform any new activities that were not considered in previous environmental reviews, the change in timing to initiate construction does not involve the use of resources not previously considered.

    Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In a letter dated May 17, 2018 (ADAMS Accession No. ML18113A504), the NRC staff consulted with officials from the Missouri Department of Natural Resources regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State responded on July 13, 2018, and stated that it had no comments (ADAMS Accession No. ML18197A199).

    The NRC staff also reviewed the proposed action in accordance with the Section 106 process of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (NHPA) (54 U.S.C. 300101 et seq.), which requires federal agencies to consider the effects of their undertakings on historic properties. The NRC has determined that the proposed action, which would only affect the timing of commencement of construction of a portion of the facility, is not the type of action that has the potential to cause any additional impacts or a significant change from the impacts related to historic properties discussed and analyzed in NUREG-2209, the NRC's EIS for the 10 CFR part 50 construction permit for the RPF. Therefore, in accordance with 36 CFR 800.3(a)(1), no consultation is required under Section 106 of the NHPA.

    Under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), prior to taking a proposed action, a federal agency must determine whether: (i) Endangered and threatened species or their critical habitats are known to be in the vicinity of the proposed action and, if so, whether (ii) the proposed federal action may affect listed species or critical habitats. The NRC has determined that the proposed action will not have any additional impacts or a significant change from the impacts related to threatened or endangered species or critical habitats analyzed in the NRC's EIS for the 10 CFR part 50 construction permit for the RFP in NUREG-2209.

    III. Finding of No Significant Impact

    NWMI requested an exemption from 10 CFR 70.21(f) that would allow it to initiate construction of the 10 CFR part 70 components of the RPF upon the issuance of the 10 CFR part 50 construction permit for the RPF even if the 10 CFR 70.21(f) timing requirement has not been met. The NRC is considering issuing the requested exemption. The proposed action would not significantly: (a) Affect probabilities of evaluated accidents; (b) affect margins of safety; (c) affect the effectiveness of programs contained in licensing documents; (d) increase effluents; (e) increase occupational radiological exposures; or (f) affect operations or decommissioning activities of the RPF. The reason the environment would not be significantly affected is because the requested exemption affects only the timing of construction and does not affect the previous evaluation regarding the environmental impacts of constructing and operating the NWMI RPF, as described in the Environmental Impact Statement for Construction Permit for the Northwest Medical Isotopes Radioisotope Production Facility, Final Report (NUREG-2209). The impacts of connected 10 CFR part 70 actions at the RPF were evaluated in NUREG-2209. On the basis of the EA included in Section II of this document, and incorporated herein by reference, the NRC has determined not to prepare an EIS for the proposed action. The related environmental documents are: (a) NWMI Exemption request dated December 17, 2017, as supplemented on March 12, 2018 (ADAMS Accession Nos. ML17362A040 and ML18088A175); (b) NWMI Preliminary Safety Analyses Report, Chapter 19, “Environmental Report,” Corvallis, OR, revision OA dated June 2015, (ADAMS Accession Nos. ML15210A123, ML15210A128, ML15210A129, and ML15210A131; and (c) NUREG-2209, “Environmental Impact Statement for the Construction Permit for the Northwest Medical Isotopes Radioisotope Production Facility,” issued in May 2018 (ADAMS Accession No. ML17130A862).

    This FONSI and other related environmental documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's PDR, located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. Publicly-available records are also accessible online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC's PDR reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected]

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 24th day of August, 2018.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    Brian W. Smith, Deputy Director, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety, Safeguards, and Environmental Review, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18757 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 72-1050; NRC-2016-0231] Interim Storage Partner's Waste Control Specialists Consolidated Interim Storage Facility AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Revised license application; opportunity to request a hearing and to petition for leave to intervene; order imposing procedures.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) received a request from Interim Storage Partners, a joint venture between Waste Control Specialists, LLC (WCS) and Orano CIS, LLC by letters dated June 8, 2018, and July 19, 2018, to resume NRC staff review of a license application for the WCS Consolidated Interim Storage Facility (CISF) in Andrews County, Texas. By letter dated April 18, 2017, the previous applicant, WCS, asked NRC to temporarily suspend all safety and environmental review activities.

    DATES:

    A request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene must be filed by August 29, 2018. Any potential party as defined in section 2.4 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), who believes access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information (SUNSI) is necessary to respond to this notice must request document access by September 10, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2016-0231 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-2016-0231. 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 “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] For the convenience of the reader, the ADAMS accession numbers are provided in a table in the “Availability of Documents” section of 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:

    John-Chau Nguyen, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-0262; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Introduction

    The NRC received, by letter dated April 28, 2016, an application from WCS for a specific license pursuant to 10 CFR part 72, “Licensing Requirements for the Independent Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level Radioactive Waste, and Reactor-Related Greater Than Class C Waste.” WCS proposed to construct a Consolidated Interim Storage Facility (CISF) on its approximately 60.3 square kilometer (14,900 acre) site in western Andrews County, Texas. WCS currently operates facilities on this site that process and store Low-Level Waste and Mixed Waste (i.e., waste that is considered both hazardous waste and Low-Level Waste). The facility also disposes of both hazardous waste and toxic waste.

    On January 30, 2017, the NRC published two notices in the Federal Register: (1) A notice describing the closing date for the scoping period for the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), and dates, times, and locations of scoping meetings wherein the NRC received oral comments as part of the EIS scoping process (82 FR 8771); and (2) a notice of its acceptance of the WCS application and an opportunity to request a hearing and petition for leave to intervene (82 FR 8773). On March 16, 2017 (82 FR 14039), the NRC published a notice in the Federal Register of an extension to the scoping period and additional public meetings. On April 4, 2017, and in a corrected notice dated April 10, 2017, the NRC published in the Federal Register (82 FR 16435; 82 FR 17297) an order granting all petitioners an extension of time until May 31, 2017, to file hearing requests on WCS's license application. On July 20, 2017 (82 FR 33521), the NRC published a notice in the Federal Register that WCS had asked NRC to temporarily suspend all safety and environmental review activities. The July 20, 2017, notice in the Federal Register withdrew the notice of opportunity to request a hearing for WCS's application and explained that the NRC staff would publish a notice in the Federal Register if WCS requested that the NRC staff resume its review of WCS's application.

    By letters dated June 8, 2018, and July 19, 2018, NRC received a request from Interim Storage Partners (ISP), a joint venture between WCS and Orano CIS, LLC to resume NRC staff review of the license application for the WCS Consolidated Interim Storage Facility (CISF) in Andrews County, Texas. ISP provided Revision 2 of the License Application, including a revised Safety Analysis Report and Environmental Report. In its June 8, 2018, letter, ISP stated that the Physical Security Plan and Safeguards Contingency Plan submitted with Revision 1 of its License Application remain applicable to the current application. The NRC staff has determined that Revision 1 of the Emergency Plan also remains applicable to the current application. Though ISP is the new owner, the name of the proposed facility remains the WCS CISF.

    An NRC administrative completeness review found the revised application acceptable for a technical review. Prior to issuing the license, the NRC will need to make the findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (AEA), and the NRC's regulations. The NRC's findings will be documented in a safety evaluation report and an EIS.

    II. Opportunity To Request a Hearing and Petition for Leave To Intervene

    Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, any persons (petitioner) whose interest may be affected by this action may file a request for a hearing and petition for leave to intervene (petition) with respect to the action. Petitions shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's “Agency Rules of Practice and Procedure” in 10 CFR part 2. Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR part 2. The NRC's regulations are accessible electronically from the NRC Library on the NRC's website at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. A copy of the regulations is also available at the NRC's Public Document Room, located at One White Flint North, Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. If a petition is filed, the Commission or a presiding officer will rule on the petition and, if appropriate, a notice of a hearing will be issued.

    As required by 10 CFR 2.309(d), the petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following general requirements for standing: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the petitioner; (2) the nature of the petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest.

    In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f), the petition must also set forth the specific contentions which the petitioner seeks to have litigated in the proceeding. Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner must provide a brief explanation of the bases for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner must also provide references to the specific sources and documents on which the petitioner intends to rely to support its position on the issue. The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant or licensee on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions must be limited to matters within the scope of the proceeding. The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner who fails to satisfy the requirements at 10 CFR 2.309(f) with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.

    Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene. Parties have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing with respect to resolution of that party's admitted contentions, including the opportunity to present evidence, consistent with the NRC's regulations, policies, and procedures.

    Petitions must be filed no later than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice. Petitions and motions for leave to file new or amended contentions that are filed after the deadline will not be entertained absent a determination by the presiding officer that the filing demonstrates good cause by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i) through (iii). The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in the “Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)” section of this document.

    A State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof, may submit a petition to the Commission to participate as a party under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1). The petition should state the nature and extent of the petitioner's interest in the proceeding. The petition should be submitted to the Commission no later than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice. The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in the “Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)” section of this document, and should meet the requirements for petitions set forth in this section. Alternatively, a State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof may participate as a non-party under 10 CFR 2.315(c).

    If a hearing is granted, any person who is not a party to the proceeding and is not affiliated with or represented by a party may, at the discretion of the presiding officer, be permitted to make a limited appearance pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person making a limited appearance may make an oral or written statement of his or her position on the issues but may not otherwise participate in the proceeding. A limited appearance may be made at any session of the hearing or at any prehearing conference, subject to the limits and conditions as may be imposed by the presiding officer. Details regarding the opportunity to make a limited appearance will be provided by the presiding officer if such sessions are scheduled.

    III. Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)

    All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene (petition), any motion or other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a request for hearing or petition to intervene, and documents filed by interested governmental entities that request to participate under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in accordance with the NRC's E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007, as amended at 77 FR 46562; August 3, 2012). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit and serve all adjudicatory documents over the internet, or in some cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions may be found in the Guidance for Electronic Submissions to the NRC and on the NRC website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants may not submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in accordance with the procedures described below.

    To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 10 days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the Office of the Secretary by email at [email protected], or by telephone at 301-415-1677, to (1) request a digital identification (ID) certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or representative) to digitally sign submissions and access the E-Filing system for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a petition or other adjudicatory document (even in instances in which the participant, or its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). Based upon this information, the Secretary will establish an electronic docket for the hearing in this proceeding if the Secretary has not already established an electronic docket.

    Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is available on the NRC's public website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/getting-started.html. Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a docket has been created, the participant can then submit adjudicatory documents. Submissions must be in Portable Document Format (PDF). Additional guidance on PDF submissions is available on the NRC's public website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/electronic-sub-ref-mat.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the document is submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Filing system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends the submitter an email notice confirming receipt of the document. The E-Filing system also distributes an email notice that provides access to the document to the NRC's Office of the General Counsel and any others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the document on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for and receive a digital ID certificate before adjudicatory documents are filed so that they can obtain access to the documents via the E-Filing system.

    A person filing electronically using the NRC's adjudicatory E-Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC's Electronic Filing Help Desk through the “Contact Us” link located on the NRC's public website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by email to [email protected], or by a toll-free call at 1-866-672-7640. The NRC Electronic Filing Help Desk is available between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays.

    Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing stating why there is good cause for not filing electronically and requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants filing adjudicatory documents in this manner are responsible for serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing the document with the provider of the service. A presiding officer, having granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a participant or party to use E-Filing if the presiding officer subsequently determines that the reason for granting the exemption from use of E-Filing no longer exists.

    Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in the NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at https://adams.nrc.gov/ehd, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the Commission or the presiding officer. If you do not have an NRC-issued digital ID certificate as described above, click cancel when the link requests certificates and you will be automatically directed to the NRC's electronic hearing dockets where you will be able to access any publicly available documents in a particular hearing docket. Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information, such as social security numbers, home addresses, or personal phone numbers in their filings, unless an NRC regulation or other law requires submission of such information. For example, in some instances, individuals provide home addresses in order to demonstrate proximity to a facility or site. With respect to copyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use application, participants are requested not to include copyrighted materials in their submission.

    IV. Availability of Documents

    The documents identified in this Federal Register notice are accessible to interested persons in ADAMS under the accession numbers identified in the table below.

    Title ADAMS
  • accession No.
  • WCS CISF License Application, Revision 2, with Safety Analysis Report and Environmental Report ML18206A595 WCS CISF Physical Security Plan, Revision 1, and Safeguards Contingency Plan, and Guard Training and Qualification Plan (redacted) ML17075A289 WCS submittal of Supplemental Security Information (redacted) ML16235A467 WCS submittal of Supplemental Security Information (redacted) ML16280A300 WCS CISF Emergency Plan, Rev. 1 ML17082A054
    V. Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information and Safeguards Information for Contention Preparation

    A. This Order contains instructions regarding how potential parties to this proceeding may request access to documents containing sensitive unclassified information (including Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information (SUNSI) and Safeguards Information (SGI)). Requirements for access to SGI are primarily set forth in 10 CFR parts 2 and 73. Nothing in this Order is intended to conflict with the SGI regulations.

    B. Within 10 days after publication of this notice of hearing and opportunity to petition for leave to intervene, any potential party who believes access to SUNSI or SGI is necessary to respond to this notice may request access to SUNSI or SGI. A “potential party” is any person who intends to participate as a party by demonstrating standing and filing an admissible contention under 10 CFR 2.309. Requests for access to SUNSI or SGI submitted later than 10 days after publication will not be considered absent a showing of good cause for the late filing, addressing why the request could not have been filed earlier.

    C. The requestor shall submit a letter requesting permission to access SUNSI, SGI, or both to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, and provide a copy to the Associate General Counsel for Hearings, Enforcement and Administration, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. The expedited delivery or courier mail address for both offices is: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. The email address for the Office of the Secretary and the Office of the General Counsel are [email protected] and [email protected] respectively.1 The request must include the following information:

    1 While a request for hearing or petition to intervene in this proceeding must comply with the filing requirements of the NRC's “E-Filing Rule,” the initial request to access SUNSI and/or SGI under these procedures should be submitted as described in this paragraph.

    (1) A description of the licensing action with a citation to this Federal Register notice;

    (2) The name and address of the potential party and a description of the potential party's particularized interest that could be harmed by the action identified in C.(1);

    (3) If the request is for SUNSI, the identity of the individual or entity requesting access to SUNSI and the requestor's basis for the need for the information in order to meaningfully participate in this adjudicatory proceeding. In particular, the request must explain why publicly available versions of the information requested would not be sufficient to provide the basis and specificity for a proffered contention; and

    (4) If the request is for SGI, the identity of each individual who would have access to SGI if the request is granted, including the identity of any expert, consultant, or assistant who will aid the requestor in evaluating the SGI. In addition, the request must contain the following information:

    (a) A statement that explains each individual's “need to know” the SGI, as required by 10 CFR 73.2 and 10 CFR 73.22(b)(1). Consistent with the definition of “need to know” as stated in 10 CFR 73.2, the statement must explain:

    (i) Specifically why the requestor believes that the information is necessary to enable the requestor to proffer and/or adjudicate a specific contention in this proceeding; 2 and

    2 Broad SGI requests under these procedures are unlikely to meet the standard for need to know; furthermore, NRC staff redaction of information from requested documents before their release may be appropriate to comport with this requirement. These procedures do not authorize unrestricted disclosure or less scrutiny of a requestor's need to know than ordinarily would be applied in connection with an already-admitted contention or non-adjudicatory access to SGI.

    (ii) The technical competence (demonstrable knowledge, skill, training, or education) of the requestor to effectively utilize the requested SGI to provide the basis and specificity for a proffered contention. The technical competence of a potential party or its counsel may be shown by reliance on a qualified expert, consultant, or assistant who satisfies these criteria.

    (b) A completed Form SF-85, “Questionnaire for Non-Sensitive Positions,” for each individual who would have access to SGI. The completed Form SF-85 will be used by the Office of Administration to conduct the background check required for access to SGI, as required by 10 CFR part 2, subpart C, and 10 CFR 73.22(b)(2), to determine the requestor's trustworthiness and reliability. For security reasons, Form SF-85 can only be submitted electronically through the electronic questionnaire for investigations processing (e-QIP) website, a secure website that is owned and operated by the Office of Personnel Management. To obtain online access to the form, the requestor should contact the NRC's Office of Administration at 301-415-3710.3

    3 The requestor will be asked to provide his or her full name, social security number, date and place of birth, telephone number, and email address. After providing this information, the requestor usually should be able to obtain access to the online form within one business day.

    (c) A completed Form FD-258 (fingerprint card), signed in original ink, and submitted in accordance with 10 CFR 73.57(d). Copies of Form FD-258 may be obtained by writing the Office of Administrative Services, Mail Services Center, Mail Stop P1-37, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, or by email to [email protected] The fingerprint card will be used to satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR part 2, subpart C, 10 CFR 73.22(b)(1), and Section 149 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, which mandates that all persons with access to SGI must be fingerprinted for an FBI identification and criminal history records check.

    (d) A check or money order payable in the amount of $324.00 4 to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for each individual for whom the request for access has been submitted.

    4 This fee is subject to change pursuant to the Office of Personnel Management's adjustable billing rates.

    (e) If the requestor or any individual(s) who will have access to SGI believes they belong to one or more of the categories of individuals that are exempt from the criminal history records check and background check requirements in 10 CFR 73.59, the requestor should also provide a statement identifying which exemption the requestor is invoking and explaining the requestor's basis for believing that the exemption applies. While processing the request, the Office of Administration, Personnel Security Branch, will make a final determination whether the claimed exemption applies. Alternatively, the requestor may contact the Office of Administration for an evaluation of their exemption status prior to submitting their request. Persons who are exempt from the background check are not required to complete the SF-85 or Form FD-258; however, all other requirements for access to SGI, including the need to know, are still applicable.

    Note:

    Copies of documents and materials required by paragraphs C.(4)(b), (c), and (d) of this Order must be sent to the following address: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Attn: Personnel Security Branch, Mail Stop TWFN-03-B46M, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852.

    These documents and materials should not be included with the request letter to the Office of the Secretary, but the request letter should state that the forms and fees have been submitted as required.

    D. To avoid delays in processing requests for access to SGI, the requestor should review all submitted materials for completeness and accuracy (including legibility) before submitting them to the NRC. The NRC will return incomplete packages to the sender without processing.

    E. Based on an evaluation of the information submitted under paragraphs C.(3) or C.(4) above, as applicable, the NRC staff will determine within 10 days of receipt of the request whether:

    (1) There is a reasonable basis to believe the petitioner is likely to establish standing to participate in this NRC proceeding; and

    (2) The requestor has established a legitimate need for access to SUNSI or need to know the SGI requested.

    F. For requests for access to SUNSI, if the NRC staff determines that the requestor satisfies both E.(1) and E.(2) above, the NRC staff will notify the requestor in writing that access to SUNSI has been granted. The written notification will contain instructions on how the requestor may obtain copies of the requested documents, and any other conditions that may apply to access to those documents. These conditions may include, but are not limited to, the signing of a Non-Disclosure Agreement or Affidavit, or Protective Order setting forth terms and conditions to prevent the unauthorized or inadvertent disclosure of SUNSI by each individual who will be granted access to SUNSI.5

    5 Any motion for Protective Order or draft Non-Disclosure Affidavit or Agreement for SUNSI must be filed with the presiding officer or the Chief Administrative Judge if the presiding officer has not yet been designated, within 30 days of the deadline for the receipt of the written access request.

    G. For requests for access to SGI, if the NRC staff determines that the requestor has satisfied both E.(1) and E.(2) above, the Office of Administration will then determine, based upon completion of the background check, whether the proposed recipient is trustworthy and reliable, as required for access to SGI by 10 CFR 73.22(b). If the Office of Administration determines that the individual or individuals are trustworthy and reliable, the NRC will promptly notify the requestor in writing. The notification will provide the names of approved individuals as well as the conditions under which the SGI will be provided. Those conditions may include, but are not limited to, the signing of a Non-Disclosure Agreement or Affidavit, or Protective Order 6 by each individual who will be granted access to SGI.

    6 Any motion for Protective Order or draft Non-Disclosure Agreement or Affidavit for SGI must be filed with the presiding officer or the Chief Administrative Judge if the presiding officer has not yet been designated, within 180 days of the deadline for the receipt of the written access request.

    H. Release and Storage of SGI. Prior to providing SGI to the requestor, the NRC staff will conduct (as necessary) an inspection to confirm that the recipient's information protection system is sufficient to satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR 73.22. Alternatively, recipients may opt to view SGI at an approved SGI storage location rather than establish their own SGI protection program to meet SGI protection requirements.

    I. Filing of Contentions. Any contentions in these proceedings that are based upon the information received as a result of the request made for SUNSI or SGI must be filed by the requestor no later than 25 days after receipt of (or access to) that information. However, if more than 25 days remain between the petitioner's receipt of (or access to) the information and the deadline for filing all other contentions (as established in the notice of hearing or opportunity for hearing), the petitioner may file its SUNSI or SGI contentions by that later deadline.

    J. Review of Denials of Access.

    (1) If the request for access to SUNSI or SGI is denied by the NRC staff either after a determination on standing and requisite need, or after a determination on trustworthiness and reliability, the NRC staff shall immediately notify the requestor in writing, briefly stating the reason or reasons for the denial.

    (2) Before the Office of Administration makes a final adverse determination regarding the trustworthiness and reliability of the proposed recipient(s) for access to SGI, the Office of Administration, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.336(f)(1)(iii), must provide the proposed recipient(s) any records that were considered in the trustworthiness and reliability determination, including those required to be provided under 10 CFR 73.57(e)(1), so that the proposed recipient(s) have an opportunity to correct or explain the record.

    (3) The requestor may challenge the NRC staff's adverse determination with respect to access to SUNSI or with respect to standing or need to know for SGI by filing a challenge within 5 days of receipt of that determination with: (a) The presiding officer designated in this proceeding; (b) if no presiding officer has been appointed, the Chief Administrative Judge, or if he or she is unavailable, another administrative judge, or an Administrative Law Judge with jurisdiction pursuant to 10 CFR 2.318(a); or (c) if another officer has been designated to rule on information access issues, with that officer.

    (4) The requestor may challenge the Office of Administration's final adverse determination with respect to trustworthiness and reliability for access to SGI by filing a request for review in accordance with 10 CFR 2.336(f)(1)(iv).

    (5) Further appeals of decisions under this paragraph must be made pursuant to 10 CFR 2.311.

    K. Review of Grants of Access. A party other than the requestor may challenge an NRC staff determination granting access to SUNSI whose release would harm that party's interest independent of the proceeding. Such a challenge must be filed within 5 days of the notification by the NRC staff of its grant of access and must be filed with: (a) The presiding officer designated in this proceeding; (b) if no presiding officer has been appointed, the Chief Administrative Judge, or if he or she is unavailable, another administrative judge, or an Administrative Law Judge with jurisdiction pursuant to 10 CFR 2.318(a); or (c) if another officer has been designated to rule on information access issues, with that officer.

    If challenges to the NRC staff determinations are filed, these procedures give way to the normal process for litigating disputes concerning access to information. The availability of interlocutory review by the Commission of orders ruling on such NRC staff determinations (whether granting or denying access) is governed by 10 CFR 2.311.7

    7 Requestors should note that the filing requirements of the NRC's E-Filing Rule (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007, as amended at 77 FR 46562; August 3, 2012) apply to appeals of NRC staff determinations (because they must be served on a presiding officer or the Commission, as applicable), but not to the initial SUNSI/SGI request submitted to the NRC staff under these procedures.

    L. The Commission expects that the NRC staff and presiding officers (and any other reviewing officers) will consider and resolve requests for access to SUNSI or SGI, and motions for protective orders, in a timely fashion in order to minimize any unnecessary delays in identifying those petitioners who have standing and who have propounded contentions meeting the specificity and basis requirements in 10 CFR part 2. The attachment to this Order summarizes the general target schedule for processing and resolving requests under these procedures.

    It is so ordered.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th of August, 2018.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    Rochelle C. Bavol, Acting, Secretary of the Commission.
    Attachment 1—General Target Schedule for Processing and Resolving Requests for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information and Safeguards Information in This Proceeding Day Event/activity 0 Publication of Federal Register notice of hearing and opportunity to petition for leave to intervene, including order with instructions for access requests. 10 Deadline for submitting requests for access to Sensitive Unclassified Non Safeguards Information (SUNSI) and/or Safeguards Information (SGI) with information: Supporting the standing of a potential party identified by name and address; describing the need for the information in order for the potential party to participate meaningfully in an adjudicatory proceeding; demonstrating that access should be granted (e.g., showing technical competence for access to SGI); and, for SGI, including application fee for fingerprint/background check. 60 Deadline for submitting petition for intervention containing: (i) Demonstration of standing; (ii) all contentions whose formulation does not require access to SUNSI and/or SGI (+25 Answers to petition for intervention; +7 requestor/petitioner reply). 20 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff informs the requestor of the staff's determination whether the request for access provides a reasonable basis to believe standing can be established and shows (1) need for SUNSI or (2) need to know for SGI. (For SUNSI, NRC staff also informs any party to the proceeding whose interest independent of the proceeding would be harmed by the release of the information.) If NRC staff makes the finding of need for SUNSI and likelihood of standing, NRC staff begins document processing (preparation of redactions or review of redacted documents). If NRC staff makes the finding of need to know for SGI and likelihood of standing, NRC staff begins background check (including fingerprinting for a criminal history records check), information processing (preparation of redactions or review of redacted documents), and readiness inspections. 25 If NRC staff finds no “need,” no “need to know,” or no likelihood of standing, the deadline for requestor/petitioner to file a motion seeking a ruling to reverse the NRC staff's denial of access; NRC staff files copy of access determination with the presiding officer (or Chief Administrative Judge or other designated officer, as appropriate). If NRC staff finds “need” for SUNSI, the deadline for any party to the proceeding whose interest independent of the proceeding would be harmed by the release of the information to file a motion seeking a ruling to reverse the NRC staff's grant of access. 30 Deadline for NRC staff reply to motions to reverse NRC staff determination(s). 40 (Receipt +30) If NRC staff finds standing and need for SUNSI, deadline for NRC staff to complete information processing and file motion for Protective Order and draft Non-Disclosure Affidavit. Deadline for applicant/licensee to file Non-Disclosure Agreement for SUNSI. 190 (Receipt +180) If NRC staff finds standing, need to know for SGI, and trustworthiness and reliability, deadline for NRC staff to file motion for Protective Order and draft Non-disclosure Affidavit (or to make a determination that the proposed recipient of SGI is not trustworthy or reliable). Note: Before the Office of Administration makes a final adverse determination regarding access to SGI, the proposed recipient must be provided an opportunity to correct or explain information. 205 Deadline for petitioner to seek reversal of a final adverse NRC staff trustworthiness or reliability determination under 10 CFR 2.336(f)(1)(iv). A If access granted: Issuance of a decision by a presiding officer or other designated officer on motion for protective order for access to sensitive information (including schedule for providing access and submission of contentions) or decision reversing a final adverse determination by the NRC staff. A + 3 Deadline for filing executed Non-Disclosure Affidavits. Access provided to SUNSI and/or SGI consistent with decision issuing the protective order. A + 28 Deadline for submission of contentions whose development depends upon access to SUNSI and/or SGI. However, if more than 25 days remain between the petitioner's receipt of (or access to) the information and the deadline for filing all other contentions (as established in the notice of opportunity to request a hearing and petition for leave to intervene), the petitioner may file its SUNSI or SGI contentions by that later deadline. A + 53 (Contention receipt +25) Answers to contentions whose development depends upon access to SUNSI and/or SGI. A + 60 (Answer receipt +7) Petitioner/Intervenor reply to answers. >A + 60 Decision on contention admission.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18758 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    NUCLEAR WASTE TECHNICAL REVIEW BOARD Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board AGENCY:

    U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Performance Review Board membership.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces the membership of the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board (NWTRB) Senior Executive Service (SES) Performance Review Board (PRB).

    DATES:

    August 27, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Neysa M. Slater-Chandler by telephone at 703-235-4480, or via email at [email protected], or via mail at 2300 Clarendon Blvd., Suite 1300, Arlington, VA 22201.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(1) through (5) requires each agency to establish, in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Office of Personnel Management, one or more SES Performance Review Boards.

    The PRB shall review and evaluate the initial summary rating of a senior executive's performance, the executive's response, and the higher-level official's comments on the initial summary rating. In addition, the PRB will review and recommend executive performance bonuses and pay increases.

    5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(4) requires the appointment of board members to be published in the Federal Register. The following persons comprise a standing roster to serve as members of the SES PRB for the U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board:

    Laura Dudes, Deputy Regional Administrator, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II, Atlanta, GA Raymond Lorson, Director, Division of Reactor Projects, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region I, King of Prussia, PA Katherine R. Herrera, Technical Director, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, Washington, DC Timothy J. Dwyer, Associate Technical Director for Nuclear Materials Processing and Stabilization, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, Washington, DC Richard E. Tontodonato, Associate Technical Director for Nuclear Weapon Programs, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, Washington, DC Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 10262.

    Dated: August 22, 2018. Neysa M. Slater-Chandler, Director of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18726 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-AM-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-83916; File No. SR-OCC-2017-020] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 2, Concerning Enhanced and New Tools for Recovery Scenarios August 23, 2018. I. Introduction

    On December 18, 2017, The Options Clearing Corporation (“OCC”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change SR-OCC-2017-020 (“Proposed Rule Change”) pursuant to Section 19(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”),1 and Rule 19b-4 2 thereunder concerning enhanced and new tools for recovery scenarios.3 The Proposed Rule Change was published for comment in the Federal Register on December 26, 2017.4 On January 25, 2018, the Commission designated a longer period of time for Commission action on the Proposed Rule Change.5 On March 22, 2018, the Commission published an order to institute proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove the Proposed Rule Change.6

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    3See Notice infra note 4, 82 FR 61107.

    4 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82531 (Dec. 19, 2017), 82 FR 61107 (Dec. 26, 2017) (SR-OCC-2017-020) (“Notice”). On December 8, 2017, OCC also filed a related advance notice (SR-OCC-2017-809) (“Advance Notice”) with the Commission pursuant to Section 806(e)(1) of Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, entitled the Payment, Clearing, and Settlement Supervision Act of 2010 and Rule 19b-4(n)(1)(i) under the Exchange Act. 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1) and 17 CFR 240.19b-4(n)(1)(i), respectively. The Advance Notice was published in the Federal Register on January 23, 2018. Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82513 (Jan. 17, 2017), 83 FR 3244 (Jan. 23, 2018) (SR-OCC-2017-809).

    The Financial Stability Oversight Council designated OCC a systemically important financial market utility on July 18, 2012. See Financial Stability Oversight Council 2012 Annual Report, Appendix A, available at http://www.treasury.gov/initiatives/fsoc/Documents/2012%20Annual%20Report.pdf. Therefore, OCC is required to comply with the Payment, Clearing and Settlement Supervision Act and file advance notices with the Commission. See 12 U.S.C. 5465(e).

    5 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82585 (Jan. 25, 2018), 83 FR 4526 (Jan. 31, 2018) (File No. SR-OCC-2017-020).

    6 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82926 (Mar. 22, 2018), 83 FR 13171 (Mar. 27, 2018) (File No. SR-OCC-2017-020).

    On July 11, 2018, OCC filed Amendment No. 1 to the Proposed Rule Change.7 On July 12, 2018, OCC filed Amendment No. 2 to the Proposed Rule Change.8 Therefore, the Proposed Rule Change, as modified by Amendment No. 2, reflects the changes proposed. Notice of Amendments No. 1 and 2 to the Proposed Rule Change was published for public comment in the Federal Register on August 2, 2018.9 Comments received on the Proposed Rule Change are discussed below.10 This order approves the Proposed Rule Change as modified by Amendment No. 2 (“Amended Proposed Rule Change”).

    7 In Amendment No. 1, OCC made certain changes to clarify the use of the recovery tools and to improve the overall transparency regarding the use of the recovery tools.

    8 Amendment No. 2 superseded and replaced Amendment No. 1 in its entirety, due to technical defects in Amendment No. 1.

    9 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83725 (Jul. 27, 2018), 83 FR 37839 (Aug. 2, 2018) (“Notice of Amendment”).

    10 The letters are available at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-occ-2017-022/occ2017020.htm.

    II. Description of the Amended Proposed Rule Change 11

    11 Capitalized terms used but not defined herein have the meanings specified in OCC's Rules and By-Laws, available at https://www.theocc.com/about/publications/bylaws.jsp.

    The Amended Proposed Rule Change concerns proposed changes to OCC's Rules and By-Laws to enhance OCC's existing tools to address the risks of liquidity shortfalls and credit losses and to establish new tools by which OCC could re-establish a matched book and, if necessary, allocate uncovered losses following the default of a Clearing Member as well as provide for additional financial resources. Each of the proposed tools is contemplated to be deployed by OCC in an extreme stress event that has placed OCC into a recovery or orderly wind-down scenario. The proposed changes include modifying OCC's powers of assessment, introducing a framework for requesting voluntary payments to the Clearing Fund, and establishing OCC's authority to extinguish open positons (i.e., conduct tear-ups) as well as authorizing OCC's Board of Directors (“Board”) to re-allocate losses from tear-ups.

    A. Proposed Changes to OCC Powers of Assessment

    OCC maintains a Clearing Fund comprised of required contributions from Clearing Members, and OCC has authority to use the Clearing Fund, by a proportionate charge or otherwise, to cover certain losses suffered by OCC.12 When an amount is paid out of a Clearing Member's required contribution to the Clearing Fund, the Clearing Member is generally required to promptly make good any deficiency in its required contribution to the Clearing Fund from such payment.13 Generally, this requirement to promptly make good on any deficiency arising from the default of a Clearing Member has been referred to as an “assessment” by OCC against a Clearing Member; however, as further described below, OCC is making clarifying changes to a Clearing Member's obligation to contribute to the Clearing Fund, including defining and delineating between a Clearing Member's obligation to answer “assessments” charged by OCC under certain circumstances described further below and a Clearing Member's obligations where OCC seeks to effect a “replenishment” of the Clearing Fund.

    12See OCC By-Laws, Article VIII. For example, under Section 5 of Article VIII of the OCC By-Laws, when a Clearing Member defaults, OCC will pay for the resulting losses or expenses by first applying other funds available to OCC in the accounts of the defaulting Clearing Member and then applying the defaulting Clearing Member's required contribution to the Clearing Fund. If the losses and expenses exceed those amounts, then OCC will charge the amount of the remaining deficiency on a proportionate basis against all non-defaulting Clearing Members' required contributions to the Clearing Fund.

    13See OCC By-Laws, Article VIII, Section 6.

    Currently, a Clearing Member's obligation to make good its required contribution to the Clearing Fund is not subject to any pre-determined limit. However, a Clearing Member may limit the amount of its liability to contribute to the Clearing Fund by winding-down its clearing activities and terminating its membership. To do so, a Clearing Member must provide written notice to OCC that it is terminating its membership by no later than the fifth business day after application of the proportionate charge.14 This termination would limit the Clearing Member's obligation to meet a future assessment to an additional 100 percent of the amount of its then-required Clearing Fund contribution. Thus, terminating clearing membership is the only means by which a Clearing Member can currently limit its liability for amounts due to the Clearing Fund. OCC proposed three changes to modify its existing authority to assess proportionate charges against Clearing Members' required contributions to the Clearing Fund: (1) A cooling-off period and cap on assessments; (2) termination of clearing membership during a cooling-off period; and (3) replenishment of resources following a cooling-off period.

    14 In addition to providing the written notice, to effectively terminate membership, a Clearing Member must satisfy two other conditions. First, after submitting the written notice, the Clearing Member cannot submit for clearance any opening purchase transaction or opening written transaction or initiate a Stock Loan through any of the Clearing Member's accounts. Second, the Clearing Member has to close out or transfer all of its open positions with OCC, in each case as promptly as practicable after giving written notice. See OCC By-Laws, Article VIII, Section 6.

    1. Cooling-Off Period and Cap on Assessments

    The proposal would introduce a minimum fifteen calendar day “cooling-off” period that automatically begins when OCC imposes a proportionate charge related to the default of a Clearing Member against non-defaulting Clearing Members' Clearing Fund contributions. During a cooling-off period, the aggregate liability for a Clearing Member would be capped at 200 percent of its then-required contribution to the Clearing Fund. The cooling-off period would be extended if one or more specific events related to the default of a Clearing Member (as set forth in OCC's By-laws) 15 occur(s) during that fifteen calendar day period and results in one or more proportionate charges against the Clearing Fund. Such an extension would run until the earlier of (i) the fifteenth calendar day from the date of the most recent proportionate charge resulting from that subsequent event, or (ii) the twentieth day from the date of the proportionate charge that initiated the cooling-off period.

    15 Specifically, a cooling-off period would automatically begin after a proportionate charge arises in response to: (i) Any Clearing Member failure to discharge duly any obligation on or arising from any confirmed trade accepted by OCC, (ii) any Clearing Member (including any Appointed Clearing Member) failure to perform any obligations (including its obligations to the correspondent clearing corporation) under or arising from any exercised or assigned option contract or any other contract or obligation issued or guaranteed by OCC or in respect of which it is otherwise liable, (iii) any Clearing Member failure to perform any obligation to OCC in respect of the stock loan and borrow positions of such Clearing Member, or (iv) OCC suffered any loss or expense upon any liquidation of a Clearing Member's open positions. See OCC By-Laws, Article VIII, Section 5(a)(i) 09(iv).

    Once the cooling-off period ends, each remaining Clearing Member would be required to replenish the Clearing Fund in the amount necessary to meet its then-required contribution. Any remaining losses or expenses suffered by OCC as a result of any events that occurred during that cooling-off period could not be charged against the amounts Clearing Members have contributed to replenish the Clearing Fund upon the expiration of the cooling-off period. However, after the end of a cooling-off period, the occurrence of another specified event that results in a proportionate charge against the Clearing Fund would trigger a new cooling-off period.

    2. Membership Termination During a Cooling-Off Period

    As noted above, to limit its liability to replenish the Clearing Fund, a Clearing Member currently must provide written notice of its intent to terminate its clearing membership by no later than the fifth business day after a proportionate charge. OCC's proposal would extend the time frame for a Clearing Member to provide such notice of termination, which would allow the terminating Clearing Member to avoid liability to replenish the Clearing Fund after the cooling-off period. Specifically, to terminate its status as a Clearing Member and not be liable for replenishment at the end of a cooling-off period, a Clearing Member would be required to: (i) Notify OCC in writing of its intent to terminate by no later than the last day of the cooling-off period, (ii) not initiate any opening purchase or opening writing transaction, and, if the Clearing Member is a Market Loan Clearing Member or a Hedge Clearing Member, not initiate any Stock Loan transaction through any of its accounts, and (iii) close-out or transfer all open positions by no later than the last day of the cooling-off period. If a Clearing Member fails to satisfy all of these conditions by the end of a cooling-off period, it would not have completed all of the requirements necessary to terminate its status as a Clearing Member, and therefore, it would remain subject to its obligation to replenish the Clearing Fund after the cooling-off period ends.

    Given the products cleared by OCC and the composition of its clearing membership, OCC determined that a minimum 15-calendar day cooling-off period, rolling up to a maximum of 20 calendar days, is likely to be a sufficient amount of time for OCC to manage the ongoing default(s) and take necessary steps in furtherance of stabilizing the clearing system. Further, based on its conversations with Clearing Members, OCC believes that the proposed cooling-off period is likely to be a sufficient amount of time for Clearing Members (and their customers) to orderly reduce or rebalance their positions, in an attempt to mitigate stress losses and exposure to potential initial margin increases during the stress event.16 OCC also believes the proposed cooling-off period, coupled with the other proposed changes to OCC's assessment powers, is likely to provide Clearing Members with an adequate measure of stability and predictability as to the potential use of Clearing Fund resources, which would, according to OCC, remove the existing incentive for Clearing Members to withdraw following a proportionate charge (i.e., to avoid facing potentially unlimited liability for replenishing the Clearing Fund).

    16See Notice of Amendment, 83 FR at 37847.

    3. Replenishment and Assessment

    The proposal would clarify the distinction between “replenishment” of the Clearing Fund and a Clearing Member's obligation to answer “assessments” charged by OCC. In this context, the term “replenish” (and its variations) would refer to a Clearing Member's standing duty, following any proportionate charge against the Clearing Fund, to return its Clearing Fund contribution to the amount required from such Clearing Member for the month in question. The term “assessment” (and its variations) would refer to the amount, during any cooling-off period, that a Clearing Member would be required to contribute to the Clearing Fund in excess of the amount of the Clearing Member's pre-funded required Clearing Fund contribution.

    B. Proposed Authority To Request Voluntary Payments

    OCC proposed new Rule 1011 to provide a framework for receipt of voluntary payments in a circumstance where a Clearing Member has defaulted and OCC has determined that it may not have sufficient resources to satisfy its obligations and liabilities resulting from such default.17 OCC would initiate a call for voluntary payments by issuing a notice inviting all non-defaulting Clearing Members to make payments to the Clearing Fund in addition to any amounts they are otherwise required to contribute pursuant to Rule 1001 (“Voluntary Payment Notice”). The Voluntary Payment Notice would specify the terms applicable to any voluntary payment, including but not limited to, that any voluntary payment may not be withdrawn once made, that no Clearing Member shall be obligated to make a voluntary payment, and that OCC shall retain full discretion to accept or reject any voluntary payment.

    17 OCC's determination would be made notwithstanding availability of remaining resources under Rules 707 (addressing the treatment of funds in a Clearing Member's X-M accounts); 1001 (addressing the size of OCC's Clearing Fund and the amount of a Clearing Member's contribution); 1104-1107 (concerning the treatment of the portfolio of a defaulted Clearing Member); and 2210 and 2211 (concerning the treatment of Stock Loan positions of a defaulted Clearing Member).

    In the event that OCC eventually obtains additional financial resources from the defaulting Clearing Member, OCC would give priority to repayment of Clearing Members that made Voluntary Payments. Specifically, if OCC subsequently recovers from the defaulted Clearing Member or the estate of the defaulted Clearing Member, OCC would seek to first compensate all non-defaulting Clearing Members that made voluntary payments.18 If the amount recovered from the defaulted Clearing Member were less than the aggregate amount of voluntary payments, non-defaulting Clearing Members that made voluntary payments each would receive a percentage of the amount recovered that corresponds to that Clearing Member's percentage of the total amount of voluntary payments received.

    18 As discussed further in Section II.C.1 below, OCC's proposed authority with respect to Voluntary Payments and Voluntary Payments would work together to establish a hierarchy of repayment in the event that OCC subsequently recovers from the defaulted Clearing Member. Under proposed rules 1011(b) and 1111(a)(ii), OCC would first seek to compensate those non-defaulting Clearing Members who had submitted Voluntary Payments and, thereafter, to the extent funds remained, OCC would then seek to compensation those non-defaulting Clearing Members who had participated in the Voluntary Tear-Up.

    C. Proposed Authority to Conduct Voluntary Tear-Ups and Partial Tear-Ups

    OCC proposed new Rule 1111 to establish a framework to extinguish positions of a suspended or defaulted Clearing Member on a voluntary basis (“Voluntary Tear-Up”) or on a mandatory basis (“Partial-Tear Up”) and, in certain extreme circumstances, to allocate any uncovered losses in the event that OCC does not have sufficient financial resources to conduct the tear-up. A Voluntary Tear-Up, if provided, would precede a Partial-Tear Up, and any Partial Tear-Up would take into account any positions extinguished as part of a Voluntary Tear-Up. Further, Rule 1111(h) would provide that no action or omission by OCC pursuant to, and in accordance with, Rule 1111 shall constitute a default by OCC, provided that Rule 1111(h) would not apply where OCC pays Clearing Members a pro rata amount of the applicable Tear-Up price because OCC does not have adequate resources to pay the full Tear-Up price.

    OCC's use of both Voluntary and Partial Tear-Up would be subject to certain prerequisites. First, any tear-up would occur after one or more failed auctions pursuant to Rule 1104 or 1106. Second, any tear-up would occur after OCC has determined that it may not have sufficient resources to satisfy its obligations and liabilities resulting from such default.19

    19 As with Voluntary Payments, this determination would be made notwithstanding availability of remaining resources under Rules 707, 1001, 1104-1107, 2210, and 2211. See note 17 supra.

    OCC represented that it would initiate its tear-up process on a date sufficiently in advance of the exhaustion of its financial resources such that OCC would expect to have adequate remaining resources to cover the amount it must pay to extinguish the positions of Clearing Members and customers.20 The holders of torn-up positions would be assigned a price, and OCC would draw on its remaining financial resources to extinguish the torn-up positions at the assigned price. Although OCC does not intend, in the first instance, for its tear-up process to serve as a means of loss allocation, OCC recognizes that circumstances may arise such that, despite its best efforts, OCC may not have adequate remaining financial resources to extinguish torn-up positions at the full assigned price, resulting in the allocation of uncovered losses by the tear-up process. As further described below, a Clearing Member allocated an uncovered loss would then have an unsecured claim against OCC for the value of the difference between the pro rata amount paid to the Clearing Member and the full amount the Clearing Member should have received.

    20 Specifically, OCC stated that it anticipated that it would determine the date on which to initiate Partial Tear-Ups by monitoring its remaining financial resources against the potential exposure of the remaining unauctioned positions from the portfolio(s) of the defaulted Clearing Member(s).

    1. Voluntary Tear-Up

    As noted above, a Voluntary Tear-Up would provide an opportunity to holders of certain positions opposite a defaulting Clearing Member to voluntarily extinguish those positions. Although the Risk Committee of OCC's Board of Directors (“Risk Committee”) approval is not necessary to commence a Voluntary Tear-Up, the Risk Committee would be responsible for determining the scope of a Voluntary Tear-Up. Proposed Rule 1111(c) would provide discretion to the Risk Committee when determining the appropriate scope, but the discretion would be subject to, and limited by, certain conditions, i.e., that the determination should be (i) based on then-existing facts and circumstances, (ii) be in furtherance of the integrity of OCC and the stability of the financial system, and (iii) take into consideration the legitimate interests of Clearing Members and market participants.

    Once the Risk Committee has determined the scope, OCC would initiate the call for Voluntary Tear-Ups by issuing a notice (“Voluntary Tear-Up Notice”) to inform all non-defaulting Clearing Members of the opportunity to participate in a Voluntary Tear-Up.21 The Voluntary Tear-Up Notice would specify the terms applicable to any Voluntary Tear-Up, including, but not limited to, that no Clearing Member or customers of a Clearing Member shall be obligated to participate in a Voluntary Tear-Up, and that OCC shall retain full discretion to accept or reject any Voluntary Tear-Up.

    21 Because OCC does not know the identities of Clearing Members' customers, OCC would depend on each Clearing Member to notify its customers with positions in scope of the Voluntary Tear-Up of the opportunity to participate in such tear-up.

    Clearing Members and their customers that participated in a Voluntary Tear-Up and incurred losses would have a claim to amounts subsequently recovered from a defaulted Clearing Member (or the estate of the defaulted Clearing Member). The claim would be junior to Clearing Members who made a voluntary payment to the Clearing Fund, and OCC would satisfy the claims on a pro-rata basis.

    2. Partial Tear-Up

    Under proposed Rule 1111(b), OCC's Board would be responsible for the decision to conduct a mandatory Partial Tear-Up. The Risk Committee would then be responsible for determining the appropriate scope of the Partial Tear-Up, subject to the conditions in Rule 1111(c) discussed above.

    The proposed rule would also provide the Board with the discretion to conduct a mandatory Partial Tear-Up to extinguish the remaining open positions of any defaulted Clearing Member or customer of such defaulted Clearing Member(s) (“Remaining Open Positions”) and/or any related open positions necessary to mitigate further disruptions to the markets affected by the Remaining Open Positions (“Related Open Positions”). The open positions subject to tear-up opposite to the Remaining Open Positions and the Related Open Positions would be designated in accordance with the methodology in Rule 1111(e). Specifically, for Remaining Open Positions, the aggregate amount in the identical Cleared Contracts and Cleared Securities would be designated on a pro-rata basis to non-defaulting Clearing Members that have an open position in such Cleared Contract or Cleared Security. For Remaining Open Positions, all open positions in Cleared Contracts and Cleared Securities identified in the scope of the Partial Tear-Up would be extinguished.

    After the scope of the Partial Tear-Up is determined, OCC would initiate the Partial Tear-Up process by issuing a notice (“Partial Tear-Up Notice”). The Partial Tear-Up Notice would: (i) Identify the Remaining Open Positions and Related Open Positions designated for tear-up, (ii) identify the Tear-Up Positions, (iii) specify the termination price (“Partial Tear-Up Price”) for each position to be torn-up, and (iv) list the date and time, as determined by the Risk Committee, that the Partial Tear-Up will occur (“Partial Tear-Up Time”).

    Rule 1111(f) would provide that, to determine the Partial Tear-Up Price, OCC would use its discretion, acting in good faith and in a commercially reasonable manner, to adopt methods of valuation expected to produce reasonably accurate substitutes for the values that would have been obtained from the relevant market if it were operating normally, including but not limited to the use of pricing models that use the market price of the underlying interest or the market prices of its components. Rule 1111(f) further specifies that OCC may consider the same information set forth in subpart (c) of Section 27, Article VI of OCC's By-Laws.22 OCC stated that it is likely to use the last established end-of-day settlement price, in accordance with its existing practices concerning pricing and valuation. However, given that it is not possible to know in advance the precise circumstances that would cause OCC to conduct a tear-up, Rule 1111(f) would allow OCC to exercise reasonable discretion, if necessary, in establishing the Partial Tear-Up Price by some means other than its existing practices concerning pricing and valuation. For example, OCC represented that it has observed certain rare circumstances in which a closing price for an underlying security of an option may be stale or unavailable. A stale or unavailable closing price could be the result of a halt on trading in the underlying security, a corporate action resulting in a cash-out or conversion of the underlying security (but that has not yet been finalized), or the result of an ADR whose underlying security is being impacted by certain provisions under foreign laws. OCC stated it would consider these circumstances in determining whether use of the discretion that would be afforded under proposed Rule 1111(f) might be warranted.23

    22 Section 27, Article VI addresses the valuation of positions that may be subject to close-out netting in the event of OCC's insolvency or default. Specifically, it states that in determining a close-out amount, OCC may consider any information that it deems relevant, including, but not limited to, any of the following factors: (i) Prices for underlying interests in recent transactions, as reported by the market or markets for such interests; (ii) quotations from leading dealers in the underlying interest, setting forth the price (which may be a dealing price or an indicative price) that the quoting dealer would charge or pay for a specified quantity of the underlying interest; (iii) relevant historical and current market data for the relevant market, provided by reputable outside sources or generated internally; and (iv) values derived from theoretical pricing models using available prices for the underlying interest or a related interest and other relevant data.

    23See Letter from Joseph P. Kamnik, Sr. Vice President and CRO, OCC, to Brent Fields, Secretary, Commission, at 5 (Jul. 9, 2018) (“OCC Letter”).

    Every Partial Tear-Up position would be automatically terminated at the Partial Tear-Up Time, without the need for any further step by any party to the position. Upon termination, either OCC or the relevant Clearing Member would be obligated to pay to the other party the applicable Partial Tear-Up Price. The corresponding open position would be deemed terminated at the Partial Tear-Up Price. In the event that, given the amount of remaining resources, OCC would not be able to pay the full Partial Tear-Up Price, OCC would pay each torn-up Clearing Member a pro-rata amount of the applicable Partial Tear-Up Price based on the amounts of such resources remaining. Those Clearing Members would then have an unsecured claim against OCC for the value of the difference between the pro rata amount and the Partial Tear-Up Price.

    3. Re-Allocating Losses From Tear-Up

    The proposed changes would provide OCC with means to re-allocate losses, costs, and expenses associated with the tear-up process. First, the proposal would amend Article VIII of the By-Laws to provide OCC discretion to use remaining Clearing Fund contributions to re-allocate losses imposed on non-defaulting Clearing Members and customers from tear-up. Second, in connection with a Partial Tear-Up, proposed Rule 1111(g) would provide the Board with discretion to re-allocate losses, costs, and fees imposed upon non-defaulting Clearing Members and their customers among all non-defaulting Clearing Members to the extent that such losses, costs, and fees can be reasonably determined by OCC (“Special Charge”). The Special Charge would correspond to each non-defaulting Clearing Member's proportionate share of the variable amount of the Clearing Fund at the time of the Partial Tear-Up. The Special Charge would be distinct and separate from a Clearing Member's obligation to satisfy Clearing Fund assessments during a cooling-off period and, therefore, not subject to the cap on assessments.

    III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Exchange Act directs the Commission to approve a proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if it finds that such proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to such organization.24 After carefully considering the Amended Proposed Rule Change, the Commission believes the proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to OCC. More specifically, the Commission finds that the Amended Proposed Rule Change is consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange Act 25 and Rules 17Ad-22(e)(2)(i), (iii), and (v), (e)(4)(viii) and (ix), (e)(13), and (e)(23)(i) and (ii) thereunder.26

    24 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C).

    25 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).

    26 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(2)(i), (iii), and (v), (e)(4)(viii) and (ix), (e)(13), and (e)(23)(i) and (ii).

    A. Consistency With Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange Act

    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange Act requires that the rules of a clearing agency be designed to, among other things, promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions, assure the safeguarding of securities and funds which are in the custody or control of the clearing agency or for which it is responsible, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.27

    27 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).

    OCC is the sole registered clearing agency for the U.S. listed options markets. In general, OCC maintains equal and opposite obligations on cleared positions (commonly referred to as a matched book). In an extreme loss event caused by a Clearing Member default, re-establishing a matched book as quickly as possible is essential because it would allow OCC to continue clearing and settling securities transactions as a central counterparty. In addition, allocating uncovered losses is important in such an event because it would allow OCC to provide further certainty to Clearing Members, their customers, and other stakeholders about how it addresses such losses and avoid a disorderly resolution to such an event. Thus, taken together, the Commission believes that the new and amended authority granted to OCC specific to the context of extreme loss events and described in the Amended Proposed Rule Change should provide OCC with the ability to re-establish a matched book, allocate uncovered losses if necessary, and limit OCC's potential exposure to losses from such an event, all of which would be essential to OCC's ability to continue promptly and accurately clearing securities transactions in the event that an extreme market event places OCC in a recovery scenario.

    Further, the Commission believes that the proposed changes would provide a reasonable amount of clarity and specificity to Clearing Members, their customers, and other stakeholders about the potential tools that would be expected to be available to OCC if such an event occurred, and the consequences that might arise from OCC's application of such tools. Because of this increased clarity and specificity, OCC's Clearing Members, their customers, and other stakeholders should have more information regarding their potential exposure and liability to OCC in an extreme loss event. Accordingly, the Commission believes that the proposed changes should allow Clearing Members, their customers, and other stakeholders to better evaluate the risks and benefits of clearing transactions at OCC because the proposed changes result in those parties having more information and specificity regarding the actions that OCC could take in response to an extreme loss event. To the extent that Clearing Members, their customers, and other stakeholders are able to use this increased clarity and specificity to better manage their potential exposure and liability in clearing transactions at OCC, such parties should be able to mitigate the likelihood that such tools could surprise or otherwise destabilize them. For these reasons, the Commission believes that the proposed rules providing for such clarity and specificity are designed, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.

    It is important for OCC to implement measures, including measures designed to facilitate OCC's ability to address risks and obligations arising in the specific context of extreme loss events, that enhance OCC's ability to address losses and to avoid threatening its ability to safeguard securities and funds within OCC's custody or control. OCC's proposed modified assessment powers would impose a cap on a Clearing Member's potential liability to replenish the Clearing Fund following a particular default event and extend the timeframe during which a Clearing Member must determine whether to terminate its membership and avoid further losses. Taken together, the Commission believes that these tools are reasonably designed to provide OCC with sufficient financial resources to cover default losses and ensure that OCC can take timely actions to contain losses and continue meeting its obligations in the event of a Clearing Member default. Similarly, the Commission believes that these changes would provide Clearing Members and their customers with greater certainty and predictability regarding the amount of losses they must bear as a result of a Clearing Member default. For these reasons, the Commission believes that the Amended Proposed Rule Change is designed to assure the safeguarding of securities and funds in OCC's custody or control.

    Additionally, OCC's proposed authority to conduct tear-ups would provide OCC with a mechanism for restoring a matched book and, in the event that OCC did not have sufficient financial resources to pay the full Partial Tear-Up Price, allocate losses to the non-defaulting Clearing Members. The Commission recognizes that a tear-up would result in termination of positions of non-defaulting Clearing Members. However, because under the proposed rules OCC would only be able to use its tear-up authority after it has conducted an auction pursuant to its Rules and when OCC has determined that it may not have sufficient financial resources to meet its obligations, a tear-up would only arise in an extreme stress scenario. Use of tear-up in such circumstances could potentially return OCC to a matched book quickly, thereby containing its losses and avoiding OCC's and its Clearing Members' exposure to additional losses. OCC's proposal would also address the determination of the Partial Tear-Up Price. Specifically, OCC would determine a Partial Tear-Up Price by using its discretion, acting in good faith and in a commercially reasonable manner, to adopt methods of valuation expected to produce reasonably accurate substitutes for the values that would have been obtained from the relevant market if it were operating normally, including but not limited to the use of pricing models that use the market price of the underlying interest or the market prices of its components. The Commission believes that OCC's proposed authority to conduct tear-ups could facilitate its ability to return to a matched book quickly and, in an extreme event, allocate losses. This, in turn, could help ensure that OCC is able to continue providing its critical clearing functions by facilitating the timely containment of default losses and liquidity pressures, thereby helping to prevent OCC from failing in such an event, and is therefore consistent with promoting the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions.

    One commenter states that the Partial Tear-Up Price should be determined objectively and not on a discretionary basis.28 In the OCC Letter, OCC states that, in the event that it has to determine a Partial Tear-Up Price, OCC anticipates that it is likely to use the last established end-of-day settlement price, in accordance with its existing practices concerning pricing and valuation, but notes that discretion may be necessary in the circumstances likely to be associated with an extreme loss event necessitating a tear-up where the end-of-day closing price may be stale or unavailable.29 Further, the Commission notes that, under OCC's proposed rule, OCC would not have unfettered discretion to determine the appropriate price. Rather, OCC's discretion would be limited by two conditions. Specifically, in the event that OCC uses its discretion to determine a Partial Tear-Up Price, it will be required under OCC's proposed rule to do so (i) in good faith and (ii) in a commercially reasonable manner.30 The Commission believes that this discretion, as limited by the two specified conditions, is appropriate given that it is not possible to know the precise circumstances likely to be associated with an extreme loss event necessitating a tear-up, and, therefore, the limited discretion provided for in the proposed rule may be appropriate in such circumstances. The Commission also notes that, in the event that OCC is using its authority to conduct a Partial Tear-Up, OCC would provide notification to the Commission and other regulators.31 Accordingly, the Commission does not believe that this aspect of the proposal is inconsistent with the Exchange Act.

    28See Letter from Jacqueline H. Mesa, Sr. Vice President of Global Policy, Futures Industry Association, to Brent Fields, Secretary, Commission, at 2; available at https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-occ-2017-022/occ2017020.htm (Jan. 16, 2018) (“FIA Letter”).

    29See OCC Letter at 5. According to OCC, a stale or unavailable closing price could be the result of a halt on trading in the underlying security, a corporate action resulting in a cash-out or conversion of the underlying security (but that has not yet been finalized), or the result of an ADR whose underlying security is being impacted by certain provisions under foreign laws. See id.

    30See also id. at 5.

    31See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83918 (Aug. 23, 2018) at note 19 (SR-OCC-2017-021).

    Finally, OCC's proposal would also introduce methods of re-allocating losses after a tear-up. First, the revised By-Laws would allow OCC discretion to use remaining Clearing Fund contributions to re-allocate losses imposed on non-defaulting Clearing Members and their customers from a tear-up. Second, the revised Rules would provide the Board with the discretion to re-allocate losses among all non-defaulting members via a Special Charge, to the extent that such losses can be reasonably determined. As such, the Commission believes that these tools, and the associated governance, are designed to give OCC the ability to re-allocate the losses in a fair and equitable manner after an extreme market event, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.

    One commenter states that the power to impose the Special Charge in connection with a Partial Tear-Up potentially could impose costs onto non-defaulting Clearing Members that did not have an opposing position from a defaulting Clearing Member. According to the commenter, the Special Charge could, in effect, be another assessment against all Clearing Members, which could create unquantifiable and unmanageable risks to Clearing Members. Moreover, the commenter states that the discretion afforded the Board may result in the Special Charge being capriciously applied. For these reasons, the commenter believes that the costs associated with a Partial Tear-Up should not be transferrable to unaffected Clearing Members.32

    32See FIA Letter at 2.

    Under the terms of the proposed rule, the Special Charge could only be used when the losses, costs, and fees imposed upon non-defaulting Clearing Members and their customers directly resulting from a Partial Tear-Up reasonably can be determined by OCC. Further, if it were used, the Special Charge would correspond to each non-defaulting Clearing Member's proportionate share of the Clearing Fund at the time of the Partial Tear-Up. Thus, the Commission does not believe that OCC would be permitted under the proposed rule to engage in unlimited assessments because the amount of the Special Charge must be subject to a reasonable determination, and the Special Charge would then correspond to the non-defaulting Clearing Member's proportionate share of the Clearing Fund. These aspects of the Special Charge should help ensure that OCC does not apply the tool capriciously and that the Board would use the Special Charge in these delineated circumstances, i.e., when the amount of the losses was reasonably determinable. For these reasons, the Commission does not believe that the Special Charge is inconsistent with the Exchange Act.

    Therefore, the Commission believes that the proposed rule changes would promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions, assure the safeguarding of securities and funds in OCC's custody and control, and, in general, protect investors and the public interest, consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange Act.33

    33 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).

    B. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(2)(i), (iii), and (v), Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(viii) and (ix), Rule 17Ad-22(e)(13), and Rule 17Ad-22(e)(23)(i) and (ii) Under the Exchange Act 1. Governance

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(2) requires, in relevant part, that OCC establish, implement, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to provide for governance arrangements that are clear and transparent; support the public interest requirements of Section 17A of the Exchange Act applicable to clearing agencies, and the objectives of owners and participants; and specify clear and direct lines of responsibility.34

    34 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(2)(i), (iii), and (v).

    The proposal, taken together with existing OCC Rules, specifies the governance that would apply to use of each of the recovery tools. Specifically, with respect to the modified powers of assessment, the cooling-off period would commence automatically upon a number of events specified in the By-Laws. The use of Voluntary Payments and either Voluntary or Partial Tear-Up cannot occur unless OCC has determined that it may not have sufficient resources available to satisfy its obligations after a default. In addition, the proposal specifies the applicable decision-making body that would be responsible for determining whether to conduct a tear-up. Specifically, for a Voluntary Tear-Up, OCC would be able to make that determination, and for a Partial Tear-Up, which is mandatory, Board action is required. The Risk Committee would be responsible for determining the scope of the tear-ups, and any such determinations must take into account certain considerations. Only the Board may elect to impose a Special Charge to reallocate losses, costs, and fees from a Partial Tear-Up.

    Thus, key decisions by OCC in connection with the use of its proposed recovery tools are subject to specific governance processes. These requirements include the involvement of the Risk Committee in determining the scope and pricing for any Partial Tear-up and specifically require Board approval with respect to instituting Partial Tear-Up and authorizing the Special Charge. Accordingly, the Commission believes that the governance process for using the recovery tools is clear and transparent and provides clear and direct lines of responsibility by addressing decision making in the use of recovery tools, thereby supporting the public interest requirements of Section 17A of the Exchange Act applicable to clearing agencies, and the objectives of owners and participants, and therefore the Commission believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(2)(i), (iii), and (v).35

    35 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(2)(i), (iii), and (v).

    2. Allocation of Credit Losses Exceeding Available Resources

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(viii) requires, in relevant part, that OCC establish, implement, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to address allocation of credit losses OCC may face if its collateral and other resources are insufficient to fully cover its credit exposures.36 OCC's proposal includes three new recovery tools addressing the allocation of credit losses in the event that OCC determined that, notwithstanding the availability of any remaining resources under the other resource rules, OCC may not have sufficient resources to satisfy its obligations and liabilities following a default. First, Rule 1009 would provide a framework for OCC to receive Voluntary Payments in addition to their required contribution to the Clearing Fund to address a shortfall. Second, Rule 1111 would provide a framework for Clearing Members and their customers to participate in a Voluntary Tear-Up. Third, Rule 1111 would provide the Board with the discretion to conduct a mandatory Partial Tear-Up. This tool could be used, if necessary in the event that OCC determines that its resources are inadequate to pay the applicable Partial Tear-Up Price, to allocate losses by allowing OCC to pay each relevant Clearing Member a pro rata amount of the applicable Partial Tear-Up Price based on the amount of such resources remaining. In addition, the modified powers of assessment would continue to allow OCC to use the Clearing Fund to address credit losses in the event of a member default.

    36 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(viii).

    Thus, the Commission believes that these additional recovery tools are reasonably designed to provide OCC with means to address allocation of credit losses that it may face if its collateral and other resources are insufficient to fully cover its credit exposures. Further, the Commission believes that these tools should address fully any credit losses that OCC may face as a result of any individual or combined default among its Clearing Members. Therefore, the Commission believes that these aspects of the proposed changes are consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(viii).37

    37 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(viii).

    3. Replenishment of Financial Resources Following a Default

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(ix) requires, in relevant part, that OCC establish, implement, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to describe OCC's process to replenish any financial resources it may use following a default or other event in which use of resources is contemplated.38

    38 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(ix).

    The proposed changes to OCC's assessment powers would include the addition of a minimum fifteen-day cooling-off period that would be automatically triggered by a proportionate charge to the Clearing Fund arising from a Clearing Member default. At the end of the cooling-off period, a remaining Clearing Member (i.e., a Clearing Member that did not choose to terminate its membership during the cooling-off period) would be obligated to replenish the Clearing Fund.

    The Commission recognizes that by placing a cap on its assessment power during the cooling-off period, these revisions would effectively limit the amount of financial resources available to OCC from its Clearing Fund during that period. However, the Commission believes that these proposals would provide greater certainty and predictability regarding Clearing Members' maximum liability to the Clearing Fund. Moreover, in light of the proposed cap on OCC's assessment powers during the cooling-off period, OCC has authority under Rule 603 to call for additional initial margin from Clearing Members to ensure that OCC maintains sufficient financial resources to meet its requirements under Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(iii). Finally, at the end of a cooling-off period, a Clearing Member would be required to replenish the Clearing Fund in the amount necessary to meet its then-required contribution.

    In light of the foregoing discussion, the Commission believes that the provisions related to OCC's assessment powers, taken together with the other components of OCC's default management procedures and recovery rules, which are reasonably designed to allow OCC to replenish its financial resources following a default or other event in which use of such resources is contemplated, are consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(ix).39

    39 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(ix).

    One commenter states that OCC should provide an explanation of its determination to set the cap on the powers of assessment at 200 percent during a cooling-off period.40 In the OCC Letter, OCC provided an explanation of the internal analysis that it conducted to reach the 200 percent determination.41 Specifically, OCC stated that it considered its ability to have sufficient financial resources inclusive of its proposed assessment powers to withstand extreme market conditions on a “Cover-2” basis under various scenarios, and that OCC determined that, under such scenarios, it would be able to meet its clearing obligations so long as it was able to use (1) the financial resources on hand in the Clearing Fund, and (2) the full funding of two assessments (i.e., 200 percent) from non-defaulting Clearing Members.42 Moreover, OCC stated that it reviewed the caps that other CCPs impose upon their own assessment powers and determined that the 200 percent cap is generally aligned with other assessment caps.43 Based on review of the analysis provided by OCC and the caps of other CCPs,44 the Commission believes that the 200 percent cap in the proposed changes is consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(ix).

    40See FIA Letter at 1-2.

    41See OCC Letter at 2-3.

    42See id.

    43See id. at 3.

    44See, e.g., Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Credit LLC; Notice of Filing Amendment No. 1 and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change to Amend the ICE Clear Credit Clearing Rules, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, Relating to Default Management, Clearing House Recovery and Wind-Down, Exchange Act Release No. 79750 (Jan. 6, 2017), 82 FR 3831 (Jan. 12, 2017) (SR-ICC-2016-013) (approving a proposed rule change including, among other things, a 300 percent cap on non-defaulting participants' liability during a cooling-off period).

    4. Authority To Take Timely Action To Contain Losses and Liquidity Demands and Continue To Meet Obligations

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(13) requires, in relevant part, that OCC establish, implement, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to ensure that it has the authority and operational capacity to take timely action to contain losses and liquidity demands and continue to meet its obligations.45 As described above, OCC's proposal would provide OCC with modified assessment powers and new tools of Voluntary Payments, Voluntary Tear-Ups, and Partial Tear-Ups.

    45 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(13).

    As discussed above, the Commission recognizes that a tear-up would result in termination of positions of non-defaulting Clearing Members. However, because OCC would only be able to use its tear-up authority after it has conducted an auction pursuant to its Rules and when OCC has determined that it may not have sufficient financial resources to meet its obligations, a tear-up would only arise in an extreme stress scenario. Further, use of tear-up in such circumstances could potentially return OCC to a matched book quickly, thereby containing its losses.

    The Commission believes that these tools are designed to provide greater certainty to Clearing Members seeking to estimate the potential risks and losses arising from their use of OCC, while enabling OCC to promptly return to a matched book. The Commission believes that returning to a matched book pursuant to these provisions in the context of OCC's default management and recovery facilitates OCC's operational capacity to timely contain losses and liquidity demands while continuing to meet its obligations. Thus, the Commission believes that the proposed changes are consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(13).46

    46Id.

    5. Public Disclosure of Key Aspects of Default Rules

    Rules 17Ad-22(e)(23)(i) and (ii) require, in relevant part, that OCC establish, implement, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to provide for the public disclosure of all relevant rules and material procedures, including key aspects of default rules and procedures, as well as sufficient information to enable participants to identify and evaluate the risks, fees and other material costs they incur by participating in OCC.47 The Commission believes that the proposed changes address key aspects of OCC's default rules and procedures, thereby providing Clearing Members with a better understanding of the potential risks and costs they might face in an extreme event where OCC may use its proposed recovery tools, including the potential use of the Special Charge. Accordingly, the Commission believes that OCC has disclosed these key aspects of its default rules and procedures, consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(23)(i) and (ii).48

    47 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(23)(i) and (ii).

    48Id.

    IV. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the Amended Proposed Rule Change is consistent with the requirements of the Exchange Act, and in particular, with the requirements of Section 17A of the Exchange Act 49 and the rules and regulations thereunder.

    49 In approving this Amended Proposed Rule Change, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange Act,50 that the Proposed Rule Change (SR-OCC-2017-020), as modified by Amendment No. 2, be, and it hereby is, approved.

    50 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    51 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.51

    Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18672 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-83919; File No. SR-CboeBZX-2018-044] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on a Proposed Rule Change Regarding BZX Rule 14.11(c) (Index Fund Shares) August 23, 2018.

    On June 21, 2018, Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (“BZX”) 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 allow the quantitative requirements of BZX Rule 14.11(c)(3), (4), and (5) to be satisfied by either the underlying index or the fund's portfolio. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register on July 11, 2018.3 The Commission has received no comment letters on the proposed rule change.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    3See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83594 (July 5, 2018), 83 FR 32158.

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act 4 provides that, within 45 days of the publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or as to which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change, disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The 45th day after publication of the notice for this proposed rule change is August 25, 2018. The Commission is extending this 45-day time period.

    4 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    The Commission finds that it is appropriate to designate a longer period within which to take action on the proposed rule change so that it has sufficient time to consider the proposed rule change. Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,5 designates October 9, 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 Number SR-CboeBZX-2018-044).

    5Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.6

    6 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).

    Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18674 Filed 8-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-83927; File No. SR-OCC-2017-809] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation; Notice of No Objection to Advance Notice, as Modified by Amendment No. 2, Concerning Enhanced and New Tools for Recovery Scenarios August 23, 2018. I. Introduction

    On December 8, 2017, The Options Clearing Corporation (“OCC”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) advance notice SR-OCC-2017-809 (“Advance Notice”) pursuant to Section 806(e)(1) of Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, entitled Payment, Clearing and Settlement Supervision Act of 2010 (“Clearing Supervision Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4(n)(1)(i) 2 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) 3 to propose changes to OCC's Rules and By-Laws to enhance OCC's existing tools to address the risks of liquidity shortfalls and credit losses and to establish new tools by which OCC could re-establish a matched book and, if necessary, allocate uncovered losses following a default as well as provide for additional financial resources. The Advance Notice was published for public comment in the Federal Register on January 23, 2018.4 On January 23, 2018, the Commission requested OCC provide it with additional information regarding the Advance Notice.5 OCC responded to the request, and the Commission received the information on July 13, 2018.6

    1 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4(n)(1)(i).

    3 15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.

    4 Exchange Act Release No. 82513 (Jan. 17, 2018), 83 FR 3244 (Jan. 23, 2018) (SR-2017-809) (“Notice of Filing”). On December 18, 2017, OCC also filed a related proposed rule change (SR-OCC-2017-020) with the Commission pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Exchange Act and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, seeking approval of changes to its rules necessary to implement the Advance Notice (“Proposed Rule Change”). 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1) and 17 CFR 240.19b-4, respectively. The Proposed Rule Change was published in the Federal Register on December 26, 2017. Exchange Act Release No. 82531 (Dec. 19, 2017), 82 FR 61107 (Dec. 26, 2017).

    5See Memorandum from Office of Clearance and Settlement, Division of Trading and Markets, dated January 23, 2018, available at https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-occ-2017-809/occ2017809-2948229-161855.pdf.

    6See Memorandum from Office of Clearance and Settlement, Division of Trading and Markets, dated July 17, 2018, available at https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-occ-2017-809/occ2017809-04062512-169148.pdf.

    On July 11, 2018, OCC filed Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 to the Advance Notice to make certain changes to clarify the use of the recovery tools and to improve the overall transparency regarding the use of the recovery tools.7 Notice of the Amendments to the Advance Notice was published for public comment in the Federal Register on August 7, 2018.8 Comments received on the proposal contained in the Advance Notice are discussed below.9

    7 Amendment No. 2 was filed to supersede and replace Amendment No. 1 in its entirety due to technical defects in Amendment No. 1.

    8See Exchange Act Release No. 83761 (Aug. 1, 2018), 83 FR 38738 (Aug. 7, 2018) (“Notice of Amendment”).

    9 The letters are available at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-occ-2017-022/occ2017020.htm.

    Since the proposal contained in the Advance Notice was also filed as a proposed rule change, all comments received on the proposal are considered regardless of whether the comments are submitted on the proposed rule change or the Advance Notice.

    This publication serves as notice that the Commission does not object to the changes set forth in the Advance Notice, as amended by Amendment No. 2 (“Amended Advance Notice”).

    II. Background 10

    10 Capitalized terms used but not defined herein have the meanings specified in OCC's Rules and By-Laws, available at https://www.theocc.com/about/publications/bylaws.jsp.

    The Amended Advance Notice concerns proposed changes to OCC's Rules and By-Laws to enhance OCC's existing tools to address the risks of liquidity shortfalls and credit losses and to establish new tools by which OCC could re-establish a matched book and, if necessary, allocate uncovered losses following the default of a Clearing Member as well as provide for additional financial resources. Each of the proposed tools is contemplated to be deployed by OCC in an extreme stress event that has placed OCC into a recovery or orderly wind-down scenario. The proposed changes include modifying OCC's powers of assessment, introducing a framework for requesting voluntary payments to the Clearing Fund, and establishing OCC's authority to extinguish open positons (i.e., conduct tear-ups) as well as authorizing OCC's Board to re-allocate losses from tear-ups.

    A. Proposed Changes to OCC's Powers of Assessment

    OCC maintains a Clearing Fund comprised of required contributions from Clearing Members, and OCC has authority to use the Clearing Fund, by a proportionate charge or otherwise, to cover certain losses suffered by OCC.11 When an amount is paid out of a Clearing Member's required contribution to the Clearing Fund, the Clearing Member is generally required to promptly make good any deficiency in its required contribution to the Clearing Fund from such payment.12 Generally, this requirement to promptly make good on any deficiency arising from the default of a Clearing Member has been referred to as an “assessment” by OCC against a Clearing Member; however, as further described below, OCC is making clarifying changes to a Clearing Member's obligation to contribute to the Clearing Fund, including defining and delineating between a Clearing Member's obligation to answer “assessments” charged by OCC under certain circumstances described further below and a Clearing Member's obligations where OCC seeks to effect a “replenishment” of the Clearing Fund.

    11See OCC By-Laws, Article VIII. For example, under Section 5 of Article VIII of the OCC By-Laws, when a Clearing Member defaults, OCC will pay for the resulting losses or expenses by first applying other funds available to OCC in the accounts of the defaulting Clearing Member and then applying the defaulting Clearing Member's required contribution to the Clearing Fund. If the losses and expenses exceed those amounts, then OCC will charge the amount of the remaining deficiency on a proportionate basis against all non-defaulting Clearing Members' required contributions to the Clearing Fund.

    12See OCC By-Laws, Article VIII, Section 6.

    Currently, a Clearing Member's obligation to make good its required contribution to the Clearing Fund is not subject to any pre-determined limit. However, a Clearing Member may limit the amount of its liability to contribute to the Clearing Fund by winding-down its clearing activities and terminating its membership. To do so, a Clearing Member must provide written notice to OCC that it is terminating its membership by no later than the fifth business day after application of the proportionate charge.13 This termination would limit the Clearing Member's obligation to meet a future assessment to an additional 100 percent of the amount of its then-required Clearing Fund contribution. Thus, terminating clearing membership is the only means by which a Clearing Member can currently limit its liability for amounts due to the Clearing Fund. OCC proposed three changes to modify its existing authority to assess proportionate charges against Clearing Members' required contributions to the Clearing Fund: (1) A cooling-off period and cap on assessments; (2) termination of clearing membership during a cooling-off period; and (3) replenishment of resources following a cooling-off period.

    13 In addition to providing the written notice, to effectively terminate membership, a Clearing Member must satisfy two other conditions. First, after submitting the written notice, the Clearing Member cannot submit for clearance any opening purchase transaction or opening written transaction or initiate a Stock Loan through any of the Clearing Member's accounts. Second, the Clearing Member has to close out or transfer all of its open positions with OCC, in each case as promptly as practicable after giving written notice. See OCC By-Laws, Article VIII, Section 6.

    1. Cooling-Off Period and Cap on Assessments

    The proposal would introduce a minimum fifteen calendar day “cooling-off” period that automatically begins when OCC imposes a proportionate charge related to the default of a Clearing Member against non-defaulting Clearing Members' Clearing Fund contributions. During a cooling-off period, the aggregate liability for a Clearing Member would be capped at 200 percent of its then-required contribution to the Clearing Fund. The cooling-off period would be extended if one or more specific events related to the default of a Clearing Member (as set forth in OCC's By-laws) 14 occur(s) during that fifteen calendar day period and results in one or more proportionate charges against the Clearing Fund. Such an extension would run until the earlier of (i) the fifteenth calendar day from the date of the most recent proportionate charge resulting from that subsequent event, or (ii) the twentieth day from the date of the proportionate charge that initiated the cooling-off period.

    14 Specifically, a cooling-off period would automatically begin after a proportionate charge arises in response to: (i) Any Clearing Member failure to discharge duly any obligation on or arising from any confirmed trade accepted by OCC, (ii) any Clearing Member (including any Appointed Clearing Member) failure to perform any obligations (including its obligations to the correspondent clearing corporation) under or arising from any exercised or assigned option contract or any other contract or obligation issued or guaranteed by OCC or in respect of which it is otherwise liable, (iii) any Clearing Member failure to perform any obligation to OCC in respect of the stock loan and borrow positions of such Clearing Member, or (iv) OCC suffered any loss or expense upon any liquidation of a Clearing Member's open positions. See OCC By-Laws, Article VIII, Section 5(a)(i)-(iv).

    Once the cooling-off period ends, each remaining Clearing Member would be required to replenish the Clearing Fund in the amount necessary to meet its then-required contribution. Any remaining losses or expenses suffered by OCC as a result of any events that occurred during that cooling-off period could not be charged against the amounts Clearing Members have contributed to replenish the Clearing Fund upon the expiration of the cooling-off period. However, after the end of a cooling-off period, the occurrence of another specified event that results in a proportionate charge against the Clearing Fund would trigger a new cooling-off period.

    2. Membership Termination During a Cooling-Off Period

    As noted above, to limit its liability to replenish the Clearing Fund, a Clearing Member currently must provide written notice of its intent to terminate its clearing membership by no later than the fifth business day after a proportionate charge. OCC's proposal would extend the time frame for a Clearing Member to provide such notice of termination, which would allow the terminating Clearing Member to avoid liability to replenish the Clearing Fund after the cooling-off period. Specifically, to terminate its status as a Clearing Member and not be liable for replenishment at the end of a cooling-off period, a Clearing Member would be required to: (i) Notify OCC in writing of its intent to terminate by no later than the last day of the cooling-off period, (ii) not initiate any opening purchase or opening writing transaction, and, if the Clearing Member is a Market Loan Clearing Member or a Hedge Clearing Member, not initiate any Stock Loan transaction through any of its accounts, and (iii) close-out or transfer all open positions by no later than the last day of the cooling-off period. If a Clearing Member fails to satisfy all of these conditions by the end of a cooling-off period, it would not have completed all of the requirements necessary to terminate its status as a Clearing Member, and therefore, it would remain subject to its obligation to replenish the Clearing Fund after the cooling-off period ends.

    Given the products cleared by OCC and the composition of its clearing membership, OCC determined that a minimum 15-calendar day cooling-off period, rolling up to a maximum of 20 calendar days, is likely to be a sufficient amount of time for OCC to manage the ongoing default(s) and take necessary steps in furtherance of stabilizing the clearing system. Further, based on its conversations with Clearing Members, OCC believes that the proposed cooling-off period is likely to be a sufficient amount of time for Clearing Members (and their customers) to orderly reduce or rebalance their positions, in an attempt to mitigate stress losses and exposure to potential initial margin increases during the stress event.15 OCC also believes the proposed cooling-off period, coupled with the other proposed changes to OCC's assessment powers, is likely to provide Clearing Members with an adequate measure of stability and predictability as to the potential use of Clearing Fund resources, which would, according to OCC, remove the existing incentive for Clearing Members to withdraw following a proportionate charge (i.e., to avoid facing potentially unlimited liability for replenishing the Clearing Fund).

    15See Notice of Amendment, 83 FR at 38746.

    3. Replenishment and Assessment

    The proposal would clarify the distinction between “replenishment” of the Clearing Fund and a Clearing Member's obligation to answer “assessments” charged by OCC. In this context, the term “replenish” (and its variations) would refer to a Clearing Member's standing duty, following any proportionate charge against the Clearing Fund, to return its Clearing Fund contribution to the amount required from such Clearing Member for the month in question. The term “assessment” (and its variations) would refer to the amount, during any cooling-off period, that a Clearing Member would be required to contribute to the Clearing Fund in excess of the amount of the Clearing Member's pre-funded required Clearing Fund contribution.

    B. Proposed Authority To Request Voluntary Payments

    OCC proposed new Rule 1011 to provide a framework for receipt of voluntary payments in a circumstance where a Clearing Member has defaulted and OCC has determined that it may not have sufficient resources to satisfy its obligations and liabilities resulting from such default.16 OCC would initiate a call for voluntary payments by issuing a notice inviting all non-defaulting Clearing Members to make payments to the Clearing Fund in addition to any amounts they are otherwise required to contribute pursuant to Rule 1001 (“Voluntary Payment Notice”). The Voluntary Payment Notice would specify the terms applicable to any voluntary payment, including but not limited to, that any voluntary payment may not be withdrawn once made, that no Clearing Member shall be obligated to make a voluntary payment, and that OCC shall retain full discretion to accept or reject any voluntary payment.

    16 OCC's determination would be made notwithstanding availability of remaining resources under Rules 707 (addressing the treatment of funds in a Clearing Member's X-M accounts); 1001 (addressing the size of OCC's Clearing Fund and the amount of a Clearing Member's contribution); 1104-1107 (concerning the treatment of the portfolio of a defaulted Clearing Member); and 2210 and 2211 (concerning the treatment of Stock Loan positions of a defaulted Clearing Member).

    In the event that OCC eventually obtains additional financial resources from the defaulting Clearing Member, OCC would give priority to repayment of Clearing Members that made Voluntary Payments. Specifically, if OCC subsequently recovers from the defaulted Clearing Member or the estate of the defaulted Clearing Member, OCC would seek to first compensate all non-defaulting Clearing Members that made voluntary payments.17 If the amount recovered from the defaulted Clearing Member were less than the aggregate amount of voluntary payments, non-defaulting Clearing Members that made voluntary payments each would receive a percentage of the amount recovered that corresponds to that Clearing Member's percentage of the total amount of voluntary payments received.

    17 As discussed further in Section II.C.1 below, OCC's proposed authority with respect to Voluntary Payments and Voluntary Payments would work together to establish a hierarchy of repayment in the event that OCC subsequently recovers from the defaulted Clearing Member. Under proposed rules 1011(b) and 1111(a)(ii), OCC would first seek to compensate those non-defaulting Clearing Members who had submitted Voluntary Payments and, thereafter, to the extent funds remained, OCC would then seek to compensation those non-defaulting Clearing Members who had participated in the Voluntary Tear-Up.

    C. Proposed Authority To Conduct Voluntary Tear-Ups and Partial Tear-Ups

    OCC proposed new Rule 1111 to establish a framework to extinguish positions of a suspended or defaulted Clearing Member on a voluntary basis (“Voluntary Tear-Up”) or on a mandatory basis (“Partial-Tear Up”) and, in certain extreme circumstances, to allocate any uncovered losses in the event that OCC does not have sufficient financial resources to conduct the tear-up. A Voluntary Tear-Up, if provided, would precede a Partial-Tear Up, and any Partial Tear-Up would take into account any positions extinguished as part of a Voluntary Tear-Up. Further, Rule 1111(h) would provide that no action or omission by OCC pursuant to, and in accordance with, Rule 1111 shall constitute a default by OCC, provided that Rule 1111(h) would not apply in the event that OCC pays Clearing Members a pro rata amount of the applicable Tear-Up price because OCC does not have adequate resources to pay the full Tear-Up price.

    OCC's use of both Voluntary and Partial Tear-Up would be subject to certain prerequisites. First, any tear-up would occur after one or more failed auctions pursuant to Rule 1104 or 1106. Second, any tear-up would occur after OCC has determined that it may not have sufficient resources to satisfy its obligations and liabilities resulting from such default.18

    18 As with Voluntary Payments, this determination would be made notwithstanding availability of remaining resources under Rules 707, 1001, 1104-1107, 2210, and 2211. See note 16 supra.

    OCC represented that it would initiate its tear-up process on a date sufficiently in advance of the exhaustion of its financial resources such that OCC would expect to have adequate remaining resources to cover the amount it must pay to extinguish the positions of Clearing Members and customers.19 The holders of torn-up positions would be assigned a price, and OCC would draw on its remaining financial resources to extinguish the torn-up positions at the assigned price. Although OCC does not intend, in the first instance, for its tear-up process to serve as a means of loss allocation, OCC recognizes that circumstances may arise such that, despite its best efforts, OCC may not have adequate remaining financial resources to extinguish torn-up positions at the full assigned price, resulting in the allocation of uncovered losses by the tear-up process. As further described below, a Clearing Member allocated an uncovered loss would then have an unsecured claim against OCC for the value of the difference between the pro rata amount paid to the Clearing Member and the full amount the Clearing Member should have received.

    19 Specifically, OCC stated that it anticipated that it would determine the date on which to initiate Partial Tear-Ups by monitoring its remaining financial resources against the potential exposure of the remaining unauctioned positions from the portfolio(s) of the defaulted Clearing Member(s).

    1. Voluntary Tear-Up

    As noted above, a Voluntary Tear-Up would provide an opportunity to holders of certain positions opposite a defaulting Clearing Member to voluntarily extinguish those positions. Although the Risk Committee of OCC's Board of Directors (“Risk Committee”) approval is not necessary to commence a Voluntary Tear-Up, the Risk Committee would be responsible for determining the scope of a Voluntary Tear-Up. Proposed Rule 1111(c) would provide discretion to the Risk Committee when determining the appropriate scope, but the discretion would be subject to, and limited by, certain conditions, i.e., that the determination should be: (i) Based on then-existing facts and circumstances; (ii) be in furtherance of the integrity of OCC and the stability of the financial system; and (iii) take into consideration the legitimate interests of Clearing Members and market participants.

    Once the Risk Committee has determined the scope, OCC would initiate the call for Voluntary Tear-Ups by issuing a notice (“Voluntary Tear-Up Notice”) to inform all non-defaulting Clearing Members of the opportunity to participate in a Voluntary Tear-Up.20 The Voluntary Tear-Up Notice would specify the terms applicable to any Voluntary Tear-Up, including, but not limited to, that no Clearing Member or customers of a Clearing Member shall be obligated to participate in a Voluntary Tear-Up, and that OCC shall retain full discretion to accept or reject any Voluntary Tear-Up.

    20 Because OCC does not know the identities of Clearing Members' customers, OCC would depend on each Clearing Member to notify its customers with positions in scope of the Voluntary Tear-Up of the opportunity to participate in such tear-up.

    Clearing Members and their customers that participated in a Voluntary Tear-Up and incurred losses would have a claim to amounts subsequently recovered from a defaulted Clearing Member (or the estate of the defaulted Clearing Member). The claim would be junior to Clearing Members who made a voluntary payment to the Clearing Fund, and OCC would satisfy the claims on a pro-rata basis.

    2. Partial Tear-Up

    Under proposed Rule 1111(b), OCC's Board would be responsible for the decision to conduct a mandatory Partial Tear-Up. The Risk Committee would then be responsible for determining the appropriate scope of the Partial Tear-Up, subject to the conditions in Rule 1111(c) discussed above.

    The proposed rule would also provide the Board with the discretion to conduct a mandatory Partial Tear-Up to extinguish the remaining open positions of any defaulted Clearing Member or customer of such defaulted Clearing Member(s) (“Remaining Open Positions”) and/or any related open positions necessary to mitigate further disruptions to the markets affected by the Remaining Open Positions (“Related Open Positions”). The open positions subject to tear-up opposite to the Remaining Open Positions and the Related Open Positions would be designated in accordance with the methodology in Rule 1111(e). Specifically, for Remaining Open Positions, the aggregate amount in the identical Cleared Contracts and Cleared Securities would be designated on a pro-rata basis to non-defaulting Clearing Members that have an open position in such Cleared Contract or Cleared Security. For Remaining Open Positions, all open positions in Cleared Contracts and Cleared Securities identified in the scope of the Partial Tear-Up would be extinguished.

    After the scope of the Partial Tear-Up is determined, OCC would initiate the Partial Tear-Up process by issuing a notice (“Partial Tear-Up Notice”). The Partial Tear-Up Notice would: (i) Identify the Remaining Open Positions and Related Open Positions designated for tear-up; (ii) identify the Tear-Up Positions; (iii) specify the termination price (“Partial Tear-Up Price”) for each position to be torn-up; and (iv) list the date and time, as determined by the Risk Committee, that the Partial Tear-Up will occur (“Partial Tear-Up Time”).

    Rule 1111(f) would provide that, to determine the Partial Tear-Up Price, OCC would use its discretion, acting in good faith and in a commercially reasonable manner, to adopt methods of valuation expected to produce reasonably accurate substitutes for the values that would have been obtained from the relevant market if it were operating normally, including but not limited to the use of pricing models that use the market price of the underlying interest or the market prices of its components. Rule 1111(f) further specifies that OCC may consider the same information set forth in subpart (c) of Section 27, Article VI of OCC's By-Laws.21 OCC stated that it is likely to use the last established end-of-day settlement price, in accordance with its existing practices concerning pricing and valuation. However, given that it is not possible to know in advance the precise circumstances that would cause OCC to conduct a tear-up, Rule 1111(f) would allow OCC to exercise discretion, if necessary, in establishing the Partial Tear-Up Price by some means other than its existing practices concerning pricing and valuation. For example, OCC represented that it has observed certain rare circumstances in which a closing price for an underlying security of an option may be stale or unavailable. A stale or unavailable closing price could be the result of a halt on trading in the underlying security, a corporate action resulting in a cash-out or conversion of the underlying security (but that has not yet been finalized), or the result of an ADR whose underlying security is being impacted by certain provisions under foreign laws. OCC stated it would consider these circumstances in determining whether use of the discretion that would be afforded under proposed Rule 1111(f) might be warranted.22

    21 Section 27, Article VI addresses the valuation of positions that may be subject to close-out netting in the event of OCC's insolvency or default. Specifically, it states that in determining a close-out amount, OCC may consider any information that it deems relevant, including, but not limited to, any of the following factors: (i) Prices for underlying interests in recent transactions, as reported by the market or markets for such interests; (ii) quotations from leading dealers in the underlying interest, setting forth the price (which may be a dealing price or an indicative price) that the quoting dealer would charge or pay for a specified quantity of the underlying interest; (iii) relevant historical and current market data for the relevant market, provided by reputable outside sources or generated internally; and (iv) values derived from theoretical pricing models using available prices for the underlying interest